Minor update, have now sorted the idle out I think, seems much happier, needed to tweak a few idle duty cycles as well as a few ignition and fuel tables but it seems much happier.

Think I have now done around 25 more miles on the car bringing it up to 75 miles in total, no issues so far with it but will be going round and checking all bolts etc again, might now pull the battery out and check the passenger side engine mounts and swap over to my MAF-less intake tube as at this point I don't think I can go back to stock with the current knock sensor.

Would be interesting to see what kind of changed you see in measured manifold pressure without the MAF in place. Put to sleep for good the inferences that the MAF is a big drag on performance and airflow

Quote from: shnazzle on August 18, 2020, 17:33Would be interesting to see what kind of changed you see in measured manifold pressure without the MAF in place. Put to sleep for good the inferences that the MAF is a big drag on performance and airflow

I am going to leave the MAF tube in place at the moment during break in, will look to log some runs as well as see what the idle and fuel trims are like with the MAF swapped out to a tube.

I have now swapped the MAF tube out to just run a silicone adaptor and straight tube.

There is a slight squeak coming from somewhere on the car, might be the front engine mount, its just rather annoying!

Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

I have swapped over to a straight tube, removing the MAF tube and have done some logging, looking at some of the logs pre and post I can see at full throttle at around 5.5k rpm (found a like for like area pre and post) the engine is now leaned out with the same fuel table mapping.

With MAF tube = 13.6:1
With straight pipe = 14.4:1

With all things equal it would seem that there would be around 5% more airflow going into the engine to be able to lean the engine out whilst fuelling the same.

I will be turning the closed loop lambda back on again to autofuel to the AFR target but it looks like I might need to richen the fuel table by around 5% with the new intake.

I am hoping to also get a higher flow sports cat to replace the very rattling heatshielded stock cat (currently driving me mad!) - still trying to find where the squeak is coming from but might also be main cat heat shield related.

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 11:25Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

I have swapped over to a straight tube, removing the MAF tube and have done some logging, looking at some of the logs pre and post I can see at full throttle at around 5.5k rpm (found a like for like area pre and post) the engine is now leaned out with the same fuel table mapping.

With MAF tube = 13.6:1
With straight pipe = 14.4:1

With all things equal it would seem that there would be around 5% more airflow going into the engine to be able to lean the engine out whilst fuelling the same.

I will be turning the closed loop lambda back on again to autofuel to the AFR target but it looks like I might need to richen the fuel table by around 5% with the new intake.

I am hoping to also get a higher flow sports cat to replace the very rattling heatshielded stock cat (currently driving me mad!) - still trying to find where the squeak is coming from but might also be main cat heat shield related.

That much?? Crikey. That's massive!
On the piggyback I had an airflow correction of 10% guesstimated, which seems to be too much. I kept that value because that's how it was mapped with a 57i K&N setup.

But it won't be uniform across the board of course

Quote from: shnazzle on September  2, 2020, 12:45

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 11:25Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

I have swapped over to a straight tube, removing the MAF tube and have done some logging, looking at some of the logs pre and post I can see at full throttle at around 5.5k rpm (found a like for like area pre and post) the engine is now leaned out with the same fuel table mapping.

With MAF tube = 13.6:1
With straight pipe = 14.4:1

With all things equal it would seem that there would be around 5% more airflow going into the engine to be able to lean the engine out whilst fuelling the same.

I will be turning the closed loop lambda back on again to autofuel to the AFR target but it looks like I might need to richen the fuel table by around 5% with the new intake.

I am hoping to also get a higher flow sports cat to replace the very rattling heatshielded stock cat (currently driving me mad!) - still trying to find where the squeak is coming from but might also be main cat heat shield related.

That much?? Crikey. That's massive!
On the piggyback I had an airflow correction of 10% guesstimated, which seems to be too much. I kept that value because that's how it was mapped with a 57i K&N setup.

But it won't be uniform across the board of course

Correct - its just on one of the cells comparing like for like though.

My setup is a 3" cone filter to a 3" pipe necking down to the 70mm throttle body outer so basically no restriction before the throttlebody and will be the same sort of setup when I do go turbo.

Just need to sort out the really really annoying rattling and squeaking the car now has but its slowly getting there now - shouldn't need to worry about oil consumption, only ensuring that things are ok for the MOT in terms of emissions next year.

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 11:25Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

Just past 100 miles!  what you been doing get it out and drive it   im nearly 1500miles on mine now since the refresh

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 13:25

Quote from: shnazzle on September  2, 2020, 12:45

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 11:25Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

I have swapped over to a straight tube, removing the MAF tube and have done some logging, looking at some of the logs pre and post I can see at full throttle at around 5.5k rpm (found a like for like area pre and post) the engine is now leaned out with the same fuel table mapping.

