Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JOHN96850R

300whp S70 T5 Manual

Recommended Posts

Pathetic, from, and experience.

Regardless, pull some timing logs of your S70's current setup, and let's see where all this EXPERIANCE has taken you. :rolleyes:

by the way... news flash, hate to break it to ya... but making 523 WHP on a 1JZ is like properly installing a chip/mbc/turbo/exhaust on any 850 T5. Congrats big boy. Someone break out the fking party hats.

Spoken again form someone who’s obviously jealous. Making accusations, with NO proof to validate his bogus claims. Maybe because you say I should buy I chip I should? Any car with high boost will PULL timing, it’s a fact of life. If you want MORE timing ADD better FUEL. Now for some FACTS a 1jz with stock twins will make NO more then 350-380 WHP without the addition of cams and lots of engine goodies.

Again you add NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE to this topic only ignorance.

No wonder Volvo owners are in the dark ages when it comes to power production… Nothing but kids here to bash. I remember when buddy was making low 13 second passes on his LPT and everyone instantly bashed him. You are a sorry excuse for an enthusiast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoken again form someone who's obviously jealous. Making accusations, with NO proof to validate his bogus claims. Maybe because you say I should buy I chip I should? Any car with high boost will PULL timing, it's a fact of life. If you want MORE timing ADD better FUEL. Now for some FACTS a 1jz with stock twins will make NO more then 350-380 WHP without the addition of cams and lots of engine goodies.

Again you add NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE to this topic only ignorance.

No wonder Volvo owners are in the dark ages when it comes to power production… Nothing but kids here to bash. I remember when buddy was making low 13 second passes on his LPT and everyone instantly bashed him. You are a sorry excuse for an enthusiast.

Could've sworn I mentioned a turbo upgrade in the modification list, but apparently your level of reading comprehension is also on par with that of writing ability.

Jealous is one thing I am not, laughing hysterically, I am doing plenty of. Thank you for the comic relief. Having actually seen the timing maps for these cars on stock software, I can tell you that 15 PSI early in the RPM band does have a very high effect on timing pull. Surely you don't need me to tell you that timing values can affect a/f values. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it still making power? Isnt' that the goal even if it pulls timing? Yes I can physically feel power loss if I drive on 91. Hence why I use 94, it stock ecu's will ALWAYS pull timing when boost gets high, afterall it's not expecting or programmed for the change. You can poke holes in my credibility all you want. I know that I've got dyno sheets showing 244WHP and time slips in the low 14's with a MPH good for 13's all done at a fraction of the cost it's taken you. My engine has 248000KM on it, and my turbo is original. So poke away, I know I haven't blown any t5 engines, I know that I'm faster then may of the people on this board and I also know I spent LESS then 1000$ doing it.

by the way if 500WHP is so easy on a 1jz making 300 on a Volvo should be a walk in the park and guess what IT IS!

You can bash me all you like the fact of the matter is I'VE MADE POWER MY SELF and YOU HAVE NOT. Grow up and act like a moderator, OPEN your eyes to new ideas and LEARN instead of thinking you are king SHIZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it still making power? Isnt' that the goal even if it pulls timing? Yes I can physically feel power loss if I drive on 91. Hence why I use 94, it stock ecu's will ALWAYS pull timing when boost gets high, afterall it's not expecting or programmed for the change. You can poke holes in my credibility all you want. I know that I've got dyno sheets showing 244WHP and time slips in the low 14's with a MPH good for 13's all done at a fraction of the cost it's taken you. My engine has 248000KM on it, and my turbo is original. So poke away, I know I haven't blown any t5 engines, I know that I'm faster then may of the people on this board and I also know I spent LESS then 1000$ doing it.

by the way if 500WHP is so easy on a 1jz making 300 on a Volvo should be a walk in the park and guess what IT IS!

You can bash me all you like the fact of the matter is I'VE MADE POWER MY SELF and YOU HAVE NOT. Grow up and act like a moderator, OPEN your eyes to new ideas and LEARN instead of thinking you are king SHIZ.

Everyone is jealous of your S70 with a boost controller, that is probably correct. I know I am, it still has A/C and everything probably works :lol:

14.4 is hardly low 14s, and if you would observe how fast people trap for their 1/4 times in these cars, 97 is NOT good for high 13s. :rolleyes:

Joseph is one of the few active members on this board who has modified a car himself into the 13s, and Johann has two of the faster cars on the board as well. My car is pretty sorry right now but has been very fast in both the tune that I purchased it in, as well as the block-up build and engine swap I did myself in my driveway. Do I see a trend developing here? People who have actually put work into their cars (Volvos) themselves and made them fast rolling their eyes at you?

