Advertisement

VitTuned Drop In Turbo Upgrade -- Initial Results Sneak Peak!

Status
Not open for further replies.

VitViper

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
638
Reaction score
1,980
Location
United States
Car(s)
Lots
Well this has been in the works for some time and we finally have a decent "drop in" turbo upgrade for the 1.5T! The goal was to have something quick and easy to install and pick up 10-15% power and keeping the powerband from dropping like a rock after 5000 rpm.

Mission accomplished.

Get it here: http://www.civicx.com/threads/vittuned-1-5l-stage-1-turbo-upgrade.19564/

Foremost, it's sad, but I have to put this disclaimer in: my dyno is not very generous. A car that dynos 270-280whp here will trap 108-109mph (@maddmatt02 's car made 230-240 here and traps 103-104mph). None of this sub 300whp and 104mph traps. However if you need your glory #'s, just multiply by 1.15 on what you see.

First -- we have the results w/ the turbo upgrade on 92 octane vs E40 fuel. I did also go up as high as E60 fuel and NO MORE POWER WAS FOUND. The motor, yet again, for the countless time, was happy in the E40 range. What WAS found at this power level on E60 fuel were misfires and aircharge blow out due to the injector pulsewidth being too high (not enough time for the fuel to tumble/mix). We also target a conservative 11.2-11.3 AFR on 92 octane and 11.8-12.0 afr on ethanol blends, not 13.2-13.5 (which some people do to reduce the fuel demand on the D/I fuel system -- this doesn't make power, creates heat and doesn't make you "faster" when you put the motor through it's paces -- turns the ethanol into a blow torch).

For the stock turbo graphs you can see I extrapolated the dyno chart with a line -- we don't dyno the car past 6500 on the stock turbo as power loss is DRASTIC up there.

pump_vs_e40.png
312whp on E40 and 276whp on 92 octane. And the best art -- power carries to 7000 rpm! No more cliff dive after 5000 rpm.

How's this compare to E40 on the stock turbo?
turbo_vs_stock_e40.png
This is going all out on the stock turbo -- as you can see we removed the huge torque spike below 3500 rpm (harder on the rods). Torque comes in smoother and power from 3700 to 5000 rpm is basically a wash -- but then the upgraded turbo continues to carry. Anywhere from 20-40whp gained and now it's got some legs!

How's this look on 92 octane? Let's compare a conservative tune first.
pump_gas_conservative.png
Plenty gained over a conservative tune.

How about a really aggressive 92 octane stock turbo tune that pushes the knock limit (which people like to do for "glory" numbers, but unrealistic to run as it gets crunchy and can hurt the motor. Hey we do it for fun too!)
pump_gas_aggressive.png
Similar results as the eblend.

Overall the results are satisfying and the car pulls MUCH better instead of just being a peaky torque hit. This should also allow you to make more power however you chose to run the motor -- pump gas, corn, conservative, aggressive, whatever. As it sits now the restriction is in the turbine size of the turbo -- which I chose not to change as I did NOT want to impact spool drastically (and as you can see we didn't lose much). Upgrading the turbine wheel may be in the cards as well, but to make more power with it we'll have to look at moving away from ethanol based fuels and step up to race gas to lower the demand on the fuel system -- something most people don't want to do due to the increased cost of the fuel.



Advertisement


 
Last edited:

andyboyd102

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
550
Reaction score
519
Location
Alabama
Car(s)
2017 Si
Country flag
I can't wait for this to come available. Once again you show why you are leading the way on tuning options and R&D work for us 10th gen owners. Hats off to you and thanks for sharing your hard work for us users wanting the best product and best available tuner.
 

FKSE7EN

Senior Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
583
Reaction score
578
Location
SoCal
Car(s)
2017 HatchBack Sport 6MT
Country flag
@VitViper since this is a compressor wheel upgrade would you recommend using a core from an Si/CRV for a base 1.5T?
 
OP

VitViper

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
638
Reaction score
1,980
Location
United States
Car(s)
Lots
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #9
Any concern over connecting rod failures running over 30 Psi of boost and more torque?
Boost pressure is irrelevant. Torque breaks rods. HP = torque * rpm / 5252. We've reduced the peaky torque and instead "moved" the power band up to make more HP. So if anything it'll live longer at this power level.

@VitViper since this is a compressor wheel upgrade would you recommend using a core from an Si/CRV for a base 1.5T?
Using the Si turbo as a core is highly recommended as exhaust pressure is a serious issue after ~18-20psi. I expect EMAP to be even worse on the base turbo.
 

davemarco

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
2,396
Reaction score
1,323
Location
New York
Car(s)
2019 Civic Type R (CBP), 2001 Honda Prelude (Premium White Pearl)
Country flag
Well this has been in the works for some time and we finally have a decent "drop in" turbo upgrade for the 1.5T! The goal was to have something quick and easy to install and pick up 10-15% power and keeping the powerband from dropping like a rock after 5000 rpm.

Mission accomplished.

