UKSaabs

THE site for UK Saab people!
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:23 am

All times are UTC



Forum rules


A place for you to tell us about and show us your car.

Your Cars is the place for telling us about minor upgrades and mini projects.

Full on restorations & major rebuilds should be posted in Restorations & Major Projects.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 401 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 21  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 10:19 am 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
VikingSpirit wrote:
Thats quite a spikey torque curve at low revs, is that down to the lumpy cam?


The spikes are not so bad, you don't even notice them when driving, you can drive this car in 4th gear at 1500rpm and it will still pick up. The cam is not really wild, but it is making the spikes low down, because it's not in it's designed 'pulse' zone and as you can see from the graphs, you can alter this by changing the exhaust manifold and trumpet lengths, if you look at the last graph you can see the torque curve has been lifted but also flattened between around 2400rpm and 3200rpm.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:21 am 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
Fliptop wrote:
Looking good Dave. One of these days you'll give me a ride in it!


The engine/box will be coming out again in a few weeks, you'll have to be quick.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:51 am 
Offline
Put a SOC in it!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:48 pm
Posts: 21090
Location: Fliptop Towers, North Yorks...the flat bit.
Car Model: One or two...
Unlikely then. You likely to make it to the AGM? And if so will it be ready by then?

_________________
S4 Avant 3.0 V6T
9-5 Aero 600Nm FB3
900 T16S track hack
96V4s


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:36 pm 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
A technical article on exhaust manifold sizing has been added to the website.

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/manifold.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:02 pm 
Offline
Barrelling Along
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 6:13 pm
Posts: 18857
Location: Maidstone
Car Model: 9-5 Aero
Pumaracing wrote:
A technical article on exhaust manifold sizing has been added to the website.

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/manifold.htm

given that this is on the turbo killer thread, am I right in assuming that the article refers to n/a engines? :?

_________________
Rich
CC Carlsson - The colour's secret
9-5 Aero saloon - Espresso
9-5 saloon - battered


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:52 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
McVities wrote:
given that this is on the turbo killer thread, am I right in assuming that the article refers to n/a engines?


Yes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:36 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
A further article on exhaust system sizing has been added to the website.

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/exhaust.htm

This indicates the ideal size for Dave's car up to 185 bhp is 2 1/8" (54mm) o/d. He may now wish to clarify what the car actually runs at present.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:00 am 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
Pumaracing wrote:
A further article on exhaust system sizing has been added to the website.

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/exhaust.htm

This indicates the ideal size for Dave's car up to 185 bhp is 2 1/8" (54mm) o/d. He may now wish to clarify what the car actually runs at present.


The system on the car is all 54mm, using Jetex silencers and a twin Ansa tail pipe.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:04 pm 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
Jolly good. We're just waiting for you to get the 46mm valve head on then. I've run some calculations to try and predict the power gain from even bigger valves and more cam and I think 180 bhp will be hard to break but we should be close. It would have been nice to have had the time to get some flow bench figures off the two heads which would have enabled me to get much closer on the power calculations but maybe another time.

However what we're already up to with 166 bhp is not to be sneezed at. If you read the Ford Pinto article on my site I used to see plenty of other people's rally spec 2 litre engines which didn't break 150 bhp and the Pinto is similar in dimensions to the Saab engine and in fact it's even Pinto valves we're now using in yours so the two engines make a good comparison. You'd be into full race territory to expect 180 bhp from a Pinto from most engine builders so if we can do that, or even close, from a road going tractable Saab it'll be pretty damn impressive.

The other thing to remember is the Dastek rollers are the most conservative in their bhp figures anyone is ever going to see. We'd already be well into the 170s on most other rollers such as Wayne Schofield's or Emerald.

Finally it begs the question if we can get so much power out of a normally aspirated engine what might a turbo one go like with one of my heads. Running some more calcs I can estimate that with a standard or mildly uprated cam, a decent turbo installation putting out just 1 bar of boost which is not very adventurous and a good exhaust system we'd be looking for about 260 to 270 bhp. With a bigger turbo and 2 bar of boost that would be closer to 400 bhp.

