You are correct in the sence that it does not improve peak numbers.
It does however improve the production of torque at low rpm's.

Drag racing is not really the corect place for true anti lag. Flat shift yes, bang-bang no.

 

Hmm some of it makes it possible. Another part of it is very advanced engine management and lots of setup and tuning time for very specific conditions coupled with good fuel, etc.
I think if you consider F1 cars, you won't be so surprised by what GpN is doing. Think of GpA as a cheaper version of F1 and GpN as a parts restricted version of that. All of them spend quite a bit of money making sure they have a solid platform to push the limits on. Right now we are pushing power hard core on a motor that cost MMC about 1/4 what the dealer wants for one. It simply isn't feasible to expect it to be ultra high tolerance like big power will expect.

BTW, STi's come with 6 speeds now as well. The diffs are all allowed to be changed as are the gearsets.
Also, guys I would stop calling it "bang bang". That is what it was termed in a poor subtitle translation in Initial D (a drifiting anime cartoon from Japan). I know of no where else that it is called that. The character called it that because he didn't know what it was and it sounded like a bunch of gunshots, etc.

Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com

 

I've been building cars for about 12 years now.
I have always heard that form of anti lag called that.

anti lag is so broad, with many types. That term atleast narrows it down to what type.

call it what you want I will call it what I want. The term "bang-bang" was around way before the cartoon.

 

Great info guys!! I think I do get the concept of anti-lag targeting more of the keeping spool up while throttle is let-off...and I can see how it would assist getting more torque earlier in the revs...but it looks like a less attractive option with nitrous so available and contributing a lot of the same benefit. But then it looks like a lot of the stand-alone units incorporate an anti-lag option which it seems could be combined with N2O...just by retarding timing in low rpm range.

So what about the overboring? I'm surprised Al hasn't (or am I speaking too soon ) done that since he's done so much other stuff. Why isn't anyone overboring...is it just the commitment of tearing the whole engine apart or is it going to really limit safety of increased boost? I would think that bored and sleaved cylinders would give a heck of a lot more low-end torque and really magnify virtually every other mod we're playing with.

Still nobody on the clutched supercharger idea?

 

From what I have read you cannot overbore the 4G63, there is not enough room, but I could be wrong. I wish you could though so as to bore it out along with an increased stroke all the while keeping the ratio's good.

 

It has been called bang-bang since TTE invented the system in it's current form for the Celica GT4. Originally the GT4 was sold in europe with the a working ALS system. Toyota removed it soon after some customer cars cracked or blew off exhaust manifolds. It is not the best for engine longevity.

Some systems are more turbo friendly than others. I knows that the GEMS (the hardware that is the basis for the AEM EMS) can be tuned for light anti-lag. You can limit it to the point where you lose vacuum for the brake boost diaphragm.

The system retards the timing so far that the plug fires after the exhaust valve is open. Either a stepper motor working to crack open the throttle plate or the secondary air system (as on JDM Evos) is used to supply additional air. Remember that WRC cars have to be licensed in the country of the event and meet emissions. In most events they run cats.

The ALS system does allow much more torque down low.

1. Allows a much larger turbo to be used due to spool up issues.

2. Most of the systems can provide full boost just off idle. No other system could. The systems are driver adjustable to provide the responsiveness required by the driver. Regardless higher boost = higher torque.

The restrictor keeps a lid on high rpm power. Don't confuse any of this with the whole torque vs. power debate. Low rpm power give the modern WRC class cars their amazing performance.

 

I'll order one of the ones that are engine Friendly Please!!!

 

You don't just order it up. You need an experienced WRC or group N rally tuner and a GEMS/Autronic/Motec/Pectal ECU.

 

I was just kidding. Is my sarcasm that bad.

 

erik long time,where have u been.call me
frank

 

misfiring system

 

Ok, the answer to the problem of low end torque and lag is to run a supercharger in series with the turbo. Now please don’t laugh, there is some sense here really. Think about it, at low rpms, when the turbo is normally dormant the supercharger will be blowing and then when the turbo wakes up you let it take over. This will make the car VERY drivable and should make the turbo spool up faster (The Group B lancer S4 ran a similar system). The systems that I have seen runs the supercharger outlet into the inlet of the turbo, but half way down the pipe have a pipe coming off running to a second filter. On that line they mount a throttle body (either rpm or pressure controlled) that opens when the turbo starts to pump. If set up correctly you shouldn’t feel the switch! This gives you all the low end performance of a supercharged engine, with the top end benefits of a turbo. It also enables you to run a much larger turbo than on a conventional car and not suffer total lag. Also there is no need to mod anything or dose it reduce the reliability of anything else, and the system could be supplied as a bolt on kit!!!!

P.S. I have not seen this on an EVO yet and packaging may be a problem, but it might just work.

 

Ok, the answer to the problem of low end torque and lag is to run a supercharger in series with the turbo. Now please don’t laugh, there is some sense here really. Think about it, at low rpms, when the turbo is normally dormant the supercharger will be blowing and then when the turbo wakes up you let it take over. This will make the car VERY drivable and should make the turbo spool up faster (The Group B lancer S4 ran a similar system). The systems that I have seen runs the supercharger outlet into the inlet of the turbo, but half way down the pipe have a pipe coming off running to a second filter. On that line they mount a throttle body (either rpm or pressure controlled) that opens when the turbo starts to pump. If set up correctly you shouldn’t feel the switch! This gives you all the low end performance of a supercharged engine, with the top end benefits of a turbo. It also enables you to run a much larger turbo than on a conventional car and not suffer total lag. Also there is no need to mod anything or dose it reduce the reliability of anything else, and the system could be supplied as a bolt on kit!!!!

P.S. I have not seen this on an EVO yet and packaging may be a problem, but it might just work.

 

The bore has nothing to do with the rod/stroke ratio. It has to do with the length of the rod versus the stroke. Stroking makes the ratio worse.
The 4G63 cannot really be bored out like a lot of V8's and other cars. The motor can't/doesn't need sleeves to hold power.

erikgj,
My apologies. I have never heard of it that way. <shrug> That being said I have seen a few threads on the Subaru boards where many have heard of it just from that source. Some guys were very hard to convince that they shouldn't be running around on the street with antilag all the time. Not that I want to stop them, but rather make sure they have a clear picture of pro/con.

Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com

 

Problem with the supercharger at least for WRC cars is that they are harder to adjust. The adjustment of ALS is needed for driver control. No one runs full power ALS on WRC cars since the car is just too explosive out of corners. I would love to have that problem.

Without a complicated drive system the ALS aided turbo will out perform a supercharged one at low speeds. The supercharger is also much less efficient reducing available power.