Foremost, it's sad, but I have to put this disclaimer in: my dyno is not very generous. A car that dynos 270-280whp here will trap 108-109mph (@maddmatt02 's car made 230-240 here and traps 103-104mph). None of this sub 300whp and 104mph traps. However if you need your glory #'s, just multiply by 1.15 on what you see.

First -- we have the results w/ the turbo upgrade on 92 octane vs E40 fuel. I did also go up as high as E60 fuel and NO MORE POWER WAS FOUND. The motor, yet again, for the countless time, was happy in the E40 range. What WAS found at this power level on E60 fuel were misfires and aircharge blow out due to the injector pulsewidth being too high (not enough time for the fuel to tumble/mix). We also target a conservative 11.2-11.3 AFR on 92 octane and 11.8-12.0 afr on ethanol blends, not 13.2-13.5 (which some people do to reduce the fuel demand on the D/I fuel system -- this doesn't make power, creates heat and doesn't make you "faster" when you put the motor through it's paces -- turns the ethanol into a blow torch).

For the stock turbo graphs you can see I extrapolated the dyno chart with a line -- we don't dyno the car past 6500 on the stock turbo as power loss is DRASTIC up there.

pump_vs_e40.png
312whp on E40 and 276whp on 92 octane. And the best art -- power carries to 7000 rpm! No more cliff dive after 5000 rpm.

How's this compare to E40 on the stock turbo?
turbo_vs_stock_e40.png
This is going all out on the stock turbo -- as you can see we removed the huge torque spike below 3500 rpm (harder on the rods). Torque comes in smoother and power from 3700 to 5000 rpm is basically a wash -- but then the upgraded turbo continues to carry. Anywhere from 20-40whp gained and now it's got some legs!

How's this look on 92 octane? Let's compare a conservative tune first.
pump_gas_conservative.png
Plenty gained over a conservative tune.

How about a really aggressive 92 octane stock turbo tune that pushes the knock limit (which people like to do for "glory" numbers, but unrealistic to run as it gets crunchy and can help the motor. Hey we do it for fun too!)
pump_gas_aggressive.png
Similar results as the eblend.

Overall the results are satisfying and the car pulls MUCH better instead of just being a peaky torque hit. This should also allow you to make more power however you chose to run the motor -- pump gas, corn, conservative, aggressive, whatever. As it sits now the restriction is in the turbine size of the turbo -- which I chose not to change as I did NOT want to impact spool drastically (and as you can see we didn't lose much). Upgrading the turbine wheel may be in the cards as well, but to make more power with it we'll have to look at moving away from ethanol based fuels and step up to race gas to lower the demand on the fuel system -- something most people don't want to do due to the increased cost of the fuel.
Was the 277 whp on the new turbo with a more conservative tune? If so, what would an aggressive tune on the new turbo net with 92 octane?
 
OP

VitViper

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
638
Reaction score
1,980
Location
United States
Car(s)
Lots
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #11
Was the 277 whp on the new turbo with a more conservative tune? If so, what would an aggressive tune on the new turbo net with 92 octane?
Kind of in the middle -- roughly the same as the conservative stock turbo below 6k but a little more aggressive above that since the turbo is still doing work.
 

davemarco

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
2,396
Reaction score
1,323
Location
New York
Car(s)
2019 Civic Type R (CBP), 2001 Honda Prelude (Premium White Pearl)
Country flag
Kind of in the middle -- roughly the same as the conservative stock turbo below 6k but a little more aggressive above that since the turbo is still doing work.
Whoa! So if I'm interpreting correctly, that means that this new turbo could make even more power on 92 if it were pushed harder below 6K!?
 

davemarco

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
2,396
Reaction score
1,323
Location
New York
Car(s)
2019 Civic Type R (CBP), 2001 Honda Prelude (Premium White Pearl)
Country flag
Kind of in the middle -- roughly the same as the conservative stock turbo below 6k but a little more aggressive above that since the turbo is still doing work.
Did you feel there were any issues with less aggressive daily driving, with the power curve pushed out ~500 rpm and less low end oomph? Sorry for all of the questions, just really excited.
 
OP

VitViper

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
638
Reaction score
1,980
Location
United States
Car(s)
Lots
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #14
Whoa! So if I'm interpreting correctly, that means that this new turbo could make even more power on 92 if it were pushed harder below 6K!?
On 93 octane for sure. 92 octane I wouldn't push it harder.

Did you feel there were any issues with less aggressive daily driving, with the power curve pushed out ~500 rpm and less low end oomph? Sorry for all of the questions, just really excited.
No it still has plenty of torque to pass in 6th gear... I should lay it over the stock dyno pull... still makes more power than stock.
 

JDM_DOHC_SiR

Uncle Dave
Joined
Apr 17, 2017
Messages
931
Reaction score
1,061
Location
Chula Vista/ Eastlake
Car(s)
2012 Acura TL California Edition / 2018 Civic Si Coupe /2020 Civic Type-R
Country flag
YES!!.... More money to blow:headbang::banghead:
giphy.gif
 

Advertisement


Status
Not open for further replies.




Advertisement




Top