Jump to content


FCP Euro

Photo
- - - - -

850's Throttle Response/power Curve Question


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
15 replies to this topic

#1 Madman55

Madman55

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 365 posts

Posted 30 September 2010 - 10:33 PM

A friend (amateur racer and former 850R owner) and I were having a lively discussion/debate last night about what effects certain turbo, boost, and exhaust configurations have on a t-5's engine. I'm sure many of you that are experienced with modifying these car's can shed some light on this subject for me :) .

so MY friend has been racing cars his whole life and knows them very well from driver's perspective, but almost never works on his own car so his mechanical application knowledge is limited on the engine side of things. On the other end of the spectrum, I am an Mechanical engineering student and have taken all of my fluid mechanics, heat transfer, and engine cycle courses, but I also have not had much hand on experience with modifying or tuning engines (except for with a couple 600cc na motorcycle engines (no turbos tho)).

Anyway our conversation quickly broke down into generalities and became mostly a theoretical debate. The issue we got stuck on is this: what exactly makes a t-5's car suck so bad in low rpms in its stock configuration?

The only certain logical explanation I could come up is that the engine simply that the does not flow air well through the entire combustion system until the turbo spools up and forces it through. While this conclusion is obvious and widely known (for our cars especially), What I really want to know is

What exactly the the most the single biggest contributing factor to the t-5 engine's air flow limitation in low rpms?

Is it the relatively long length of intake piping? (causing a delay between the time the throttle plate opens and when the boosted or ambient air pressure pressure is able to react to the low manifold pressure)

Is it the intake manifold?(air restriction, making the engine suck harder and the turbo push harder to flow air.)

The Head? (stock head + intake/exhaust valves don't flow well..low volumetric efficiency?)

the Turbo itself? (I already know this is a huge limitation on our cars, but why? Is the it the 15g's compressor design or it's exhaust housing that flows and spools poorly)

The last step is obvious, stock exhaust is pretty damn restrictive.

I had never heard this perspective before, but my fiend used to race stock Evos (td05 turbo) and said that his mechanics would actually turn DOWN the his boost (via mbc) in order to help throttle response and low-end power. This was a bit opposite to my intuition hearing it at first because I had never thought turning down boost would help anything. But I suppose it can make sense theoretically; if you lower boost settings, then the back-pressure between the engine and the turbo is lowered because the gas is not having to do work on the turbine wheel (since its being diverted through the waste-gate i assume?). But how much does this concept actually apply to our cars? whatever the case, I am pretty damn certain either way that I would not want go go this route to help reduce turbo lag on my car simply because then I would be chopping off the top end of the power band.

I then brought up the possibility of putting on a slightly larger turbo on the car (16t) or upgraded the 15g's compressor wheel might help. I have read on here that that these mods give more power, but know not exactly how. I can only reason that an upgraded turbo would not require as much exhaust energy to flow a given amount of air, therefore reducing back-pressure, spool-time, etc). my friend said theres no way would a bigger turbo ever help throttle response. (this is where I kinda stopped, realizing I'd reached the limits of his knowledge on how turbos work),

So what do you guys think?

The reason this all came up in the first place is that my down-pipe got a hole torn in it recently. This has started me down the slippery slope of debating what road to go down replacing to replace it. Whether to just go ahead and get an entire new 2.5" exhaust setup Ive wanted for so long (expensive)... or just replace the stock dp and upgrade the stock turbo and/or engine components (MBC, WG spring, n/a cams etc)..or maybe grab a even grab a used 16t (which would also get choked if i left the exhaust stock size). I only have a little more to spend on my car since I just spend a quite a bit on stage 0 stuff (tires, suspension bushings, steering rack, engine torque mounts, plugs, wires, k&n,vacuum stuff, etc). . so I'm trying to stretch it out.

I have maybe $500 to spend at most, a 2 car garage, and all the tools I could possible need (except for a decent torque wrench <_< ) so I can do all work myself for the most part. I even have access to a machine shop for free fabrication if needed.

What do you guys think? Also please correct me where my logic on things might be off. Its only recently that I have finally really began working on my car and learning EXACTLY how it works in relation to the mechanical theory I have learned in class.
96 850R
Stock for now except for Pinstripes, grill, door inserts, deck and PEGZ



#2 TorqueSteer

TorqueSteer

    Pretty Boy Racing

  • Supporting Member
  • 4,231 posts

Posted 30 September 2010 - 11:10 PM

Id say the low compression ratio is one of the largest contributing factors.

Also camshaft choice and timing can help to improve the issue.

Ignition timing advance will also help, but I never got around to playing with it too much.

