BLSTIC

There is a random bolt or two in the door somewhere with a sliding stop attached to it. This adjusts the upper stop of the window. Move the window to as high was you want it to go then remove the doorskin (don't lower the window). Loosening those bolts (don't remove, it looked like it would be a PITA to put the stop back on) should make the stop fall on to the moving part of the window frame. At most a very light pressure should be needed unless yours is rusty. Do the bolt back up and the new upper stop position is set. That was on a 1st gen front door and is from memory, so there's a fair chance it's different to yours. Did you remove the door? Or just the window?

Never mind the fact that you just did the clutch, I would be checking the blow-off valve connections.

well you can have them ported, but there is ony so far you can take it. If you could find a large external wastegate with an external (like internal wastegates have) actuator you could use that with the original exhaust control valve. If a normal external gate actuator functions the same you can use it, but I doubt it.

what's this overspool thing you mention? Do you mean spiking or the boost level staying too high all the time? Both are easily fixed with well placed bypasses (with restrictions) on the boost control plumbing. It would be a little complicated with a twin-turbo system, but more than likely still do-able. Best off asking someone with experience doing what you plan to do, and see if they actually had problems and what they did to fix them. I haven't done much with the twin turbo's, just theorised about how to fix the valley of death (not actually done it...).

I see no reason to go 3" for the secondary turbo then back to 2.5" as soon as you join the 2.5" primary pipe. Remember the twin turbo system doesn't switch the turbo's (ie the primary never stops, the secondary just cuts in), so if you think about it that way, the primary and secondary dump pipes only have to flow 150kw maximum each (The chances of you going any further than 300kw while still keeping some variant of the twin turbo system is so close to zero) I was thinking 2.5" from both turbo's to the collector, then 3" from the collector back.

Alternatively someone with a first gen who is about to do a front-mount can lay down some before and after 3rd gear 2000-7000rpm times for us. That or we can wait a few months for me to do mine.

BC5RA - I was basing that on the fact that the car has been in my family since 1997 (imported then) and I know no major overhauls have taken place in that time They also failed to mention any freshly replaced parts (although that doesn't mean that there was no problems though). There's no saying that it didn't have fresh parts on it when it arrived (the coils had BF turbo written on them, so they are at least wrecker items). No I'm not going to tell you I have owned the car for any more than 6 months, and in that time I have had to replace the coils, the exhaust manifold-turbo pipe (due again, must have got a dud. I hate doing the same job twice because of faulty parts), remove a rocker (head was going to be a PITA to remove in the car, and a lifter was jammed), replace two heater hoses, and discovered that my dual mode power steering is fauty. I don't know if the pump works on high speed or not, but that's an electrical thing, not a pump fault. Now that you mention the pump bearings I do actually remember one issue I had. The pump didn't turn when I got the car, but stripping it revealed immaculate internals, and powering when apart (it turned) and re-assembly, with no replacement parts or cleaning, fixed the issue. I'm assuming being left dry was the culprit for the temporary siezure. Sorry about that. Incedentally I have not had any age related issues with the intake plumbing (I snapped a fitting on the bow-off valve and the threads in the air box got stripped). The turbo had no shaft play when I removed it to replace that pipe. As for cleaning the core, I assume you are talking about the air part of the core, and I was planning on it, but an oil catch can got rid of the pre-turbo deposits, and when I pulled the intercooler off on tuesday for the heater hoses there was only the slightest film, so I didn't bother. I haven't tried to flush the water part of the core either. The car had done ~270,000km when I got it, so I was extremely and pleasantly surprised about the condition of the turbo and intercooler pump. All the faults were to be expected after this long, with any car. You were scarily accurate on the 11 years plus comment though... July 1997. Incedentally re the 242kw @ wheels. Have you measured the pressure drop across the intercooler? *edited first paragraph*

Water-air cores requiring maintainance is a joke. Mine hasn't missed a beat, all I do is check the coolant level. It only needed filling once, 6 months ago when I got the car. I'm assuming that was because dad had removed it to repair the left hand side head. And yes water does circulate continously.

Modify the intercooler tank? As in the water flow through the (by then twin) cores? Or the radiator at the front?

