Ive finally got 5 mins to myself so thought i would have a catch up on here.
As they say there is always two sides to the story

You arrived on the sat morn with a bad hangover, for this you are a legend ::D prob a bit of jealousy on my part

All jokes aside, before i did anything with the car i ran through the spec of it, now bear in mind i have mapped around 35-40cars not on the forum as well as a large number from here.
First thoughts were that the turbo was way too big for the injectors at the boost you wanted to run, after what i would call good advice you were happy for me to continue testing the car.
Without going to the dyno to check actual figures the first run was very low for the turbo. I came out and spoke to you about this, i still stick by what i said that day...
Even when we got the boost up your car was 70-80hp short of expected, i still question what turbo is on your car. I regulary (sp) see more power than yours with 28R's and RS's.
On the test drive after dyno your car felt low on power (and i have driven just a few ).
Your Hours dyno time was up and you asked me to try another chip, you kept on that you wanted to see what gains would come from it. I explained that the last chip had perfect fuelling and at 1.4bar was just starting to click on the det cans. Trying the other chip was going to be a waste of your money as any more advance would det, and less would be less power. You were adamant that it would be better and it was your money so i had to try some more runs with the new chip.
I was purely trying to save you money

Hey presto, 35hp less than the previous chip.

I even tried running the car with the intake off, this gave an increase but nothing like what it should be doing.

I'm sorry if you didnt get the results you wanted, I cant help that though unfortunately. I can only give the best advice i can (to the point of trying to save you money).

Regardless, from the offset you werent interested in anything i had to say and i still to this day dont know why you came to us in the first place mate??
Everything i advised you you thought otherwise?

If you truly have the turbo you think you have, there is a big problem elsewhere.. Everyone knows what sort of power you should be making and it is way above what the stock injectors can supply. So regardless of what you may think the car is doing, you only have the fuel the stock injectors will supply.

As for trying to get more money out of you as we werent remapping the car, you were booked for one hour which you have to pay for. I almost refused to run the car on the next chip to save you money... so you paid for another half hour which you agreed on. You were charged for what you asked us to do.

What more can i say?

Rob

Rob.

As usual 2 sides of the story.

However, the repeated "complaint" is that there is no afr graph given and that people are merely told "Its fine".

Is this incorrect or do you have a reason for not supplying?

Ross

I'll make a proper reply later. Thanks for the input and as said, there certainly is 2 sides to every story! I'm also not out for a slagging match.

Had I known you were on here, I would've probably sought you out directly. Ah well. What's done is done etc.

Suffice to say I suspect nearly everyone uses a RR for peace of mind and testing. I got the testing bit but not the peace of mind (AFR) and the results raised more questions, but for that the session was very useful.

The reason why the AFR is not given is because it is measured on a separate machine that isn't linked to the Dastek RR graph. (Please correct me if I am wrong). All you have to do is ask?!?

On my latest re-map I had a chat with Rob about my graphs and he explained to me exactly what’s what. I had different graphs for my different boost settings and I was told my AFR. I have never had a problem with PT apart from them calling me a Pikey for bringing a crappy FIAT

Whoever you get to look after your car is whose advice you should follow. So choose a RR and stick with them, I have always used PT even before they had their Dyno.

Ok here goes.

I think there is a difference of opinion (not all mine) on what boost can be run with that turbo and on what injectors. Whikle you have access to 35-40 cars worth of data, hundreds are available here. I believe there are several people running around 350bhp and even a bit more on standard injectors - so the standard injectors should be good for around 350Bhp, so this was the absolute max that I wanted to run, regardless of better internals allowing for a bit more than this - future mods.

The lack of AFR info had me concerned that the novitec wouldn't be able to fuel 1.4bar, yet that is how it was left - "it's fine". Despite the session, I still do not know what this is and if it is truly safe with this chip, only by what you say and by listening for det myself. NB: the Novitec should only be good for about 1.2bar on a standard GT28 turbo, so how come, in your opinion, mine can supply 1.4bar on a GT2871R (or GT28R or whatever)?

