IW STi Forum banner
1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,667 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys,

I’m very sorry for the delayed response. The testing has been completed for sometime, we just haven’t had time post it up because we have been very very busy.

CONCLUSION:

We are very pleased with the results of the RR500 testing. The original testing cannot be taken into consideration because there was a wastegate flapper issue. This caused some erroneous assumptions for the turbo. Once this problem was resolved, the power curve of the turbo became substantially better as did the response. We see the RR500 as the best choice for a stock location turbo for the STI.

Results – The test car was running 100 octane mixed with 91 octane, for a ~98 octane mix. The boost pressure was increased to about 24-25 psi tapering to 20-21psi at redline. AFR and tune was kept to a very conservative 11.5:1, which given the octane is about what you’d want to run to be conservative on the street. The results are exactly what’d a customer would leave with.

HP: 353whp
TQ: 366wtq

Comparison to the 20G TD06 – The RR500 has a similar spool up to a 20G but has much more top end potential pushing more midrange torque thus resulting in a much flatter and broader horsepower curve. According to the owner of the car, the RR500 feels very similar in terms of response to the TD05-20G (much smaller turbo) which is impressive to say the least. Note the flatter and broader HP curve from 5000rpm

Comparison to the FP Green – The RR500 spools and responds considerably better than an FP Green. Comparing the torque you can see that response and power before 5900RPM is substantially better than the green. This is probably due to the green’s larger and heavier wheels, which hurts performance before 5900RPM but allows for more top end power after 6000RPM. Given the small difference in area from 6000 to redline I would venture to say that running a more aggressive AFR on the RR500 can potentially make up the majority of the difference in power, giving the RR500 a much better area under the curve for a stock block 2.5 STI on 100 octane gas.

Comparison to the SZ55 “Big Boy wheel” – Keeping in mind the RR500 is not a magical turbo, the results are as one would expect from a 55lbs compressor wheel versus the RR500. The RR500 makes less torque and horsepower after 5000rpm. That said one must note the tremendous difference in area under the curve before 5000RPM. My personal opinion is a Subaru owner would be much better served with a GT30R as opposed to the SZ55, as the GT30R offers better spool, much improved boost response, and more top end power potential. The SZ55 doesn't make sense to me, I would either go RR500 or GT30R, unless a stock location turbo was an absolute necessity, in which case I may consider the FP red...

Hope this gives you guys a clear idea of the performance capabilities of the RR500. If the exchange rate holds for the rest of the year (115:1) Helix has agreed to offer the RR500 for the original MSRP of $1199, which should mean a retail of $999. We should be seeing our first shipment mid September.

Thanks for being patient guys!

Cheers,

Gary
Gruppe-S





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,667 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
jph said:
would like to see a straight 91 octane tune.


J.
Sorry, we don't have clean 91 octane numbers because of the WG flapper issue. I'll check the dyno logs tomorrow to see if there's anything that looks remotedly reasonable. The RR500 will put down more mid range torque earlier than the FP Green with about the same peak HP, which is about 310-315whp on pump. The reason for this is the larger 8cm^2 hotside and the fact that at 310-315whp you aren't fully utilizing the slightly larger 49lbs wheel. It holds power better up top than a standard td06 20g to the tune of about 5-10whp.

Thanks,

Gary
Gruppe-S
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,300 Posts
That looks like a great turbo, I'd like to see pump gas results as well when you get some time.

I'm suprised you bash the SZ55 like that though. There are a lot running around that have outstanding power under the curve. A lot of tuners get them running really well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
whitson01 said:
i expected to see a lot higher numbers, like around 390-400 whp.. ive seen a lot of stock turbo setups hitting 315 on pump..
yea but on what dyno, I bet on the gruppe-s dyno, the stock turbo would make around 210-220, hey gruppe-s is this a 2.4 or a 3.0 inlet?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
He mentioned in another thread that Helix was not planning a 3" inlet for the RR500.

I would like to see some pics of the Gruppe-S MAF though as I think that my Perrin Big Maf might be causing me problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,300 Posts
A list of the supporting mods on the car would be great if you have the time. It looks very impressive so far.

**Just had the mods pointed out! ignore**
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,287 Posts
I don't think he is a fan of the SZ55. I however love mine. If I could start all over though, I would probably go with a rotated setup, but with my current setup that just doesn't make economical sense. The difference between the SZ55 and the GT30R is pretty negligible. Plus I'm glad I have a warranty that covers my turbo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
jgheels2003 said:
A list of the supporting mods on the car would be great if you have the time. It looks very impressive so far.
It can be found in the first dyno graph. Basically, FMIC, headers, MAF, and the usual supporting cast (injectors, TBE, tune, etc...)

However, are these the same mods that were used for the other dyno runs (for the other turbos)? Did they use the same car? Was the same 98 octane mix used for the other dyno runs?

Also, +1 for a numbers using pump gas and also, please post a graph of a stock STI on the dyno.