Don't care about pics, but cars built for something other than straight lines are more relevant. This is more due to the fact that speedway/circuit/rally guys don't modify their bonnets, and need to work perfectly long term than any cooling/flow issue. That said in nz apparently holes in bonnets are pretty legal. So some big flat shiny thing hanging out of the bonnet probably isn't an issue, as long as it ends up lower than the front bonnet line from the drivers seat.

Ok I'll clarify. Has anyone done this, what did you do, and what results did you get? Thanks Ben

Talking about the front mounted intercoolers got me thinking about why I would actually want one. The cooling performance of a water-air cooler in a stop-start environment is second to none (ok maybe a front mount with thermo-fans and an insulated intercooler-throtte pipe), so the reason would have to be airflow. So I'm thinking about modifying a water-air core for higher flow. Has anyone done this?

Any front mount I will get will probably be painted black. I prefer to create confusion in my victims/admirers (yeah... admirers...). This is the same reason any toss-off valve I fit will be a plumb-back design. I am not concerned too much about the cooling performance of the top-mount, that isn't an issue (if all else fails I can have a second reservior filled with ice water that the coolant can flow through). The issue is the pressure drop across it. If it gets any worse than 3psi it's too much for my tastes, but I don't know when I am going to get to that point. I guess I'm going to find out just how hard a VF10 can go... I'll dyno once before the new engine, once just after the new engine has been run in, and again with the big injectors and management modifications, on higher boost. The pressure drop across the stock water-air intercooler will be measured then.

Two reasons 1. I want torque as low as is practically possible while getting decent power. A small turbo pushed to it's limits is about the only way to easily do that 2. That's what I have. I'm not going to weld the wastegate shut or anything, but I'm hoping to run around the 20-22psi mark. Apparently that's about all the VF10's will pump out without being horribly, horribly inneficient. But anyway, will a front-mount be of any benifit at this power level, noting that the water-air style of intercooler is currently fitted.

If you do use just the valve between the compressor and the wastegate don't forget about a bleed. Since when was there a 1st generation RA?

For the purposes of this conversation, worked includes 7.5:1 compression pistons, wrx heads, a 2.5" exhaust, cold-air intake, and an effectively free-boosted VF10. I would hope to have maybe 230kw at the flywheel. Is going to a large front-mounted intercooler going to have much effect at this level? Aside from adding toss factor of course (I'll probably paint it black anyway though). Note that this does NOT mean that my new engine is built, just that I'm bored and thinking of what else I can do as well. Thanks Ben

Well I know it worked fine for me, aside from having a valve that was too coarse. I adjusted the boost from 10psi (after removing the hose between the solenoid and the air intake, because it had a small restrictor pil in it for some reason, and I wanted more boost, it was at 8.5-9 stock) to the boost cut at 15, and anywhere in the small range between. I could get it to hold 14psi for 5 seconds (before I ran out of road or had to change gears) at full load. Did you have the valve in the line between the compressor outlet and the solenoid, or between the solenoid and the wastegate? If it was between the solenoid and wastegate all it will do is delay the pressure from getting to the wastegate, rather than making the bleed more effective, causing the symptoms you had. Alternatively you have closed loop boost control, what car do you have? The boost controller I have now is effectively a check valve with adjustable preload and a fixed bleed. The solenoid has been disconnected. Aside from the fact that it uses different sized plumbing and the boost curve isn't completely flat (ie 15psi at 3000rpm if I load it up uphill or in 4th gear, down to 12psi at 5500) I couldn't be happier with it. The only reason I didn't buy another (finer) tap valve was because I already had this 'pressure reducing valve' lying around for another project that I stopped working on. I got the idea from an autospeed article, I'll try find it.

Actually oscar, this can and does work on open loop boost control systems such as the first generation legacies and pre-bugeye WRX's. What it does is make the bleed more effective (the solenoid is an electronically controlled bleed). The closed loop boost controllers on V7 (I think) upwards need either re-programming or replaement, there's no way around that one... They will just lower the duty cycle (and bleed off less air) in response. And yes I did try it on my own 1st gen legacy. It worked, but the valve I used was too coarse (not enough turns between open and shut) And 1/8th of a turn was about 5 psi... A different valve would have been great.