My issue comes from this basis:
What annoyed me is that when I arrived, despite driving all the way from MK, to be told that you weren't even going to put the car on the rollers because of the turbo I (claimed) to have, period. Implying that I should just go home. I had 3 conversations over the phone to expressly agree that I wanted to do, including one the day before, and what my current setup was - at least one run with the current chip and setup, and one with the Gtec2HF, then to use whatever is best/set good boost etc. It was even written as such in the diary - runs on old and new chips. I also never agreed just the one hour, as I expected the work to overrun 1 hour. I suggest you speak to the person who took the booking if you think 1 hour only was the case.

The question I have is how can someone agree this with a customer, only for someone else in the same organistion to flat refuse the work? Inconsistencies is something analysts (part of my area of expertise btw) expressely look for when offering solutions to an organisations' issues. It highlights a communication problem which would be serious if you were medium-sized or larger. Such inconsistency is never good service and always impacts productivity.

I had signed the waiver, so give your opinion if needed, but the risk is all mine. Given my research beforehand I didn't agree that it would not be safe on the first run. An opinion that you didn't appear interested in. I remember having to point out that I had been using the car for a year on this turbo as a final bargaining point. Maybe I should've brought some graphs down from the various other RR's I've been to, but I shouldn't be expected to do this as a customer. This however, is still ok and partly expected as far as I'm concerned. I went for the expertise as much as anything else. The car didn't immediately blow-up, so you know that I know what I was expecting/asking for was not unsound, also considering my personal experience of the car which should count for something. You know better than me that you can theoretically run any turbo, as long as the air-flow falls within the capabilities of chip, injectors, charge temps, internals etc.

You certainly didn't come across as wanting to save me money (saying it would've helped ) -but that's my concern not yours (I have plenty ) - but more as a lack of interest, which is documented here previously. You're an engineer, so I didn't expect you to be customer-focussed in a proper "yes sir" business sense. At the time I took this on the chin, but perhaps is something to work on? (I'm not the first to mention this)

I'm aware that you probably get people who expect the Earth and don't care of safety issues, so I expected you would not be keen on just doing exactly as I asked. It's part of your job of course. Again, I took it on the chin. But what could I do but plead/reason for you to run the car or turn around and go home? Even then you weren't keen and made that very clear. I'd have simply had to choose another RR to get the same tests done, so I fail to see how that could've helped me but delay what you thought was the inevitable blow-up? "Not on my turf"?

I also expected the other chip to over-fuel after the results of the first run but, and here's the point; I wanted to know this and to confirm that the chip was good. Exactly for a RR. I was no longer expecting or asking to see gains at this point. I always was not not interested in what you had to say either, but merely trying to get you to not send me home early before I had got some more test data. I also don't remember any conversation about timings at all with anyone - I took it as implicit and would pay for however long I was there. Certainly at no point was I advised that it will go past a supposedly agreed 1 hour slot and will cost more. I eventually got the data, so I was happy with that part. I'll accept all that as simple chinese whispers and differing perceptions though, so I'll say no more as it will degenerate into an unwinable argument.

If you have more input on what you think the reason for the results are then I would definitely appreciate it as I'm sure many others here would too. It would also be a good way to save face. The whole post was of two parts, my minor annoyance at the service as a whole (not yours personally per se) and also to work out what the issues are. All part of the fun when you have two cars, imo!

Here we say bottlenecks - gasses in via the standard airbox as I was expecting (but I like the noise it makes) and out with the v-band adapter. Until proven by making changes, I'm not 100% convinced, I never will be without empirical evidence, but that's never going to stop me trying... and asking other people to try too where duely arranged in advance.

Also, if the stock injectors were maxxed out at 300Bhp, how come the car was able to overfuel on the same boost with the Gtec2HF? If I had, say, clogged injectors, how could they push through more fuel than with the Novitec? Somesort of semi-intelligent over-compensation? That doesn't track to me. Again, without the AFR I just don't know.