Removing parasitic accessories also helps. I noticed a nice improvement with the a/c compressor and PS pump removed.

As far as turning down the boost for more low rpm power, it can help it two ways.

1. Less spinning, thus more traction and lower ETs, higher traps etc.

2. This is based on my personal experiences: When tuning, the more boost you have, the more you need to retard ignition timing. Sometimes running less boost and more ignition advance (i.e. less retard) will net a more usable powerband than more boost and more retard.

Edited by TorqueSteer, 30 September 2010 - 11:19 PM.

1995 850 Turbo | Hahn Racecraft Td05-Super 16g Turbo | 3" turboback exhaust | Water/ Methanol Injection | Custom FMIC | NA Cams | HKS SSQV BOV | Civinco Piggyback EMS | Walbro 255 LPH Fuel Pump | Innovate LM-1 A/F Meter | Koni Coilovers | QBM Endlinks | IPD Sway Bars | Profec B EBC | Bi-xenon Projector Retrofit | Matte Red Paint Finish.

...Sold for something American and RWD.

#3 Reximus

Reximus

    Level 2 Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 569 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 12:07 AM

the turbo is there to make up for decade of volumetric efficiency, and altitude compensation. to compensate for this change, volvo has made many changes to the original B5254S engine platform.
they did:
smaller bore on cylinders to compensate for thicker sleeves for strength
decrease the compression ratio
remove the extra overlaps on the camshaft timing
decrease the ignition timing to compensate detonation protection
removed the variable runner intake manifold
shrunk down throttle body size
added extra plumbing which slow the reaction time of mass air flow sensor
programing strategy changes in the ecu
added turbo manifold for installation of turbocharger (obviously) which doesn't flow as free as N/A manifold
turbo added back pressure to exhaust system

mind you these changes are really just a compromise that they have to make in order to gain power. this is not a perfect world.

where as the turbo lag goes, smaller turbo spools faster, that's a fact. that's why there's sequential turbo used on some other high performance production cars. higher boost takes longer to build. put things into perspective, boosting up to 17psi on a 15G. given the time to spool to full pressure at ideal air flow through the turbine is about 2 seconds. the first second of that would take it up to about 11 psi, then extra 6 psi on the next second. mainly due to the lost of efficiency and pressure causing resistance. if you were to program a computer to fully utilize the boost at 11psi, then it might perform satisfactory for the purpose. you can program for 17psi, but would not be fully utilized for throttle response but rather than max boost efficiency. keep in mind it take a very finely programed map to run a higher boost reliably because of the possibility of detonation or knock. at lower boost, there's more room to play with ignition time since the extra head room available.

these are from my limited knowledge of flow dynamics and mechanical physics. i apologize for any false statement i made here. but wishing these info could help :lol: cheers!

#4 850T5IVE

850T5IVE

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 188 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 12:55 AM

lmfao !!!!!! 17psi in 2 seconds? :lol:

#5 Reximus

Reximus

    Level 2 Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 569 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:10 AM

lmfao !!!!!! 17psi in 2 seconds? :lol:


at an assumption of high enough rpm... never really counted the actual time, but it always feels long :lol:

#6 kingbarley

kingbarley

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 271 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:39 AM

go snap up an obx exhaust on ebay while one's still around, sell the extra downpipe, then you've got a turboback exhaust for $300, then pick up a used tune on the forums for around $200 or $250 (probably speedtuning at that price, but still a great improvement). when all's said and done you're looking at about $550 for about 35 extra ponies to bring to the races :pizza:
1997 850R, 153K, Stage 0, K&N Filter, IPD Stage 1 Tune, Cross Drilled & Slotted Front Rotors, Silicone Intercooler Hoses, OBX Turboback, much more to come

#7 lookforjoe

lookforjoe

    Level 5 Member

  • Lifetime Supporter
  • 9,789 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 02:36 AM

2. This is based on my personal experiences: When tuning, the more boost you have, the more you need to retard ignition timing. Sometimes running less boost and more ignition advance (i.e. less retard) will net a more usable powerband than more boost and more retard.


This is absolutely true for me.

Solution is larger compressor, same impeller :D

VSXCsig3a_zps930bdcd1.jpg
1998 V70 XR M66 PTE6262 BB Built '04 2.3l Block Wiseco Pistons 147mm H-Beams '03 Ported Head EnemY21Cams TurboTuner 710cc Inj, DW300, 3" DP back Dual Magnaflow 14834's Apr 2013 408WHP AWD (@7925rpm) 347WTq(@4400rpm)@18psi LGSpeed Header Custom Intake Manifold 30x12.5x3.5"Treadstone FMIC Spec Stage III+ SO603FS Kaplhenke CoilOvers


#8 pwebb

pwebb

    Level 2 Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 707 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 03:20 AM

low compression, only five cylinders.

automatic trans...
94 854 turbo - 160k - red on black

#9 fattmatt805

fattmatt805

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 161 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 07:39 AM

the restrictor wedge on the TB plate :e-shrug:?

