Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter

    Exhaust went in today. The down pipe section of the K03s/K04-001 dump was cut off and in its place a dump off the TFSI turbo was made up. From what I can gather the flange is the same between the earlier BorgWarner Mk5 K03 version of this turbo, so if I have to change to that iteration then it'll fit too. The K04-064 from the Mk5 Pirelli and Mk6 'R' has the same flange but I'm not certain its in the exact same spot. Either way I'm pretty sure 3 turbos will work on this dump/flange. So the conversion is complete.....no going back!

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3258-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3254-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3255-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3253-jpg
    Attachment 54148Attachment 54149Attachment 54150
    The orientation on these pics is a bit whack but you get the gist. So it turned out that the 90 straight off the flange did work. Its mouth had already been opened up. It just had to be cut closer to the bend to make it eliptical in the vertical plane and then the sides stretched wider. Its ever so slightly angled towards the drivers foot and then all it needed was a small little 45 degree to turn it under the car. I got it flanged too. It might be fine on a hoist to twist and turn 2 meters of one piece dump pipe out of the car but not when you are lying on your back on stands in your garage or at the track. The flanges allow me to drop the centre section straight out the bottom and then removing the down pipe is just some very accessible nuts.
    I;ll probably drive it tomorrow on the stock MAF and old turbo tune just on the spring and the next mission will be upgrading the TIP for the bigger MAF and getting the juicier base map into it.
    Last edited by sambb; 09-06-2022 at 11:38 AM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    2,914
    Awesome stuff Sam!

    Glad you finally decided to go ahead with the swap!

    Hopefully fulfils your expectations for a while.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter
    well my hand was forced. managed to damage a blade on the K04-001 at Luddenham. I thought I'd just cooked the bearing but it turned out the whining noise was a shaft not liking its new 'balance'. Lucky I didnt do the last session. This was all meant to go in with the new engine once that was finished but its getting a guinea pig run on this engine now. At least when the new engine goes in this tune will allow it to be turn key ready to run and close enough if the small port to large port conversion won't be too big a difference.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter
    INLET SIDE:

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3260-jpg

    You just need to cut the Forge or whatever brand turbo inlet hose (TIP) 2/3rds of the way down for a pipe off the compressor. Catch 22 is that if you cut the TIP off lower, the PRV pancake for the PCV system will be able to go in where I've plugged BUT the hose diameter will be too narrow to fit over the turbos pipe. Cut it where it'll fit and this happens. Not a biggy - I'm running as vent to atmo catch can at the moment and i'll just have to throw in a silicon tee pipe down the track to be legal on the PCV side of things. A normal 2.5in to 3in 90 degree pipe fits too but then you need take offs somewhere else for the N75 valve, PRV, diverter valve and brake booster amplifyer thingy. This was the most convenient.

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3262-jpg

    If you are upgrading from the stock 2.5in MAF to a 2.75 inch I.D MAF off an S3, then you need to graduate the forge TIP's 2.75in silicon pipe opening up to 3inch so that you can fit it. I did that with some bits I had on hand and managed to get the MAF into a spot where the original cable would reach. It'll have a heat shield under it all once I'm set with where everything will go.

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3264-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3265-jpg

    I could have run with the pieburg TFSI boost solenoid which is situated on the turbo itself. Access to it turned out to be easy provided you have the car in the air but what I really wanted was easy access to everything. So I ran the plumbing up from the turbo so that I could use the original N75 in the OEM mounting position. I'll need to extend the cable a bit but thats not an issue.

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3268-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3267-jpg

    The diverter valve turned out sweet. I had always been running a pre-throttle body position for the diverter valve. With this setup I was able to re purpose the factory diverter valve pipe to give me a pretty straight shot at the T-pipe that I have ahead of the throttle body. Turbosmart do make a fully pneumatic replacement for the factory electric DV that comes with this IHI turbo. Its the neatest solution but again I like having everything where I can see/get to it and the pre throttle position for the DV has some boost response advantages and is how the diverters are run on the Golf 6 'R's with the bigger K04-064s.

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3271-jpg

    starting to take shape. Just need to sort an airfilter/box, find some big P-clamps to hold all the inlet in place, wire up the N75 solenoid. Longer term I'll integrate the catch can into the intake when some more bits arrive.
    Last edited by sambb; 10-06-2022 at 01:22 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bayside, Vic
    Posts
    93

    Thumbs up

    If the forum back end here had likes you would be drowning in them.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter
    Thanks mate. appreciate it.


    Just putting the Dave base tune in now. Spent the day getting things a bit more finalised.

    confirmed the upgraded MAF housing internal diameter. The MAF is off a 6.0L W12 Phaeton.
    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3281[1]-jpg
    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3286[1]-jpgN75 wired up. Needed a a 6 inch extension soldered in to reach.
    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3287[1]-jpgFilter on. Ready to tune!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter
    Long overdue for an update on how the new Mk6 Golf GTi turbo conversion is going.
    Had some problems with leaks from the oil return line I'd made up. I initially had done a cut and shut between the Polo sump side and the TFSI turbo side. It was leaking a bit through a pin hole from the welding, so the decisioon wa staken to reweld the flanges with an interference fit inside the flange and use -AN fittings with high temp pushlock oil hose that I had spare from my oil cooler job. All good, no leaks and much easier to work on.
    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3382-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3419-jpgSams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-img_3422-jpg
    Attachment 54774Attachment 54775Attachment 54776Attachment 54777

    E10 tuning:

    I got a bit curious about tuning for pump E10 after watching these vids

    Tuning Our Car on E10 to BEAT FUEL PRICES $$$ - YouTube
    OZG S1|E10 - Fuel Testing - Octane 91, 98, E10 and E85 + Latrobe Valley Street Machine Show - YouTube

    After doing a 98 RON tune I had the choice of doing a high octane E25 tune for the track or a 94 RON E10 tune for the street. Given that I'm closing in on a completing a forged engine and not wanting to up the power on the existing motor for fear of bending a rod, and seeing E10 go ok in these vids, plus 98 was 2 bucks 30 at one point.........I went for an E10 tune.