The reason I know this is all possible is because I've already done it several times with similar engines. 260 bhp from a 2 litre Zetec CVH on 12 psi with 45mm inlet valves, 428 bhp from a similar Zetec CVH on 2 bar of boost and 514 bhp 428 ft lbs from a 2 litre 16v Impreza engine on 2 bar on Dastek rollers.

http://forums.sidc.co.uk/index.php?show ... 3572&st=20

Post 36, top of the list and well over 100 bhp more than any other Impreza that turned up that day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:15 am 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
It would be safe to say 'project turbo killer' has been a success. My ultimate goal was to get my 99GL at a higher power output than a standard 99 turbo at 145bhp, this figure has been exceeded by 20bhp, probably a bit more. More importantly, the engine is very flexible and easy to drive.
The advice from Dave has been excellent throughout this build,his cam choice was perfect, I probably would have gone for a wilder cam. His calculations with the exhaust manifold provided more bhp and torque, I didn't expect to get 146 lb/ft. The next task is to get the B engine fitted into the GL, the EMS is still at the bodyshop, most of the wiring etc is already in the GL, so it will hopefully be easier.
180 bhp plus would be great from this old 8 valve.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:23 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
I've been waiting for the results from the modified exhaust manifold before commenting on the following but after seeing them I'm still not at all happy with the low rpm torque. I've used this cam profile in numerous 1.9 Peugeot 205 engines and they all come on the cam hard by 3000 rpm with 115/120 ft lbs of torque which should be even more from a 2 litre. Dave's engine is doing three fifths of f**k all before 4000 rpm.

Here's a graph from a similar spec 205 on TBs with coincidentally the same peak bhp and torque figures albeit from a 1.9 litre. The rpm points for peak torque and power are therefore higher than for a 2 litre so Dave's engine should be working properly at even lower rpm. At 3000 rpm this engine has 118 ft lbs whereas Dave's has less than 90. This is clearly poo and not what I expect from one of my engines.

Something is not right. Cam timing, ignition timing, fueling or exhaust manifold lengths. The top end of the power curve looks fine but the bottom end is abysmal.


Attachments:
205 8v map crop.jpg
205 8v map crop.jpg [ 35.56 KiB | Viewed 933 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:46 pm 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
Here's another Peugeot 205 with the same cam and similar power and torque figures. This one is on a standard plenum inlet manifold so it's not producing as much power as engines on TBs but it's still got nearly 120 ft lbs at 3000 rpm.


Attachments:
page0001 small.jpg
page0001 small.jpg [ 44.63 KiB | Viewed 914 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:48 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
Well the plot thickens somewhat. Dave has double checked cam timing and that seems fine as does ignition timing. However the exhaust manifold, which I've never seen, is apparently a very unusual design with 30 inch long secondary pipes. Most 4-2-1 manifolds have primaries about 12 to 16 inches long and secondaries 14 to 18 inches. Out of interest I've been out and measured the Ford Focus ST170 manifold which I've had on my 2 litre base model Focus for a few years now. It gives a huge increase over the stock Focus manifold of nearly 15 bhp and is designed for similar rpm limits as the Saab. 6500 red line although in its mild state of tune the engine only produces its peak power of 142 bhp at 5500 rpm.

Anyway the manifold lengths on that are 17 inch primary and 18 inch secondary and the engine has 125 ft lbs at 2000 and 135 ft lbs at 3000 albeit with standard cams so we aren't aiming that high for the Saab but anything must be better than its current 80 to 90 ft lbs at low rpm.

What is more curious about the ST170 manifold is the pipe diameters which are a massive 1 3/4" primary and 2" secondary O/D which theoretically are good for up to 250 bhp. Why these were thought necessary for the standard ST170 car's 170 bhp (more like 160 bhp in reality) is a mystery but maybe it's designed to have some spare capacity for modified or homologated engines. Even more strangely they clearly aren't hurting a 130 bhp base model engine much although perhaps even more would be to come with a smaller system. Perhaps pipe length is more important than pipe diameter.

It's looking like Dave is going to have to chop a foot or so out of his manifold's secondary pipes to make a system with more usual lengths and see if that improves the low rpm torque.

We will no doubt keep you all posted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:29 pm 
Offline
UKS Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 3971
Location: REMAINING UNFAITHFUL TO FACTORY STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SINCE 1988
Car Model: OLD SAABS....NUMEROUS
HELLO 'SONETT' & DAVE'PUMA'

TO ADD A LITTLE TO THIS...........

I HAVE A FOUR BRANCH MANIFOLD FITTED TO THE 99 EMS 8 VALVE RALLY CAR ON TWIN 40 DELLORTOS(35MM CHOKES),WITH 45MM TALL TRUMPETS(DUE TO SPACE RESTRICTIONS)WITH STANDARD VALVE SIZES.