Just because you have a fast Supra does not mean your Volvo is anything to be especially proud of. You are doing things with it, getting it on the dyno and going to the track, as well as sharing your results... For that I am grateful. However, acting as though a boost controller install makes you the know-it-all go-to guy for Volvo performance modification is pretty far out there man B)

For the record, I believe Joseph has trapped higher than 97 in his 1998 S70 which also only has a boost controller. He has also done it at lower boost levels (15-16?) because he had his car on a dyno and progressively turned the boost up from stock until it stopped making more power (although his AFR's were still good). If you need explanations as to why Johann should be respected you are ignorant or read nothing on this board (why bother posting then?).

We all appreciate your contributions, but Jesus Christ man wake up and look around you. There are people here who know more about these cars than you do and have more real world experience, which might come as a shock, but saying you have a 500 whp Supra in every post you make doesn't make you an authority.

Also, how many threads have we had which have deteriorated into zazzn telling us all that we just need a boost controller because his supra makes 500 whp? Too many? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any car with high boost will PULL timing, it’s a fact of life.

Do you know anything at ALL about tuning??

Timing pull is when knock is detected by the knock sensors in the engine, and Motronic cannot alleviate the issue by enriching the mixture so pulls the stock timing values at that RPM and boost level WAY back. Many modern engine management systems (if not all) do this.

Yes, every car running boost will have the timing "pulled" back at peak torque, but this is in the base ignition map, not a reactive measure by the ECU. You have a base timing setting at idle (low rpm and high vacuum), the timing value increases linearly with RPM and is reduced in correlation with torque level (on boosted cars can be simplified to boost level usually). That's the basic idea behind an ignition timing map. at 12 degrees BTDC base timing, you may be running 30 degrees timing at peak power (higher rpm well past the torque peak). If your car knocks, Motronic will pull the timing back into the single digits (which, really, it may be at already around the torque peak but should go way up after that), sometimes into the negative, and will kill the power you are making.

This is basic ignition tuning theory, and a large aspect of why your "spin the turbo into the ground and run as much boost you can" blanket advice holds no water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is jealous of your S70 with a boost controller, that is probably correct. I know I am, it still has A/C and everything probably works :lol:

14.4 is hardly low 14s, and if you would observe how fast people trap for their 1/4 times in these cars, 97 is NOT good for high 13s. :rolleyes:

Joseph is one of the few active members on this board who has modified a car himself into the 13s, and Johann has two of the faster cars on the board as well. My car is pretty sorry right now but has been very fast in both the tune that I purchased it in, as well as the block-up build and engine swap I did myself in my driveway. Do I see a trend developing here? People who have actually put work into their cars (Volvos) themselves and made them fast rolling their eyes at you?

Just because you have a fast Supra does not mean your Volvo is anything to be especially proud of. You are doing things with it, getting it on the dyno and going to the track, as well as sharing your results... For that I am grateful. However, acting as though a boost controller install makes you the know-it-all go-to guy for Volvo performance modification is pretty far out there man B)

For the record, I believe Joseph has trapped higher than 97 in his 1998 S70 which also only has a boost controller. He has also done it at lower boost levels (15-16?) because he had his car on a dyno and progressively turned the boost up from stock until it stopped making more power (although his AFR's were still good). If you need explanations as to why Johann should be respected you are ignorant or read nothing on this board (why bother posting then?).

We all appreciate your contributions, but Jesus Christ man wake up and look around you. There are people here who know more about these cars than you do and have more real world experience, which might come as a shock, but saying you have a 500 whp Supra in every post you make doesn't make you an authority.

Also, how many threads have we had which have deteriorated into zazzn telling us all that we just need a boost controller because his supra makes 500 whp? Too many? :rolleyes:

You know Eric it, you are one of the people who I actually respect on this forum because you make INTELLGENT posts. However I disagree with you on some points here.

-I have a problem with the Volvo community recommending and ECU upgrade which is not needed (unnecessary money spent for anyone who has a little DIY in them)

-My Volvo is my DD hence why I do not heavily mod it.

-97MPH IS good for a 13 second trap 1.8 60 foot and it would probably be a 13.7 (I had 2.4 60 foot)

-Just because it’s a supra doesn’t mean general rules don’t apply over platforms.

-Joseph could well have made power up to that point but it doesn’t change the fact that he hasn’t contributed anything useful in his last slew of posts.

-No one is saying I’m a know it all, I AM SAYING that 300WHP IS possible on a 16T, however, in a attempt to BACK UP MY CLAIMS I simply get bashed.

I think people need to step back here and think of what others are doing in terms of performance upgrades.

by the way My AC does work and I’m very glad for that, and no sadly it doesn’t on my supra.