With MAF tube = 13.6:1
With straight pipe = 14.4:1

With all things equal it would seem that there would be around 5% more airflow going into the engine to be able to lean the engine out whilst fuelling the same.

I will be turning the closed loop lambda back on again to autofuel to the AFR target but it looks like I might need to richen the fuel table by around 5% with the new intake.

I am hoping to also get a higher flow sports cat to replace the very rattling heatshielded stock cat (currently driving me mad!) - still trying to find where the squeak is coming from but might also be main cat heat shield related.

That much?? Crikey. That's massive!
On the piggyback I had an airflow correction of 10% guesstimated, which seems to be too much. I kept that value because that's how it was mapped with a 57i K&N setup.

But it won't be uniform across the board of course

Correct - its just on one of the cells comparing like for like though.

My setup is a 3" cone filter to a 3" pipe necking down to the 70mm throttle body outer so basically no restriction before the throttlebody and will be the same sort of setup when I do go turbo.

Just need to sort out the really really annoying rattling and squeaking the car now has but its slowly getting there now - shouldn't need to worry about oil consumption, only ensuring that things are ok for the MOT in terms of emissions next year.

Which cells out of curiosity? Guessing lower down?

Quote from: shnazzle on September  2, 2020, 16:35

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 13:25

Quote from: shnazzle on September  2, 2020, 12:45

Quote from: m1tch on September  2, 2020, 11:25Still in the process of breaking the engine in, although its now past 100 miles of driving so is pretty much broken in at this point.

I have swapped over to a straight tube, removing the MAF tube and have done some logging, looking at some of the logs pre and post I can see at full throttle at around 5.5k rpm (found a like for like area pre and post) the engine is now leaned out with the same fuel table mapping.

With MAF tube = 13.6:1
With straight pipe = 14.4:1

With all things equal it would seem that there would be around 5% more airflow going into the engine to be able to lean the engine out whilst fuelling the same.

I will be turning the closed loop lambda back on again to autofuel to the AFR target but it looks like I might need to richen the fuel table by around 5% with the new intake.

I am hoping to also get a higher flow sports cat to replace the very rattling heatshielded stock cat (currently driving me mad!) - still trying to find where the squeak is coming from but might also be main cat heat shield related.

That much?? Crikey. That's massive!
On the piggyback I had an airflow correction of 10% guesstimated, which seems to be too much. I kept that value because that's how it was mapped with a 57i K&N setup.

But it won't be uniform across the board of course

Correct - its just on one of the cells comparing like for like though.

My setup is a 3" cone filter to a 3" pipe necking down to the 70mm throttle body outer so basically no restriction before the throttlebody and will be the same sort of setup when I do go turbo.

Just need to sort out the really really annoying rattling and squeaking the car now has but its slowly getting there now - shouldn't need to worry about oil consumption, only ensuring that things are ok for the MOT in terms of emissions next year.

Which cells out of curiosity? Guessing lower down?

Here is my full mixture map for the last log, was doing a few pulls (for break in) plus some cruise and light load - the fuel map was basically pretty well mapped before I changed out the MAF tube. Below is without any CLL corrections, you can see it is much leaner at higher RPMs, was looking at the pre MAF tube change file and the CLL is off at the load cells and were within about 2% of target.

Note: 1000 rpm and 35-40kpa is idle

Owing to the current lockdown I haven't been able to put too many miles on the engine recently but I think I have done about 125 miles so far on the engine (around 75 miles on the current oil). Looking at the dipstick the oil is still a good colour, whereas after 50 miles on the previous oil it was already quite black so I am guessing most of the assembly oils and ARP gunk would have been pulled out of the engine in the first oil change which is great.

Currently tracking down a VVTi sensor error that flagged up on the Link ECU - only just noticed it but I think its been an issue for a while - will just be down to the setup on the Link ECU, need to go through a cam angle test process and offset the VVTi trigger signal.

Idle seems to be sorted out and have updated the main fuel table with everything seemingly correct and within only a few % vs target (looking at the closed loop lambda fueling trims).

I am now dialling in the cylinder trims for the knock sensor - cylinders 2 and 3 that are closer to the knock sensor need to have the gain reduced to match off with cylinder 1 and 4 that are further away to get an even figure across the engine.

It takes forever for the ARP lube to stop blackening the oil...

