nossy

Considering TA also seems to be working around the DP without much feedback tells me they are either complacent or just assume the customer just wants it to work.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

If that's the case, these companies have some very interesting ideas on what it means for something to "work"

Where to start?

 

1. You do not set boost targets at 17.5psi from 1400rpm to redline. Setting unattainable boost targets at such low rpm just has Turbo Dynamics building up where you are so far below boost threshold it's laughable. That is what causes the run up to 8psi or so at 2k4rpm and then the slump at around 2k7rpm and then a slow rise that doesn't see peak until 4k0rpm. You should be running WGDC in the 80 or 90% range up to 2k4rpm or so and then tapering off as you approach the turbo's sweet spot at around 3k2rpm. As you are now you're running a flat 40% or so until 4k0rpm or so, which has spool delayed and uneven. You should be hitting 17psi at 3k2rpm and no later.

2. You do not ask the little VF-54 to do 17.5psi at redline, or really much after about 5k2rpm. Again, asking for more than the turbo can possibly do just loads TDi and TDp up to where it will mess up boost control in the next gear.

 

I'm glad I can't see the AFR or timing curves when boost control is that messed up.

The conspiracy theorist in me makes me suspect that Nameless was in cahoots with English racing to attempt some lame cover up of this overboosting issue. From what very quick investigation I've done it would appear that English does actually know how to tune cars properly, so the only way a tuning monstrosity like this makes sense is if they were purposely doing all they could to prevent overboosting, at the expense of everything else. Makes me wonder who the customer is here?

The worst part about this is that since the part is so troublesome we cant even sell it to anyone else in order to get some money back. So its either build the car around the DP or count the loss.

 

Maybe I'll make the most expensive mantle ornament I've ever owned, or cap the ends and make a really cool urn. Cause at this point both of those options are less of a headache than putting it on my car.

This is exactly where I've been throughout this whole mess since my living/financial situation changed and I decided to sell my LGT after I had placed the order for the DP and paid for it. Now I'm stuck with a brand new $600+ hunk of metal that I doubt I could even unload for half that.

And until we see the logs showing 0 wgdc we can't say one way or the other, but according to their post the boost was not uncontrolled. At least that is how I read it. If I'm wrong I apologize.

After talking with Aaron about everything he said that having an after market BPV on the car you wont be able to get lower boost numbers. Having a valve that will hold the boost will net you 20+PSI. If you wanted say lower boost like 16-19PSI you would need to keep your stock valve.

Though I agree that seeing the complete logs would be ideal, I'm not sure how else we would interpret the above quote from Nameless apart from the boost being uncontrolled. As fahr_side mentioned, running a leaky stock BPV is not a solution, it's a bandaid.

What this test did APPEAR to show us is that there are very negligible differences between the old design of the downpipe and the new design, which was a sticking point and frustrating situation for many of us who participated in the group buy and felt that we did not get what we paid for. It seems that the design change does not significantly impact performance (and could help, though I'd be hesitant to latch onto those specifics too much).

There does however remain the issue of whether or not this uncontrolled boost goes against the claims by Nameless of the downpipe offering a "more consistent boost curve and no boost creep." I feel those claims were likely over confident on Nameless' part and needed more in-depth testing of all setups before being put out there, but I don't think there was malicious intent behind them. I also think anyone would have trouble making a legal case against them on these grounds given all of the variables involved.

So maybe Tuning Alliance uses that bias to prevent overboost, and why they recommended the stock BPV over the turbosmart. Smart guys, if thats the case, then all this time someone could have simply reverted back to the stock BPV to prevent overboost.

So the answer is reverting back to the stock BPV, leaking boost and making the turbo work harder and less efficiently? That's as ridiculous as the "solution" of running a more restrictive exhaust. Nothing but bandaids.

I believe Nameless did mention that they made a small adjustment in the design when the group buy started. But, they didn't say what it was, and they assured us that it wouldn't affect the performance of the part.

Incorrect, which can be verified by reading through the thread here. They did not acknowledge the difference at first (despite answering OTHER questions that were posted) and when pushed on the issue said it was a slight cosmetic difference and then further stated that they have seen good results with the design.

Alright show of hands who contacted nameless directly after install with an over boost issue and kept them informed of their ongoing problem?

 

I'm not on any side here, but most of the complaining has been on this thread from people who haven't even installed the part, for all we know it could be a slight inconsistency in build and in wastegate flow. Until more people step up and install we don't have much data to pull conclusions from.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

I can only speak for myself here, but the primary issue I have is the redesign of the group buy piece. Which, by the way, wasn't even brought up by Nameless in the first place, it was noticed by someone examining pictures of the two side by side. This is unacceptable to me. It was a cost-cutting measure and should have been mentioned by Nameless before anyone had sent in non-refundable deposits. While we were aware that each piece was hand-made and subject to slight variations, this was an intentional change in the design of the unit in an effort to make it easier/cheaper for the manufacturer and nothing else. We PAID FOR the original design and didn't receive it, but being desperate for a well-made and well-performing downpipe, I (and I assume others) trusted Nameless when they stated they had seen good results with the redesign (shall I link the post again?).