I also have no problem with what I was charged, but there is far more to "service" than what something costs...

Maybe should have done that LONG post in pm?

Ross

Perhaps but it's no more than what has been said already, just in more detail and in one post.

Why p.m. ? This is a forum - I can't see the problem.

Exactly. Still waiting for a reply but I don't expect something straight away from anyone (not a dig).

WF - maxxed injecors can overfuel - IIRC, the definition of maxxed is running at above 80% duty cycle. Even at this level, if the chip is injecting too much fuel, then its overfuelling.

I have to admit that this aspect confused me for some time, so I can appreciate why you would think that a maxxed injector couldn't possibly overfuel (sounds like a contradiction in terms)

From my experience of PT, if Rob says the AFR is "fine", then its fine. If it wasn't he'd say so.

I can also understand Rob's stance that plugging in the second chip would make no difference - this is based on the first chip being close to optimal, and therefore NO amount of tweaking is going to make it any better (as was proved).

In respect of the Novitec, you say "so how come, in your opinion, mine can supply 1.4bar on a GT2871R (or GT28R or whatever)?"

The Novitec isn't supplying 1.4 bar, its merely supplying enough fuel to allow the engine to run at this level. If it wasn't, the AFR would have drifted and Rob would have pulled back the boost, or tried some more fuel. However, as the chip was fuelling perfectly, there was no need to adjust.

There becomes a point on any car where something is preventing better power. We all know its not your turbo, as there are many cars producing 330+ bhp on a GT2871. However, I can't think of any of them thats still running the very restrictive V-Band adapter

IMHO, this is costing you at least 30bhp, possibly more. It doesn't matter if you have a hundred gallon watering can, if the spout is tiny, you'll only get a trickle.

You mention that Rob posting another answer "would also be a good way to save face." - who with? As far as I can see it, Perfect Touch have been even better than usual - trying to advise you that the car was as good as it was going to get and that any further twiddling would be counter-productive. Rob wasn't trying to refuse your instructions, he was trying to give you advice.

As you know, with my mapping problems, I had many visits to PT. Some of them were very short lived, as within a minute of firing the car up, a problem became apparent that called a halt to the proceedings. On other occasions, I've had to drive the 160 mile trip home without my car (is that Civic still going Rob?) It's never nice for it not to go the way its expected to, but thats modifying for you.

You have to accept that if PT can get 1000+ bhp out of a Skyline, (and 400+ bhp out of a Coupe running a Motronic) they probably know what they're doing.

Change the exhaust Welformed. If I understand it correctly you are still using standard exhaust. I wanna see a full 3" system from the turbo and all the way back. You should also consider a proper EBC instead of a PRV

Just to answer an earlier question...

I had mine dyno'd at standard at Power engineering back in the day (when JohnS made too much power for the RR) and it made;
220bhp at the fly (FWHP)
175bhp @ the wheels (WHP)
This was at 6,283rpm.

That is just over 20% losses

nigel do you really think the v-band will lose that much power?

yes - the V-Band becomes more restrictive as the revs rise, so it will be worse at the top end, which is where the highest power is made.

If WF ditched the V-Band AND fitted a 3" DP, I reckon we would see 30+ bhp more, at which point, all the Veyrons in MK will sell up as they'll know they're beaten.

That's odd because when I was up there Rob gave the V-band credit and said that a 3" DP wouldn't make all that much difference if any.

Sorry if I've got that wrong but I'm 100% sure you said that as I was asking if I should get a remap if I brought one from the BF group buy.

If the rest of the exhaust system has been opened up then it doesn't make too much of a difference. When I was running the 2860RS 0.86 I made 360bhp with the V-band adapter and 370bhp without.

That must be it then as I already had a 2.75" from the turbo back with a V-band. Cheers.

Well that's what I was after. There has to be some industry explanation for it. It's like a CSMA-CD network in I.T. they should never go above about 10% utilisation really (can't remember the figure but call it 10%), any more is considered maxxed out even though there is room for more...