Quote from: Call the midlife! on September  9, 2020, 14:25It takes forever for the ARP lube to stop blackening the oil...

And your hands lol

Think I have sorted out the VVTi error - the trigger angle offset was at 50 degrees, after running the test calibration it seems that it should be set to around 46.3 degrees which I think might be why it was throwing up an error every now and then.

Not put a huge amount more miles on the car due to the weather but I am happy with where it currently is, I will be running one of the Mailan sports cats and might swap over to the 'snake' exhaust manifold I have as well. The reason why I am looking to change over to the sports cat midpipe is that its new, has a new mounting point and there are O2 bungs both pre and post the main cat so perfect for my Wideband O2. Currently I am only measuring the AFR in 2 of the cylinders rather than the mix overall so this should sort this issue - might still try to see if I can fit an O2 bung in a stock cat though.

I am also going to focus on the suspension components now so will look to polybush the arms etc bit by bit as well as treat any rust I find.

I have a spare set of lower arms being posted to me, will be refurbishing them and fitting the poly bushes, think I might see if I can get the arm that gets bolted to the subframe via the cambolt for toe alignment as I have yet to get the car realigned after subframe swap. Figure I might as well get at least that arm poly bushed so that I wouldn't need to get it realigned again when I pull the bolt out again to fit the bushes.

Quick update on this, I have been tweaking my tune slightly on the Link Xtreme, now happy with the fuelling as well as sorting a few trigger errors out. The engine is running well and is on around 250 mile so not a huge mileage but due to the current situation I haven't had a need to take the car out that much.

I will look to clean and refurbish the current suspension arms and see if I can get them installed over the next few months, still need to get my alignment sorted on the car since changing the subframe but its not been too bad.

I have also upgraded to some Widermuller HVAC knobs and might look to replicate them in a different metal at some point once I get the garage workshop built up.

I am now in the process of pulling together a few turbo bits ready for the engine to be boosted, I actually have a used Saab T25 turbo coming which is probably ok for around 250-270bhp, its small but will allow me to bolt everything up and run things. Plan will be to then upgrade to a larger unit once everything is happy when the time comes.

Will also give me the opportunity to add some more data to my gradual improvements on the car

Here are the runs so far:

Stock power, stock weight 15.8 - 138bhp per ton

Stock power and around 68kg removed - 15.3 - 148bhp per ton

Extra power and around 68kg removed - 14.96 - 158bhp per ton (guesstimate 10bhp more than stock looking at the estimated times)

Car down on power but 83kg removed - 14.99 - 158bhp per ton - looks like I am down around 3bhp to get the same time with less weight

Estimated time if car was at 83kg removed and full power from previous runs - 14.86 (around 1 second improvement from stock)

I am planning to go to Santapod next year with a high flow cat and the new engine which will have the new gearset and higher rev limit which will give me a good benchmark run with the new engine.

I will then look to bolt on the smaller turbo and run it like that - probably running low boost to get some data and then turn it up depending on how hot the intake is getting post charge cooler - as a guess it should run a 13 second pass with around 220bhp, maybe into the 12s if I go for higher boost levels.

From there on I will need a lot more power to get into the 11s, as a comparison (estimated times):

150bhp per ton = 15.2
200bhp per ton = 13.6
250bhp per ton = 12.7
300bhp per ton = 12.2
350bhp per ton = 11.8
400bhp per ton = 11.5
450bhp per ton = 11.4
500bhp per ton = 11.2

Plan for the build it to run an 11 second pass so 11.9 or faster so would need just over 315bhp or so.

Might either go with a GTX2871r or a GTX3071r as the possible turbo options, very much doubt the more common GTX2860 will flow enough to get me to where I need to get to but will see how the smaller turbo pans out first!

Which turbo is it mate?
T25 is such a generic term.

I still fancy borg Warner turbos if I was going for big power on a built engine.

Quote from: 1979scotte on November 26, 2020, 17:31Which turbo is it mate?
T25 is such a generic term.

I still fancy borg Warner turbos if I was going for big power on a built engine.

Think most of the saab T25 were GT2554's

Its the same turbo used on SP240 kits that he is getting which is as per following link - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Turbocharger-Saab-9000-2-0-108-125kw-9146051-452083-REMAN-Turbo-Gasket-kit/330996626882

Basically im selling M1tch the stuff ive been collecting up as im putting the 2nd chapter of my turbo build on back burner for time being, might as well sell to someone else to make use of in meantime

Quote from: thetyrant on November 26, 2020, 20:20Its the same turbo used on SP240 kits that he is getting which is as per following link - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Turbocharger-Saab-9000-2-0-108-125kw-9146051-452083-REMAN-Turbo-Gasket-kit/330996626882

Basically im selling M1tch the stuff ive been collecting up as im putting the 2nd chapter of my turbo build on back burner for time being, might as well sell to someone else to make use of in meantime

It's a TB2559 if its the same saab turbo as the TTE/SP kits.
Not sure why you'd buy one if you didn't have a tte its ancient tech.
Although they are cheap.