I guess it just sucks that they haven't said as much either in this thread or in the GB thread to assuage our fears.

Seconded. I'm not interested in sob stories about "hate mail" I'm interested in results. At the very least Nameless should be posting here directly instead of us hearing secondhand through people contacting them. I guarantee there is phone service wherever these guys are off racing and it takes all of 30 seconds to logon to the site and post "hey guys, we know you're frustrated, we're hoping to be able to test this around October blah blah blah" - this game of telephone makes the situation look worse on Nameless' side.

Once again I'm going to ask, where are the "good results" that Nameless claimed they received with this design? While additional testing that is being planned in this thread is certainly welcome/needed, why don't we have information from the testing already done? Original Post

Seeing them side by side, that pipe from the wastegate looks different in a couple of ways. I thought it was just going to be the entrance into the DP.

This.

I wonder where these results are? This whole ordeal has been incredibly frustrating.

I'm not arguing electric supercharging as a viable method of temporary forced induction.

 

My argument is the product in this thread is designed to take advantage of unsuspecting buyers who don't know any better.

This sums up my point beautifully. I haven't bothered to post in the thread on the other site because they've already drank the Kool-Aid and are beyond reasoning.

I disagree with your comments about phantom ESC. They are measurign 2.5psi at redline with a peaks of 5psi. The numbers that they are reporting on the dyno line up with expected value of 2.5psi of boost. However, I can't say that I have studied the dyno charts, but the first thing I did when I read the phantom posts was do these result makes sense from a mathematical stand point.

If they are seeing that much at redline, the charts I've seen are not indicating this. If you wouldn't mind linking the specific post...

I would say that its more important with 7500rpm band to have better low end torque. Not everyone wants to have to constantly keep the rpm up and wind the engine out. It is much more practical to have low end torque for a street vehicle. Phantom ESC have had for some time had partial throttle boost feature, so you don't have to look like an 'idiot'. It would be great if the ESC made 5psi throughout the rpm band, but they are also half the $ as much as the supercharger and turbo charger kits for BRZ/FRS and a lot easier to install. Are they the best solution for an all out performance car no, but neither is a Legacy or even a Subaru engine. This isn't the ebay leaf blower supercharger kit...

I completely agree that not everyone wants to "wind the engine out" which I specifically addressed. If you aren't going WOT and cranking through the RPM range the ESC is off, it's doing nothing, there's no power going to it at all and therefore is completely useless during 99% of daily driving. The specific situation where the ESC is enabled is when you are at WOT and going for maximum acceleration - in which case there is absolutely no reason NOT to wind out the engine and shift near redline, as doing otherwise would slow you down. Once again, it looks awesome on paper and feels great in limited cases on the street, but it's impractical and a waste of money for 99% of daily driving situations. If someone was serious about racing on the track (drag, road or rally) they wouldn't even consider this unit.

Can this product work in theory? Yes.

Have the BRZ/FRS guys had "positive" results with the kit? Yes, but see below.

Is the technology there to make this a good option compared to the available alternatives? Not yet and not if you consider all of the factors

I've yet to see a dyno chart directly and truly comparing the ESC to a non-ESC car. This means taking a fully tuned BRZ without the ESC and plotting it against the SAME car, on the SAME day with the SAME tuner with the ESC tuned. I've read through pages and pages of the thread over on ft86 and nobody is calling them out on the fact that they are comparing dynos from different cars, with different mods at different locations, tuned vs. untuned - it's a mess and it's convincing the uneducated masses that this is a good bang for your buck modification. The dyno runs between stock and ESC are being started at different RPM as well, I realize this is because of the limits of the battery pack, but this also is going to cause skewed results when comparing the two plots.

Lets also mention the fact that in a car that revs to 7500+ and has the gearing of the BRZ you're going to be spending most (all?) of your time outside of the area where the ESC makes the most gains. It will speed up your 1st gear for you a bit... Big gains in the low end/midrange on a street driven car are noticed on a daily basis in situations below 100% throttle. My LGT's torque is great for speeding up around someone on the freeway, I can give it partial throttle, build partial boost and accelerate without going WOT like an idiot - the ESC is useless in this case.

This technology has its place, and someday we will likely see it in abundance (for example once Elon Musk decides to hookup his batteries to one), but anyone looking to do this on a 2.5i, BRZ/FRS or *insert average car here* is much better off with one of a multitude of other options. Yes you can say "Look at my dyno! I made power!" but it's just not a practical solution overall.

Because torque converter! Not a mechanical connection fluid coupling.

No.

I honestly can't believe people are still taking these things seriously.