Claymore

Great work as always James nice write up; I take it the Manifold is from tuning developments and the down pipe is Jperformance? Do they fit well or was some "finessing" required? Also do you mind my asking, did you buy them from TD and Jperformance? Or just TD for both? And yes, that stock third runner restriction is , probably only just good enough for stock power levels. Weirdly though when I looked at one I have here from the turbo side back up to the head flange side it doesn't look as bad!?

Nice one

Nice touch mounting the sensor (better than in the glove box 🤭). Looks like a second generation 5efe manifold? Do you know what the differences to the 4efe stock starlet manifold are? I'm sure I read that the first gen 5efe manifold is the same as 4efte (short, fat runners) larger TB port, but I also read that the second gen is the same as starlet 4efe? Internet BS perhaps. Also I take it the fte sensor has a different plug shape?

Cheers, the Holset info looked well written and researched so I thought I'd share it. Nice to find some compressor maps also.

NGK spark plug analysis. I've decided that going one heat range colder should be fine when going 4efe + t at my intended power level. As shown in an earlier post the stock spark plugs are BKR5EYA so that of course leads us to a BKR6EYA spark plug as its replacement. The chart I posted earlier decodes the product number and the only difference between the 2 plugs should be the heat range. After reading some forum posts and manufacturers explanations it seems that there are differing opinions as to what actually changes (some true some not! some alarming, some less so), so I decided it was time to "saw some shit up for science"! Firstly I measured the outer dimensions, only really concerned about the areas inside the cylinder head. Then I removed the threaded case section to inspect the insulator. I have highlighted the only significant change in red, other discrepancies can easily be chalked up to manufacturing tolerances. The change is to the height of the Insulator conductor section. This section transfers the plugs heat to the case and subsequently the cylinder head to cool the plug, as the insulator contact area is larger on the 6 heat range it will transfer more heat to the case / head. This increased length obviously shortens the Insulator absorber section length and reduces its ability to absorb heat (with a smaller gas pocket also) from the cylinder combustion. I'm glad I checked and am now confident that the 6 plugs will be ok for my build. I couldn't find any BKR7EYA, only 7E-11 which are larger gap and then it was into iridiums which were too expensive to waste! *I have only checked the above plugs from NGK - other manufacturers and plugs may have different results / changes.

I found some info online which may help, these are the sights where the above graphs are taken from. http://www.stavtech.co.uk/home/the-ultimate-holset-turbo-guide-probably http://www.stavtech.co.uk/home/stavs-tech-tips-the-holset-he221w-360bhp-capable-and-fast-spooling-turbo-can-be-easily-fitted-to-standard-subaru-volvo-and-saab-exhaust-manifolds-and-downpipes Don't forget there is more to turbos than just wheel dimensions, it seems the 211w most often has a 5cm turbine housing where a TD04l -13t Subaru turbo is a 6cm turbine housing. Other sizes may be available. Just choose wisely. The 221w turbine is TD04HL sized and requires an aftermarket HL Subaru housing to fit according to the second link.

I was looking at the 211w as an alternative as well! The problem seems to be getting hold of a used example. They're pretty rare to find let alone at a cheap enough price to ignore the TD. If you fancy a custom manifold there's always the HE221w. Best left for the 300 hp plus builds though. Are you the one who is going to be different and take the plunge on a 211w...? Would be awesome to see the results.

I've not got first hand experience of the 5e but it seems that from the info I've read the TD04l is the minimum size most use for a 5e of that hp target. If your going for the 270 hp end of it you may even need a Hybrid TD04l as it will be pushing the limits of the stock TD (Heat, choke etc). The TF will most likely be out of puff before reaching the target hp as you thought. TD's are cheap enough to buy one and test the potential and atleast you'll have one if you need to hybrid it or just sell it on anyway!

According to a build thread on the aussie site the Whiteline one fits and clears the fuel filter just, but it won't fit with the standard airbox.

4efte lower power steering bracket refurbishment: Managed to find the lower power steering tensioner bracket required to keep the power steering and allow enough clearance for the 4efte oil filter relocator. Good condition, slight rust. Date of casting 21/3/96. Back side, stand off legs in good condition also. Part number on rear: 44446-10060 Needed to free up and remove the tensioner screw which was seized into the cast bracket. So WD-40 to the rescue again. Using 2 x 12mm spanner in a squeezing motion I loosened the lock nut and the large flange nut (foot to contact the pump). Also the adjuster screw lock nut below. To aid the removal and prevent the corroded threads from jamming even more or destroying the threads in the bracket, I ran a lubed m 8 die down the thread by hand. Yes, I know I'm supposed to use a thread chaser, but I don't have one and I've done it this way for years without an issue. The reason its not in a holder is so it puts less pressure on so it can't remove good steel. More lube and the screw came out fairly easily, no damage to threads. The screw was a bit bent so I threaded 2 x sacrificial nuts on and clamped them in the vice (to avoid damaging the screw threads) and with a few blows from the medium sized hammer I'd managed to true it up well. Sand blasted the bracket in my mates cabinet. Masked up the mating faces (combination of masking tape and small circular stickers for the round bits 😉), acid etch primer to get a good key then 1 x normal primer and 2 x satin black at a 10 min interval. Pleased with the outcome. Another piece of the puzzle ready for turbo install time. Also got some heat range 6 spark plugs which I have been investigating compared to the 5 heat range.