Quote from: 1979scotte on November 26, 2020, 20:58

Quote from: thetyrant on November 26, 2020, 20:20Its the same turbo used on SP240 kits that he is getting which is as per following link - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Turbocharger-Saab-9000-2-0-108-125kw-9146051-452083-REMAN-Turbo-Gasket-kit/330996626882

Basically im selling M1tch the stuff ive been collecting up as im putting the 2nd chapter of my turbo build on back burner for time being, might as well sell to someone else to make use of in meantime

It's a TB2559 if its the same saab turbo as the TTE/SP kits.
Not sure why you'd buy one if you didn't have a tte its ancient tech.
Although they are cheap.

Its just a starter for 10 - even a small old school turbo will make more boost than an NA manifold

Quote from: m1tch on November 27, 2020, 07:14

Quote from: 1979scotte on November 26, 2020, 20:58

Quote from: thetyrant on November 26, 2020, 20:20Its the same turbo used on SP240 kits that he is getting which is as per following link - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Turbocharger-Saab-9000-2-0-108-125kw-9146051-452083-REMAN-Turbo-Gasket-kit/330996626882

Basically im selling M1tch the stuff ive been collecting up as im putting the 2nd chapter of my turbo build on back burner for time being, might as well sell to someone else to make use of in meantime

It's a TB2559 if its the same saab turbo as the TTE/SP kits.
Not sure why you'd buy one if you didn't have a tte its ancient tech.
Although they are cheap.

Its just a starter for 10 - even a small old school turbo will make more boost than an NA manifold

Yes but if you swap it, it needs mapping again.
Every change i made to my V6 was money wasted. Should just have gone all out from the beginning.

Different strokes for different folks.

Quote from: 1979scotte on November 27, 2020, 07:42

Quote from: m1tch on November 27, 2020, 07:14

Quote from: 1979scotte on November 26, 2020, 20:58

Quote from: thetyrant on November 26, 2020, 20:20Its the same turbo used on SP240 kits that he is getting which is as per following link - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Turbocharger-Saab-9000-2-0-108-125kw-9146051-452083-REMAN-Turbo-Gasket-kit/330996626882

Basically im selling M1tch the stuff ive been collecting up as im putting the 2nd chapter of my turbo build on back burner for time being, might as well sell to someone else to make use of in meantime

It's a TB2559 if its the same saab turbo as the TTE/SP kits.
Not sure why you'd buy one if you didn't have a tte its ancient tech.
Although they are cheap.

Its just a starter for 10 - even a small old school turbo will make more boost than an NA manifold

Yes but if you swap it, it needs mapping again.
Every change i made to my V6 was money wasted. Should just have gone all out from the beginning.

Different strokes for different folks.

I might not fit it but its an option, will be mapping it myself to get it in the ball park so it probably won't be 100% power with the smaller turbo if I do go with it first. With the larger turbo I will be going for a professional map though - the smaller turbo won't really be worrying the engine that much as it will be on low boost.

Link ECU has autofuelling via wideband which corrects the fueling instantly if its not on target in the AFR table, also have knock control setup (although still tweaking the individual cylinder trims).

If I do go with the smaller turbo to start with I would just run it on wastegate pressure and see where the fueling is going - can then just interpolate the fuelling for the rest of the map for this turbo.

Turbo has now arrived along with the exhaust manifold and chargecooler. Will be ordering a 3 bolt to V band adaptor to fit it to the off the shelf turbo back downpipe soon, although no rush.

My NA sports cat midpipe should be arriving soon so will hopefully be able to swap that in over the weekend along with my race exhaust manifold. Will be then running the car on a single wideband O2 sensor pre cat (rather than using one of the decat manifold O2 bungs for the whole engine).

I also have a Fiat Cinquecento radiator on the way as well for the chargecooler radiator to fit to the front and will then get some long hoses to run to the back of the car at some point. Also need to work out piping and routing of the intake system so might need to relocate the battery or drop it down to the cross member for clearance.

Plan is still to run the car NA for most of next year whilst I collect parts, the exhaust system is easy, its just the plumbing for oil and water as well as space for the intake pipework.