I should hope so! Otherwise I'd might as well just mod willy nilly. But it still doesn't tell me, just lift of fine, just right, right in the middle... I've been to 4 other RR's, all of whom I have had proper conversations about fuelling amongst other things.



...and as I expected myself too. The GtecHF is 2nd hand, so I needed to know if it work as it should. It overfuelled when the novitec was ok. I now know the chip is ok. So successful test. This is all I was after, after the results of the 2nd run @ 1.4bar with the Novitec.

I don't get why I have to keep repeating my intentions to people on this point. It's a process of elimination. I'm being anal. I always am. The detail is everything. etc. etc.

Clearly things are a bit more no-no with motors than with I.T.'s lets try it attitude, because if you don't test it, you will not know where you are.

When I get the v-band sorted, which I fully plan on doing, then I can put the Gtec2HF in and take it to another RR, without having to mess around doing other runs and opening the ECU, etc. The time I saved at PT is the time I will save here + I get some thinking time on it.



That's what I meant. If it can fuel for the air on a GT28 @ 1.2bar max, how can it fuel for the air on a GT2871R @ 1.4bar? That has to be pushing through much more air than a GT28 could ever do.

Anyway one AFR figure would eliminate this question altogether, but I didn't get it, despite asking several times.

When you get someone who doesn't seem interested, you start to wonder if they really are measuring AFR... comes back to that "service" point.



Yep and appreciated. I had no knowledge of the v-band adapter. When I asked for an exhaust from the turbo-back, I kinda expected it from the turbo and back, funnily enough... I didn't know they would just put it on the existing v-band. This was fitted when I had a standard turbo so any questions would not have been raised.



I WILL find out. If so I reckon it's translating into a heat build-up too. I notice my oil temps seem a tad higher and rise quicker on power to optimal operating temps and takes longer to cool, than before, even though I have a decent FMIC since and have messed around turning the boost down. I've never oil temps go past about 95 degrees though, so I don't know if the heat will keep rising until something goes pop. Heating up the turbo = heating up the oil?



With me. I say again, my bone isn't with the quality of the expertise, it's with the service as a whole, mainly due to the lack of communication between themselves and the customer, even after asking for information directly! Basically, it pist me off (yet whilst they're working on your pride and joy - basically have your knackers in their hand - would you start getting visibly annoyed and demanding? Besides I've learned it's always better to cool off and reflect.) and I do not care how pro they are, I see no point if you go there for diags/test and yet you can't even drag the info you need out of them.



It wasn't counter-productive (see above). When you arrive and you tell them what you want after telling them over the phone what you want, you tell them what turbo you have after telling them over the phone what turbo you have and they go "Ok, well I'm not going to put your car on the rollers today" I was so gobsmacked I stood there in silence for a moment. I haven't been stunned to silence for over a decade!


Which is why I went. Alas that is not the whole story...

possibly not completely relevant to your last post wf, but after reading the thread, a lot of which regards rolling roads, and in particular flywheel bhp taken from a RR, i'd thought i post this

rolling road coastdown losses

there are a few other interesting relevant articles which also discuss power readouts on RR's on the site.

may take a while to read, so put the kettle on.



personally, i've always been of the opinion to take RR figures about as seriously as 'car park' figures, the rolling road is usefull, to get fuelling set up etc, and is also usefull to get a figure, then see what difference any given modification makes to that figure.

comparing figures across different rolling roads gives about as much idea of a cars performance as asking the local saxo crew how quick their cars are. you'll get interesting results in each case, but neither will be'accurate'

Back again quickly, I explained in full what the AFR's were.
It is clear to see from your posts that you are very thorough (sp) with your car so can you honestly expect people to believe you would have left our premises without the only info you came for!! WTF!