    Like they say in the vids despite being 94RON you also have to weigh in the evaporative cooling effect of the 10% ethanol on the charge air temp and also the cooler burn into the equation. Rightly or wrongly I also figured that it could be that an OE engine that is designed to not run on high octane fuels might actually run well if timing could be kept in that timing zone but with more boost.

    So what I found was a bit interesting. The engine made close to the same peak power all the time but with 98 ahead. Boost ramp up was the same. It was down on torque in the midrange. However this was very dependent on ambient temperature. For instance a log coming home from night shift in say 8 degrees ambient would look like a solid log compared to 98. But once it got to only 20 degrees ambient you could feel the timing pull and loss of midrange. So after initially being excited with what I was seeing, that quickly changed once it got warmer and then revision after revision of the tune had more and more timing and boost coming out of it to keep it in the safe zone. Id say that you would only want to go to E10 safely if you have very good intercooling and aren't running the turbo way outside its comfort zone, just as ways to mitigate what seems to be a really ambient temperature sensitive fuel.

    Sams TFSI turbo conversion (maybe!?)-310593115_1080325452674473_3737661685408017220_n-jpg

    you'll need to click it to open it larger. So pretty clearly you can see that boost onset was the same but that roughly 3 psi had to be dropped out of it on E10 to keep it safe. After the initial boost peak it had to be trailed slightly upwards as a way to keep some performance in the top end. What you see there was deliberate, not boost creep.
    Both fuels were at 0.81 lambda roughly.
    The pink lines are MAF airflow which is a pretty good predictor of power. Just think of them as 'power' for what we are talking about. So the almost continuous gap between the pink lines of 20 grams per second of air equates to 16 hp difference. So E10 in the end was significantly down compared to 98 RON. In addition to that the 98 RON tune was never trying to ring the most out of it whereas the E10 tune was trying to zero in on getting the most out of it.
    BUT regarding economy the E10 was actually much better on a $ per km basis. The arguement for ethanol blended fuels is that they are cheaper but because the car uses more of it, the perceived savings are negated. Well that might be true of a car thats not tuned for it but thats not what I found at all. In commuter work with the odd log and blat thrown in, I would get 470km out of a tank (measured to when the km count down hit zero after the fuel light came on) for both fuels. In normal driving the 10% ethanol seemed to have zero impact on the fuel quantity being used. But being 25c cheaper was a good deal cheaper. In normal driving I'd say the two fuels were indistinguishable. What you see in a third gear pull is much different to how you drive on the street. Coming into and out of right angle and tight corners in the correct gear at the right engine speeds with momentum is very different to loading something up from 2000rpm in third. I'd even go so far as to say the E10 was easier to drive fast because you could take full throttle earlier coming out of corners and would actually be my choice for a track day in the wet. At a track like Luddenham or any Hillclimb other than Huntley or Panorama I don't even think you'd see much time difference between them simply because a FWD with lots of sudden midrange (98 is harder to drive than one thats more linear (E10).
    So I think E10 has its place for sure given the crazy fuel prices for those that commute decent distances (economy) have good intercooling and arent running tunes that are really pushing the turbo hard ( stable low temps).

    On the engine rebuild front, the head is now ready to go. The Supertech stainless exhaust valves have been fitted and lapped in. Just need to make a decision whether I run APR head bolts/studs or stick with OEM bolts and then i'll get it all together.
    Last edited by sambb; 19-10-2022 at 02:13 PM.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    896
    Users Country Flag
    Nice work Sam, like you I have had zero success with pump E10. Using pump 98 as the base DIY E10, E20 and E30 have been much more worthwhile, but E85 is my preference.


    Cheers
    Gary
    Golf Mk7.5 R, Volvo S60 Polestar, Skyline R32GTST

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    3,211
    Users Country Flag Thread Starter
    yeah I think E10 will be set aside for the next fuel crisis and 98 will be the go on the street provided its not much more than 2 bucks a litre. This turbo with a brewed 98 RON/E85 @ E25 will be a rocketship on the next engine. Just didn't want to do it on this bottom end.

    Gary out of curiosity does running ethanol heavy fuels cause MAF power estimations to skew. For example with E85, a large component of the oxygen that will be burnt is chemically IN the fuel and the fuel:air ratio is richer relative to petrol. So less of the O2 burnt will be taken in through the intake and the 'air' requirement is lower for a given amount of alcohol fuel. If so, does that mean that MAF g/s underestimates power on E85 cars? Or because there isnt actually that much oxygen in air, does the air measured through the MAF not actually change much?

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne VIC
    Posts
    6,781

    Great updates Sam!

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
| |