I know I've asked a lot of questions, but it is really hard to compare dyno numbers when there are so many variables.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,300 Posts
rv7 said:
It can be found in the first dyno graph. Basically, FMIC, headers, MAF, and the usual supporting cast (injectors, TBE, tune, etc...)

However, are these the same mods that were used for the other dyno runs (for the other turbos)? Did they use the same car? Was the same 98 octane mix used for the other dyno runs?

Also, +1 for a numbers using pump gas and also, please post a graph of a stock STI on the dyno.

I know I've asked a lot of questions, but it is really hard to compare dyno numbers when there are so many variables.
wow I totally just glazed over those mods in the graph haha. Thanks, that does help. It would be great to see if everything else was left the same. That boost level seems like a load for even a race gas mix tune, not too conservative. 91 and 93 octane tunes around 19-21psi max would be nice to see in comparison to the standard 44/49lb/min turbos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,082 Posts
For all the hype, I'm not seeing much...
First, let's see how it does on 91/93 octane, what most people will be using on a daily basis.
Second, let's see how it does with an external wastegate. If you're going to upgrade the turbo, do yourself a favor and go with an EWG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
I'd like to clarify...

Were these turbos installed on the same car with the same other mods and each tuned for the best power individually...?

Im not trying to bust anyone's chops, just trying to understand the controls involved.

Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
Also, the spool on that Green you compare looks *terrible* compared to others Ive seen, especially 3" Greens.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,416 Posts
All I can say is WTF. Sorry :(

1) The spool on your Green and 20G looks horrible.
2) The spool on the RR500 is ... well ... nothing to write home about at all.
3) You presented numbers with it tuned on 98 octane. Ummm - this makes absolutely no sense at all.
4) You never mentioned what gas the Green and 20G were using. If they were using 91 or 93 then the comparison is totally invalid.
5) You never mentioned what boost pressure the Green and 20G were using in the comparisons above.

For me, the data that was just presented is totally useless for anyone that knows anything about making comparisons. I almost feel like you are trying to mislead the public. I just can't figure out why you didn't do a pump gas tune with optimal tune and compare that to pump gas tunes on the 20G and Green with optimal tunes. That is what we really need to see here.

This post is rather depressing given the long wait :( I was really hoping for something hopeful with this turbo but all I am seeing (JMHO) is an attempt to make this turbo seem a heck of a lot better than it is. Yes, I know your dyno reads low.

t
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,082 Posts
WolfPlayer said:
All I can say is WTF. Sorry :(

1) The spool on your Green and 20G looks horrible.
2) The spool on the RR500 is ... well ... nothing to write home about at all.
3) You presented numbers with it tuned on 98 octane. Ummm - this makes absolutely no sense at all.
4) You never mentioned what gas the Green and 20G were using. If they were using 91 or 93 then the comparison is totally invalid.
5) You never mentioned what boost pressure the Green and 20G were using in the comparisons above.

For me, the data that was just presented is totally useless for anyone that knows anything about making comparisons. I almost feel like you are trying to mislead the public. I just can't figure out why you didn't do a pump gas tune with optimal tune and compare that to pump gas tunes on the 20G and Green with optimal tunes. That is what we really need to see here.

This post is rather depressing given the long wait :( I was really hoping for something hopeful with this turbo but all I am seeing (JMHO) is an attempt to make this turbo seem a heck of a lot better than it is. Yes, I know your dyno reads low.

t
I agree 100%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
Well, here's an earlier comparison of the RR500 to a GT30R (which doesnt have rip-roaring spool itself):



Now, according to that dyno vs. the Green above, the 91 octane GT30R handily outspools the Green by a wide margin.

I guess I have had a number of contradictory experiences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
WolfPlayer said:
All I can say is WTF. Sorry :(

1) The spool on your Green and 20G looks horrible.
2) The spool on the RR500 is ... well ... nothing to write home about at all.
3) You presented numbers with it tuned on 98 octane. Ummm - this makes absolutely no sense at all.
4) You never mentioned what gas the Green and 20G were using. If they were using 91 or 93 then the comparison is totally invalid.
5) You never mentioned what boost pressure the Green and 20G were using in the comparisons above.

For me, the data that was just presented is totally useless for anyone that knows anything about making comparisons. I almost feel like you are trying to mislead the public. I just can't figure out why you didn't do a pump gas tune with optimal tune and compare that to pump gas tunes on the 20G and Green with optimal tunes. That is what we really need to see here.

This post is rather depressing given the long wait :( I was really hoping for something hopeful with this turbo but all I am seeing (JMHO) is an attempt to make this turbo seem a heck of a lot better than it is. Yes, I know your dyno reads low.

t
A agree, saying is the ultimate daily driver turbo and using 98 octane is just silly.

Perfect world comparisons I would want 91 octane tunes for 20G, green, and this RR500 turbo, same boost, same mods, same AFR. Only difference being the weather and the turbo.

Aside from asking so much in the way of comparisons the price easily outweighs the variables and makes it a easy choice for people looking to go to a 20G like turbo upgrade.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top