If someone could post intelligently on WHY my methods wouldn’t work maybe I could accept that however, I’ve followed this method on other cars with pleasing results. If it was such a bad thing my car should have blown up years ago but she’s still boosting and getting me form a to b reliably and that’s what counts.

Last point... Someone has already made close to 300WHP aperently on a 16T so i'll end it on that note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know anything at ALL about tuning??

Timing pull is when knock is detected by the knock sensors in the engine, and Motronic cannot alleviate the issue by enriching the mixture so pulls the stock timing values at that RPM and boost level WAY back. Many modern engine management systems (if not all) do this.

Yes, every car running boost will have the timing "pulled" back at peak torque, but this is in the base ignition map, not a reactive measure by the ECU. You have a base timing setting at idle (low rpm and high vacuum), the timing value increases linearly with RPM and is reduced in correlation with torque level (on boosted cars can be simplified to boost level usually). That's the basic idea behind an ignition timing map. at 12 degrees BTDC base timing, you may be running 30 degrees timing at peak power (higher rpm well past the torque peak). If your car knocks, Motronic will pull the timing back into the single digits (which, really, it may be at already around the torque peak but should go way up after that), sometimes into the negative, and will kill the power you are making.

This is basic ignition tuning theory, and a large aspect of why your "spin the turbo into the ground and run as much boost you can" blanket advice holds no water.

So basically what you are saying Eric is that the ecu is pulling timing?

Ok thanks for agreeing!! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Eric it, you are one of the people who I actually respect on this forum because you make INTELLGENT posts. However I disagree with you on some points here.

-I have a problem with the Volvo community recommending and ECU upgrade which is not needed (unnecessary money spent for anyone who has a little DIY in them)

-My Volvo is my DD hence why I do not heavily mod it.

-97MPH IS good for a 13 second trap 1.8 60 foot and it would probably be a 13.7 (I had 2.4 60 foot)

-Just because it’s a supra doesn’t mean general rules don’t apply over platforms.

-Joseph could well have made power up to that point but it doesn’t change the fact that he hasn’t contributed anything useful in his last slew of posts.

-No one is saying I’m a know it all, I AM SAYING that 300WHP IS possible on a 16T, however, in a attempt to BACK UP MY CLAIMS I simply get bashed.

I think people need to step back here and think of what others are doing in terms of performance upgrades.

by the way My AC does work and I’m very glad for that, and no sadly it doesn’t on my supra.

If someone could post intelligently on WHY my methods wouldn’t work maybe I could accept that however, I’ve followed this method on other cars with pleasing results. If it was such a bad thing my car should have blown up years ago but she’s still boosting and getting me form a to b reliably and that’s what counts.

1.8 60 foot won't happen without slicks. I'm not a bad driver and have put a lot of time in at the track, along with a few others, and my best 60' on street tires with the manual transmission is 2.2 (after which I spun first and second gear just rolling into the powerband, killing my trap anyway), and most people don't get better than a 2.1 in any of their runs.

I have talked to one person who has run 1.8 60 foot on a mildly modified turbo Volvo, but other than that have only seen the likes of 2.1-2.2 from the faster drivers here. It sucks, but they are heavy cars with peaky torque bands being pulled by one front wheel...

I like your reasoning on the 60 foot though, gives me a mid-12 second car but oh well :lol: (13.3 at 107 with a 2.2 60 foot.. was decent launch, no bogging and a tiny bit of spin, then perfect traction for the rest of the run)

Back to the issue at hand, I would love to see someone make 300whp on a credible dyno with a 16T, or report trap speeds that would indicate such power. However, lots of people have modified their cars rather heavily with that turbo and they all fall way short. I would be pleased to be making 250-260 whp on that turbo... And that's about where most people here stop gaining much :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.8 60 foot won't happen without slicks. I'm not a bad driver and have put a lot of time in at the track, along with a few others, and my best 60' on street tires with the manual transmission is 2.2 (after which I spun first and second gear just rolling into the powerband, killing my trap anyway), and most people don't get better than a 2.1 in any of their runs.

I have talked to one person who has run 1.8 60 foot on a mildly modified turbo Volvo, but other than that have only seen the likes of 2.1-2.2 from the faster drivers here. It sucks, but they are heavy cars with peaky torque bands being pulled by one front wheel...

I like your reasoning on the 60 foot though, gives me a mid-12 second car but oh well :lol: (13.3 at 107 with a 2.2 60 foot.. was decent launch, no bogging and a tiny bit of spin, then perfect traction for the rest of the run)

Back to the issue at hand, I would love to see someone make 300whp on a credible dyno with a 16T, or report trap speeds that would indicate such power. However, lots of people have modified their cars rather heavily with that turbo and they all fall way short. I would be pleased to be making 250-260 whp on that turbo... And that's about where most people here stop gaining much :)

Eric why are you arguing with me only to agree in some way?