'SONETT' ASKED ME(AS A GOOD FRIEND IS A PAIN IN THE *RSE)IF I WOULD CHECK SOME OF THE DIMENSIONS ON THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD I HAVE FITTED.

BUT JUST BACKING UP A LITTLE,I TOOK THE 99 EMS RALLY CAR IN MARCH 2008 TO THE VERY SAME ROLLING ROAD AS 'SONETT' TOOK 'PROJECT TURBO KILLER' .

SO AT 13.2 DEG AMBIENT TEMP
980MBAR BAROMETRIC PRESSURE

THESE ARE PROBABLY THE MOST ACCURATE COMPARISON FIGURES YOU ARE EVER LIKELY TO SEE REGARDING TWO NATURALLY ASPIRATED SAAB 8 VALVE ENGINES.......WITH SIMILAR SET-UPS.

IT WILL ALSO HIGHLIGHT THE ADVANTADGES REGARDING THROTTLE BODIES/ECU OVER TWIN-CARB SET-UP........? AND ALSO THE FACT THAT 'SONETTS' CAR HAS BIGGER INLET VALVES........


SO HERE ARE MY FIGURES........


Attachments:
TORQUE GRAPH RALLY 8 VALVE ENGINE.jpg
TORQUE GRAPH RALLY 8 VALVE ENGINE.jpg [ 14.77 KiB | Viewed 859 times ]
POWER AND TORQUE FIGURES RALLY CAR.jpg
POWER AND TORQUE FIGURES RALLY CAR.jpg [ 15.92 KiB | Viewed 859 times ]

_________________
NEVER,SUFFER FROM INSANITY...............

ENJOY IT.


Last edited by BIRDIEMANGO on Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:40 pm 
Offline
UKS Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 3971
Location: REMAINING UNFAITHFUL TO FACTORY STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SINCE 1988
Car Model: OLD SAABS....NUMEROUS
NOW REGARDING THE SIZING OF PRIMARIES AND SECONDARIES......HERE ARE SOME PICTURES FOR THE VIEWERS AT HOME,SO WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING HERE.

I HAVE BEEN OUT IN THE GARAGE TONIGHT,AS I AM JUST AS INTRESTED AS SONETT AND DAVE 'PUMA' TO SEE HOW EXACTLY EVERYTHING AFFECTS THE TUNING OF THE SAAB 8 VALVE ENGINE...

THE SPARE EXHAUST MANIFOLD I HAVE 'OFF' THE CAR TURNS OUT TO MEASURE UP EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD FITTED TO THE RALLY CAR AND IS IN THREE PIECES.ALL FIGURES ARE FOR THE FULLY ASSEMBLED MANIFOLD.


SECONDARIES..45MM DIAMETER,24 INCHES LONG.
CYL 1&4......PRIMARIES 45MM DIAMETER,18 INCHES LONG .
CYL 2&3......PRIMARIES 45MM DIAMETER 14 INCHES LONG.

SO,HOW DOES THIS MEASURE UP WITH YOUR MANIFOLD 'SONETT'........?AND CAN I GO AND GET IN THE BATH NOW...........? :lol:


Attachments:
PRIMARIES AND SECONDARIES.jpg
PRIMARIES AND SECONDARIES.jpg [ 20.13 KiB | Viewed 852 times ]
Picture0133.jpg
Picture0133.jpg [ 19.27 KiB | Viewed 852 times ]
FOUR BRANCH.jpg
FOUR BRANCH.jpg [ 19.82 KiB | Viewed 852 times ]

_________________
NEVER,SUFFER FROM INSANITY...............

ENJOY IT.
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:14 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
Bugger and damnation. I've just realised the bl**dy Dastek power graphs use different scales for bhp and torque. I'd been reading the low rpm torque curves against the left hand axis which is actually only the bhp scale. The torque scale is on the right hand axis and in fact the situation is nothing like as bad as I'd thought. What I'd thought was really awful low rpm torque in the 80 to 90 ft lbs region is actually more like 105 to 115 ft lbs which is a lot more respectable.

I absolutely hate it when dynos do printouts like that. There should be a law or summat.

So ok it's still a tad lower at 3000 rpm than I would have hoped and maybe a differently designed manifold and more mixture tweaking would improve things but it is indeed a perfectly driveable power curve for a rally cam and actually quite comparable to the two curves I posted.