Block is regarded as being fine, the crankshaft (marked 4et) is stronger than the N/A ones (marked 4e). Pistons are not good for higher boost levels. You never know, maybe it had some Mk1 GT thick rods to make up for it!

Cheers, some poor sod bought it though, 1 bid.

Good work dude. Looking forward to an N/A build.

Hey Sam, I don't want to turn this into a bun fight. I've said my bit as you asked me for my opinion. If you feel you can find the "Ultimate" spec for Glanza's by trawling through umpteen graphs and spec lists and deciphering what the car "actually" has and its unknown settings from them, then feel free. Cheers

This is the puzzle. 2 largely similar spec cars (already built) producing different power and torque curves. How can anyone tell which element is making the increase or decrease unless each mod is tested separately or analysed first hand with all the required information? Does the exhaust manifold design add low down torque by spooling the turbo earlier or is it a characteristic of the Hybrid turbo design? Is the gt spec hybrid choked up top because its based on the CT9a using a restrictive exhaust wheel / housing or is the down pipe and exhaust too restrictive top end? Then let's not forget these cars are getting on a bit now and may have various levels of maintenance and or inherent faults that weren't diagnosed and rectified before sending to the dyno (a simple boost leak?). My point is we don't know for sure when only reading words on the internet. Neither graph plots boost pressure or AFR so we don't know how that is affecting the power curve either. Obviously we can't see what timing has been pulled or added (in the Blitz). I understand that most regard the "plug n play" ecu's as having more aggressive timing and leaner fuel (again, anecdotal evidence from internet forums ?, not analysed under laboratory conditions and yes I know that it's not practical to do so). I have always been taught to challenge results and findings and to analyse the methodology to validate the results. It seems with so many influencing factors (parts, problems and tuning) it can be difficult to specify / guarantee that using parts A, B and C will get you X, Y and Z. There is also a lot of gains to be had from a fully mappable / piggyback ECU with good tuning which will make the best of any parts setup as RobSR has quite rightly stated (no doubt from years of tuning experience). Also having the system analysed first hand by knowledgeable tuners will highlight areas to rectify regarding parts. I'm going with: make sure your car is well maintained, add sensible (obvious) mods, get a good tune from a company that knows their stuff and see the results for myself on my engine. Then based on my own results with help from a tuning house, address any areas that need attention one piece at a time.

Can you elaborate on this please? The mods look very similar (except for the fuel side of things). In your opinion why does one drop off and the other not? I don't see a different cam listed in the mods spec. so it can't be that. Turbo design? If only compressor maps were more common!

Didn't see the graphs, which thread was it on? Really liked the build thread too. Would have loved to have seen what a 5e-fhe + t could do on the rollers 😥.

No offence intended, just my sense of humour. Could be using pre and post iat sensors to monitor intercooler efficiencies like you said or data logging perhaps. It is what it is. Speaking of cambelt stretch, it will also get worse with bigger cam profile and increased strength valve springs. Either way I like the rest of the work. I've already expressed my fondness of using updated O.E parts in other posts. It would be nice to see dyno runs with the un modified corolla intake manifold and ct9. Think you might like this build 🔼

Good job mate. Looks brand new.

Looks like some clever parts bin raiding, corolla manifold, later generation coil pack (must be crank trigger also). Looks like glanza power steering pump and feed hose with stock 4efe high pressure hose to rack (seen this a couple of times now). Don't like the IAT sensor pre turbo though. Might as well put it in the glove box.

The shims should show how much contact the lobes have with them. If its just the centre of the lobe (not full width) this will mean some serious forces concentrated in a small area. Hope it's all ok

Doesn't look like a 4efte to me. The pistons look to be dome topped and the block doesn't have the drillings or studs for the oil filter relocator. Although it does seem to have the knock sensor in the back. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/toyota-starlet-gt-turbo-ep82-bottom-end-engine-80-000/324264882395?hash=item4b7fb170db%3Ag%3AM5sAAOSwHfpfKGbB&LH_ItemCondition=4 Possibly swapped out by previous owner for a damaged one and this guy doesn't realise. Best avoided I think.

As far as the photos show it looks like a piece has chipped off rather than been missing in the casting, most likely an inclusion in the material that caused a weak point allowing this chip to occur in use or during machining. Or problems with the chilling / hardening process of a certain batch being brittle perhaps, the rest of the surfaces don't really seem worn. I doubt Toyota would install cams in that state at the factory although the only way to tell would be to find the missing piece in the engine or not. Is the shim ok underneath? Not damaged from the chipped edge?

Maybe prices are going up? Still seems a bit close to glanza prices especially with the engine change. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Toyota-Starlet-SR-Original-TTE-Spec/324262542594?hash=item4b7f8dbd02:g:KqMAAOSwv8pfN9k7

. I admire your passion though. Looking forward to the dyno results. 👍