So again to recap 97MPH is a 13 sec E/T with traction. (especially with an auto boosting off the line) We aren't talking -about driving skill simply ET and MPH.

-Someone aperently did 297WHP on the 16T already.

I'm mean guys I know you are friends why not stop defending your friend for a second and really think about what I'm saying. I never set out to bash attack or belittle someone, instead I was the target of the flames as usual because I'm trying to share VALID points with new people to the board. Like it or not all the facts that I have stated are true, I'm have not lied to anyone and I've done this all form good will to try to help others. I gave warnings and tried to explain how and why my theories work. I dare you to post this whole thread on other car websites and see the type of responses you get.

I like my volvo but I will never take it to the level of my supra, but that won't stop me form helping someone that wants to get to that level. I realize it's NOT the best platform for big power but it is the best platform to meet my needs as a DD. Power, space, reliablity, conforts and finally cost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but that won't stop me form helping someone that wants to get to that level.

By advising people to pull the wastegate connection? That is really the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

Then we learn a chip doesn't do anything.. Come on man, I feel sorry for you, really. If you want to prove yourself come up with some useable advice instead of these bogus remarks.

To get to your level, stock T5 level?

Your Supra talk simply has no place on thise forum. You could look at it as the inability to properly tune a Volvo so you go the easy way.

Just buy the proven of the shelf Supra bolt on tuning parts and you are done, nothing special, totally not impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric why are you arguing with me only to agree in some way?

So again to recap 97MPH is a 13 sec E/T with traction. (especially with an auto boosting off the line) We aren't talking -about driving skill simply ET and MPH.

-Someone aperently did 297WHP on the 16T already.

I'm mean guys I know you are friends why not stop defending your friend for a second and really think about what I'm saying. I never set out to bash attack or belittle someone, instead I was the target of the flames as usual because I'm trying to share VALID points with new people to the board. Like it or not all the facts that I have stated are true, I'm have not lied to anyone and I've done this all form good will to try to help others. I gave warnings and tried to explain how and why my theories work. I dare you to post this whole thread on other car websites and see the type of responses you get.

I like my volvo but I will never take it to the level of my supra, but that won't stop me form helping someone that wants to get to that level. I realize it's NOT the best platform for big power but it is the best platform to meet my needs as a DD. Power, space, reliablity, conforts and finally cost

That's my only problem with your posts man, nothing personal. Just that you're giving advice to people without having been there and done that... I just tried to say that no one will find the traction with a 97 mph ET to run 13s. I will paypal 5 dollars to anyone who does.

You put forth theories, that are kind of patchy, and then say with certainty that they will work. You don't have any real life experience with these cars to back that up... What you've done is perfect for what you need your Volvo to do, and you have gotten good results by doing it. But that doesn't qualify you to say with certainty (nor does your Supra experience) what people should be doing to get their Volvos to a much higher level.

I will believe 297 whp when it's on a dyno I know or know of (no offense to some people on this board, but not all dynos are created or operated equally), or when I see a timeslip with a trap speed that would indicate that power level... Jake's car has gone very fast, I think 103 is close to that. Deafdano and Joseph are probably next in line with 16T cars, having trapped 102 with chip/exhaust/mbc setups. Behind that, I don't think there is anyone trapping 100 or higher.

I'm not trying to bash you, but just realize how much experience and knowledge really is on this board, and when people who have been here for years and years with a ton of posts and hold moderator positions make simple statements, they are usually based off of the experience that has been shared on this forum over the years, coupled with their own.

I'm just trying to keep benchracing out of informational threads, and 13s at 97 in a FWD Volvo is just such an example of that... No one should think they will run that in their chipped or boost controlled Volvo :)

You have sound ideas, but they don't mesh with the experience of those here who have been there and done that repeatedly... And presenting ideas as facts can get confusing to noobs, just trying to illustrate that there is a difference for those who can't discern it themselves.

Carry on, I'm in need of sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last point... Someone has already made close to 300WHP aperently on a 16T so i'll end it on that note.

I think I remember what dyno that was on :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be pleased to be making 250-260 whp on that turbo... And that's about where most people here stop gaining much :)

My V70 makes 249whp on a 16T at 1.05bar. Only mods are a panel filter and a rica ecu. Total cost of mods are $530.

To get this car up to 300whp will require a different turbo, plenty of exhaust modifications and of course some mapping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a Dyna pack, my car made 239 whp on 1.03 bar (values read off the boost pressure signal we used off the dyna pack) in 3rd and 242 whp in 4th gear. This same car went to the track and trapped 99.9 MPH. S70 just has a MBC and a drop-in K&N Panel Filter. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.