displaying posts 1 to 17 of 17

Author Subject: Low boost on DTA
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #1
Just wondering what people think of running a low boost on DTA. It's probably hard to say if the low boost setup is at the limit of what you'd want to run on standard compression but I'm wondering what sort of gains you might expect to see running DTA. Could you run a little more boost?

Alternatively could you simply go for a thicker head gasket and another psi of boost?

Essentially for about 1k for the ECU and mapping you could have around 280-300bhp?

Part of my reasoning behind this is that I'd like to drop the max rpm of the charger down under 100,000 rpm at the redline. I personally think the restrictor should be removed or widened a little and a larger pulley should be put on the charger to limit the max RPM as it seems daft to be overspinning the 'charger while there's a restrictor in place.
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 11:01
allanallen

Seasoned Pro

Location: Buxton

Registered: 01 May 2007

Posts: 1,399

Status: Offline

Post #2
I thought some people had been getting 280bhp out of 'low boost' set ups?
I think a low boost on a DTA would be good, you could have it properly mapped for a start and fit the throttle body downstream maybe?
If the chargers not maxing out till over 7k Rpm maybe you could just lower the rev limit rather than altering pulleys?
Fitting a bigger pulley on the charger may see you losing boost that's why rich used a restrictor rather than just putting a bigger pulley on it.
There's no hard and fast rule of what the engine can take but I'd happily try one to 280bhp, then when it pops I'd fit some skimmed s16 pistons and rods.

________________________________________

www.bridgecraftmotorsport.co.uk

Facebook
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 11:51
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #3
I don't see how increasing the pulley size will reduce boost provided you open the restrictor up. The C30-94 is good for 400bhp so I just don't see why it's spinning over 100,000 rpm to make 250bhp.

Definitely having the throttle downstream would be good and mapping out the stalling that some people have seen would be nice too.

Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 11:53
pugheaven

Seasoned Pro

Location: Fareham

Registered: 17 Dec 2006

Posts: 4,602

Status: Offline

Post #4
Putting a bigger pulley on would essentially spin the charger up slower so less boost low down in the revs, the restrictor is purely to reduce the amount of airflow at high rpm hence a low boost is on par with a high boost until a certain rev...
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:10
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #5
I think I'd be willing to sacrifice a little low RPM torque to keep the charger within it's operating limits. We'd only be talking 500rpm and only a small reduction in torque that would probably be compensated for with better mapping.
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:13
pugheaven

Seasoned Pro

Location: Fareham

Registered: 17 Dec 2006

Posts: 4,602

Status: Offline

Post #6
Is the charger being over rev'd for sure tho??
Have you had a custom map by chip wizard or are you running a generic map?
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:20
rallyestyle

Seasoned Pro

Location: London

Registered: 23 Jul 2003

Posts: 14,990

Status: Offline

Post #7
I was thinking at going down this route in the future too, quite keen to see how much i can get out of the low boost setup before it goes bang Yes Whistle

My Rallye made 268bhp on one set of rollers and 259bhp on another so not exactly sure where it's at in terms of power but never had any issues with setup No

________________________________________

Just Drive It
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:20
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #8
Pugheaven, yes at 7500rpm it's going to 106,000 rpm. I'm running a generic map so could obviously gain something by getting a custom map. Is the standard compression ratio 10.4:1 on these?
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:27
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:29
pugheaven

Seasoned Pro

Location: Fareham

Registered: 17 Dec 2006

Posts: 4,602

Status: Offline

Post #10
Im probably talking out my arse but have you taken in to account the amount of drag due to other pulleys and the length of the belt, fair enough if it was straight from the crank pulley to the charger but it's not....
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:37
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #11
I don't think that matters, it's still a 127mm / 85mm ratio which means anything over 7000rpm is overspinning the charger.

ratio of bottom pulley to charger pulley 1:1.49
ratio of C30-94 input shaft to turbine 9.49.
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 12:49
pugheaven

Seasoned Pro

Location: Fareham

Registered: 17 Dec 2006

Posts: 4,602

Status: Offline

Post #12
Have you spoke to Rich or lynx about this as it's a bit weird to overspeed the charger by 6k rpm just to chase the last bit of boost, I know it's 100 revolutions per second but how long a time period are you over 7k rpm for?
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 13:06
doof

Regular

Location: nottingham

Registered: 24 Nov 2007

Posts: 231

Status: Offline

Post #13
Rich said that given the fraction of a second you're over 7k that it's not an issue and I agree. It's just that it's not necessary given the operating envelope of the C30-94.

I've just been looking at the documentation and the low boost setup is running a Pressure Ratio (PR) of 1.72 and requires approx 0.21 kg/s of air.

Look up those 2 points on the following compressor map and the low boost setup COULD be making full power at maximum compressor efficiency at approx 75,000rpm.




Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 13:17
stan_306gti6 Forum Admin

Location: Kent

Registered: 18 Jan 2004

Posts: 21,768

Status: Offline

Post #14
doof wrote:
Pugheaven, yes at 7500rpm it's going to 106,000 rpm. I'm running a generic map so could obviously gain something by getting a custom map. Is the standard compression ratio 10.4:1 on these?


The standard compression ratio on these is 10.8:1. Yes

________________________________________

"Supercharged - 454.1bhp/317.5lb/ft"
Peugeot 306 GTi-6
2000 (X), Moonstone Love
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 13:33
m306

Seasoned Pro

Location: south coast

Registered: 16 May 2011

Posts: 1,074

Status: Offline

Post #15
I suggested similar in the other thread and would love to see this setup done.

________________________________________

supercharged China gti6 - Thu 16th Sep 1999 - sold
2010 megane rs250
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 15:10
allanallen

Seasoned Pro

Location: Buxton

Registered: 01 May 2007

Posts: 1,399

Status: Offline

Post #16
Why not leave the pulleys alone and just limit the revs to 7k, then you can open up the restrictor ring and gain some midrange rather than lose it, they're not renowned for having loads anyway. Lower revs on the engine can only help it's reliability too.

________________________________________

www.bridgecraftmotorsport.co.uk

Facebook
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 17:22
phillipm

Seasoned Pro

Location: Rotherham

Registered: 15 Oct 2006

Posts: 20,607

Status: Offline

Post #17
What allan says, just drop the limit if you're that concerned, that way you only loose the very top end power and not the midrange.

________________________________________

- Bespoke rollcages/additions/adjustments. Half cages right up to complete custom spaceframes - MSA/FIA spec, CDS, ROPT, T45, etc - PM me
Email me!
Custom-made polybushes available - need an odd size or fitment? - anything from batch work to one-off pieces.
Posted 28th Oct 2013 at 17:19

All times are GMT. The time is now 05:56

The Peugeot GTi-6 & Rallye Owners Club - ©2024 all rights reserved.

Please Note: The views and opinions found herein are those of individuals, and not of The Peugeot 306 GTi-6 & Rallye Owners Club or any individuals involved.
No responsibility is taken or assumed for any comments or statements made on, or in relation to, this website. Please see our updated privacy policy.