98 V70 T5M. 245K. Euro R clutch,cone filter, brass shifter bushings, MSD blaster, poly torque and trans mounts. 218 whp, 238 wtq
97 855T R.I.P
87 suzuki samurai-removed antiroll bar, removed fenders, rolled twice, 31" ATs...teh beast


#10 the commissar!

the commissar!

    Level 3 Member

  • Lifetime Supporter
  • 2,077 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:22 PM

the restrictor wedge on the TB plate :e-shrug:?


huh...turbos don't have a restrictor wedge, but they do have smaller throttle body openings than n/a which is why some of us switch to modified (ie no wedge)) n/a TB.
1998 V70 T-5 -Auto - ARD Blue & Turbo-Tuner,18T, HD TCVw/ Hallman Pro MBC, custom 3" DP w/ Volvo 2.75" sport catback - both wrapped and coated, RIP, IPD aluminum intercooler, intake w/ K&N cone, R ex. manifold, , gasket matched & polished intake manifold w/ thermoblock spacer, n/a TB w/ 960 plate, Optima bluetop, MSD 6aD and blaster coil, IPD plug wires, IPD poly bushing, Koni FSD w/ Eibach springs, IPD sways 25mm x 25 mm, blue silicone vac, silicone coolant lines, custom intake tubes grill to turbo, skid plate, front lower brace, cherry turbo strut brace, HD endlinks, 302mm brakes, Zeitronix wide-band/data-logger, Walbro w/variable fpr. In process: Home grown HD Endlinks, Meth/H2O injection, greens, catch can, fully built 2.3.

#11 fischmama

fischmama

    Level 4 Member

  • Vendor
  • 4,954 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:25 PM

huh...turbos don't have a restrictor wedge


S70 T5Ms do to my my knowledge. The two factory manuals I worked on had them, including mine.

vs_signature.jpg

1998 Volvo S70 T5M - 04 Darton Sleeved R Motor - Holset HY35 - 3" Custom Exhaust - TT/MegaSquirt 3X - FMIC w/ 3" piping - TA Coilovers w/ Custom Rears

Website: JJFab.net


#12 ozzimark

ozzimark

    Level 4 Member

  • Lifetime Supporter
  • 4,387 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:31 PM

the restrictor wedge on the TB plate :e-shrug:?

Nah, it won't restrict airflow much at lower RPM. Hell, it doesn't restrict airflow much at higher RPM either. :lol:

#13 Gizmo

Gizmo

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 158 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 05:44 PM

I am far less experienced than others on here, but having my valves backcut 30* has given me some nice low-rev power over stock. At least so says my butt-dyno.
-Evan
Black 1996 854T Bils, Samcos, homebuilt MBC, R Manifold, TD04HL-16T, backcut valves, and a ridiculous amount of luck.

#14 Madman55

Madman55

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 365 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 07:00 PM

Thanks for all the feedback, very insightful.


I am far less experienced than others on here, but having my valves backcut 30* has given me some nice low-rev power over stock. At least so says my butt-dyno.


What all is involved in this? IS this whats reffered to as a "valve job".
96 850R
Stock for now except for Pinstripes, grill, door inserts, deck and PEGZ

#15 Gizmo

Gizmo

    Level 1 Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 158 posts

Posted 27 October 2010 - 09:34 PM

Sorry to dredge this up....

Back cutting valves removes material at the top of the valve-head... Valve-jobs sometimes include backcutting, but valve-job usually means revacing the valve seats and teh valves themselves (or replacing the valves) for a better seal. Back-cutting is a trick used in a lot of american muscle car builds to increase flow at mid-lift. I'm finding that, with a turbo, I may want to alter my cam timing a bit to optimize the back-cut valves... actually, can anyone speak to *that* one?
-Evan
Black 1996 854T Bils, Samcos, homebuilt MBC, R Manifold, TD04HL-16T, backcut valves, and a ridiculous amount of luck.

#16 nocturnal7x

nocturnal7x

    Level 2 Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 765 posts

Posted 28 October 2010 - 04:25 AM

try NA throttle body with 960 throttle plate installed. Been said to increase throttle response and level power curve. search and a few threads on here will back this up.

Posted Image





IPD Volvo Parts


Copyright 2012 Volvospeed