Your car was running 10.5 midrange and 11.6 at the top. i also explained that this was one of the reasons your torque figure was so low.
Once again i stick by what i said, you were totally not interested in anything we had to say from the start. I still dont know why you came to us.
Also, as for customer service. When the customer really isnt interested in what i am saying, I will show no interest at all.
Nothing like talking to yourself eh .... The fact you cant recall what i told you regarding AFR's says it all for me.

Funnily enough i have had two owners in since your day here, was ineteresting to hear their thoughts on your posts and their thoughts on our service. It definately paints a different picture.

Regards

Rob

Welformed - you are running a turbo that is all about top end power, you can get more torque at 300bhp with a hyrbid. I would put money on your car spooling quicker and making more torque and similar power on a GTI-R hybrid. On a GT series turbo you HAVE to have the car breathing right if you are going to make the figures the turbo is capable of. That means ditching the airbox and getting a proper exhaust, and prefereably a flowed head / port matched manifold. I gained around 40 bhp on my 28R from swapping out the V-band and going from a 3 inch downpipe and 2.25 supersprint. The restrictive exhaust is also going to have your in cylinder temps higher than they should be....so I'm not suprised that your oil is getting hot coupled with the extra boost.

If I was in Rob's position I would have been very cagey about running your car on the standard internals + injectors and breathing on a GT2871 with a plug and play chip. For what it's worth I would not have been willing to run your car if it was my business on your spec. There are plenty of people that have slapped a big turbo on a car to get the power and it's all ended in tears on the dyno. Rob does not delight in blowing up engines - he is very enthusiastic about what he does, whether it's a lowly coupe or a GTR. There are plenty of people that must turn up with poorly maintained heaps expecting the world....and then blame the mapper when it goes pop. (I'm not saying that that is you.....)

For the benefit of anyone else going down to PT - listen to what Rob has to say, if there is something he is not sure about regarding a coupe he is very up front about it. You know the car and how you have tuned it so give him information he can work with, and regardless of the car there is not always straightforward answers. Make sure that when you go down for a mapping session or even a power run, that the car is as perfect as you can make it: no oil leaks, boost leaks, the correct clutch for the power, correct cooling, cleaned injectors that will supply enough fuel....etc.

The std intake run itself is a big restriction, not only the airbox. That's why the Straight induction pipe came about. Sometimes you have to trust that some of us have invested a lot of money into tuning coupes so you don't have to instead of re-learning the same mistake other people made.
I don't really understand the point of having a GT2871R on your car as it is a huge mismatch, and short of fitting forged internals you will never realise its potential. So all of the lag with none of the power benefit.

i think you should sell your turbo to me WF

@ tweenierob, so AFR is 10.5 to 11.6, a tad on the rich side at lower revs? That sounds about right for a Novitec.


@ JohnS, well I did consider the SIP, but given I like the noise of the std intake, I thought I could always upgrade that later. I was not worried about that, pre or post RR. This mod will be coming.

The point of the GT2871R was to get the turbo now but run it at low boost until I get other mods sorted out. I wasn't too worried about losing performance initially. Progressive upgrade based on cash I had to spend. I was going in eyes wide open... or as wide open as they can be. And just to reitterate, I'm not disappointed (frustrated) at the results when I know it's something correctable.


@ Suba, cool. That's the first report on here of someone talking of the gains Nigel was talking of by removing the v-band. Also I like your point about the restrictive exhaust increasing cylinder temps. That's what happens. It thought it might have been related to extra pressure on the turbo and it heating the oil and internal temps that way. Removing the v-band could equate to a lot of gain due to that alone, extra to the breathing restriction.


btw, who's the best mod to speak to about this section? There seems to be a few to choose from!

I've very recently been to Perfect Touch and had my Plus mapped. This was to complement a list of tuning modifications made by the previous owner. I can only comment on my own experience with team at PT and have to say I found Claudio and Rob polite, helpful and very enthusiastic. My only complaint is that I missed out on Rob's test drive, sounds like it would've been a hoot!
Having been there, I'm now running more power with better delivery, have every confidence in my engine and as a bonus, know that my boost controller is setup correctly.