Panic over. Apologies for the c*ck up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:41 am 
Offline
Active user

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:02 pm
Posts: 42
To compare the power curves properly I've interpolated the torque curves for Dave's engine on 90 mm trumpets and the first of the two Peugeot 205 curves I posted as that engine was also on TBs.

RPM.....205...SAAB
2500....104....107
3000....118....112
3500....114....104
4000....125....122
4500....128....136
4750....133....146
5000....145....143
5500....142....142
6000....136....143
6500....132....133

AVG.....128....129

So in fact the Saab is better nearly everywhere other than the bad pulse tuning dip at 3500 rpm and with a slightly better average figure. Given its capacity advantage of 2 litres compared to 1905cc it would be nice for it to be a bit higher still but overall I'm now a happy bunny again. What would be wonderful would be to be able to have a single curve with the best of both the 40mm and 90mm trumpets because where one is bad the other is good and vice versa. That's where unlimited development fund money comes in handy because with enough tweaking I'm sure a lot more could be gleaned from this power curve. I wonder if 65mm or 70mm trumpets might produce a better average.

As to Birdie's engine I can now see why that's been described previously as so bad at low rpm. 60 ft lbs at 2000/2500 rpm must be a right pain. The engine seems to die like a light switch going off at 2700 rpm and I wonder if that's an anomally in the ignition timing curve or the jetting. Given the similarities in the rest of the spec it looks like the BV head is worth at least 20 bhp which is about what my calcs showed anyway and what I also find from BV Peugeot 205 heads.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:01 am 
Offline
Light Pressure Turbo

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:12 pm
Posts: 488
Location: Somerset / London
sonett wrote:
I won't get the torque but i won't get the lag either.


It will go

lag-lag-lag-limiter
change gear
lag-lag-lag-limiter


Cool project still though, although personally I would have wanted to use a 16v head.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:06 pm 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
Pumaracing wrote:
Bugger and damnation. I've just realised the bl**dy Dastek power graphs use different scales for bhp and torque. I'd been reading the low rpm torque curves against the left hand axis which is actually only the bhp scale. The torque scale is on the right hand axis and in fact the situation is nothing like as bad as I'd thought. What I'd thought was really awful low rpm torque in the 80 to 90 ft lbs region is actually more like 105 to 115 ft lbs which is a lot more respectable.

I absolutely hate it when dynos do printouts like that. There should be a law or summat.

So ok it's still a tad lower at 3000 rpm than I would have hoped and maybe a differently designed manifold and more mixture tweaking would improve things but it is indeed a perfectly driveable power curve for a rally cam and actually quite comparable to the two curves I posted.

Panic over. Apologies for the c*ck up.


I read them the same way and it looks as though everyone else did to.
I'm still going to alter the secondaries to a more traditional length, it's easy to alter and if it has a negative result it's easy to change things back.
As for trumpets, Jenvey offer 20,40,60,90,120,150mm, the price ranges from £18 to £38 each, so it can become quite expensive, i'll ask around and see if i can borrow some of the other sizes.

Birdie, thanks for measuring your manifold, interesting to see the primaries and secondaries on your manifolds are both the same diameter.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:09 pm 
Offline
UKS Addict

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:51 pm
Posts: 2427
Location: Cheshire
Car Model: Saab 900 and 99
chip-nova wrote:
sonett wrote:
I won't get the torque but i won't get the lag either.


It will go

lag-lag-lag-limiter
change gear
lag-lag-lag-limiter


Cool project still though, although personally I would have wanted to use a 16v head.


I have a 2.1 16v engine that will be the next engine project. At some point hopefully Dave will cast his eye and vernier calipers over the valve seats and see what can be done.

_________________
900i '87
900 Turbo '82
99 GL '83 Turbo Killer
99 EMS '77
Lancer EVO 6.5 TME '00


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 401 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 21  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

follow UKSaabs on Twitter



UKSaabs silhouette logo images by Mark Green www.greenphotos.com
"subsilver2" slightly bodged by UKSaabs for our own use.

:: Disclaimer ::
Comments posted here are the views of their individual authors and are not necessarily shared by the owners of this Web site.
Authors assume all responsibility for comments posted here.

UKSaabs The biggest and best privately owned UK based independent Saab forum for all SAAB enthusiasts.
Whilst we encourage our users to support our advertisers the site wishes to remain independent and therefore does not endorse any particular advertiser(s)
UKSaabs is not affiliated with Saab Cars UK or Saab Automobile AB