Saabscene Saab Forum - Saab Technical Information Resource banner

1 - 20 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ok figured I may as well start a thread just about Viggens. I felt bad keeping that on-going argument in the wrong thread!
I realize the 9000 that I saw a video of is massively faster than my car from 0-100. I've done 100 mph in maaaaaybe 14.6 seconds if I'm pushing it, and it's cool out. But keep in mind this is an all stock Viggen. That means I'm still running 5 psi in 1st regardless of traction, 12 psi in second again regardless of traction, and not till 3rd to a get out a measely 15 psi. (Actually 15 psi has a number of turbo friends drooling, but for a Viggen, stock is stock right? Still could be better) I feel, indeed I know, the car would be quicker even with the same horses, but with better boost (which would mean more torque and the same hp over more RPMs). It may have (by the accelleration readings) 281 lb ft. Or hell even if it doesn't have that in 3rd, in 2nd it's lower STILL. For it to be expected to compete with a modified car in accelleration is silly at best! The boost lag with two catalytic converters and all stock exhaust and intake (though I have recently put a filter and discovered a new healthy 33 mpg average on the highway), is insane compared to a modified car! And with a heavily modified 9000 even if you only have 243 hp, you honestly must have well over that in torque.
Oh and I'm curious if you're using the stock turbo. I don't know how much horsepower that TD04HL-15T can put out, but if you watch the video you can see the boost backing off in 3rd gear at high rpm. TD04H-13G from the WRX USDM is supposed to be able to put out 300 hp. Could it be reasonable to say that a larger 15T compressor wheel could push more? Is the 15T bigger than the 13G? I don't know if that's the turbo or computer backing off the boost. Seems like the turbo just runs out of breath. Could be a tapered boost curve. Some turbo cars have that (like the C900's). If anyone has any ideas on that, I'm all ears.
Oh and really, why on earth did someone campare their Viggen to mine and NOT show that I shifted and they didn't!? Ok, perhaps that was just overlooked when recording the two as it's the only recording of the speedometer that's any good I have to send. But still ... .8 seconds is probably very very close to what it took me to shift. And the Viggen I'm being compared against is a 99 model which is supposed to be around 200 lbs lighter, and modified slightly, it also may not have had a passenger? I don't know about that one. Didn't ask
Oh and someone said they pulled .75 g's out of their Saab???? Holy christ-pop!! My tires would break loose at .60 g's and turn into melted rubber! They almost break loose at the .55 g's in 1st gear and that's only on 5 psi!! (another thing some turbo friends of mine are pissed about) Anyway ... to change the subject slightly.
I'm still looking for anyone who's put water injection on a Viggen. Also if and when I put it on my Viggen, I'm currently modifying an old Saab APC to controll my boost using one of the old boost pressure sensors and a boost solenoid! I thought it would be fun and way more controllable than a MBC. Not only can you adjust the max boost, but also the boost climb rate!! And if you put the variable resistors inside the car you can even do it on the go! I'm not looking for any insane amount of boost. Maybe just a healthy 19.5 psi or so ... especially in 2nd gear. 12 psi would feel positively anemic next to even the 15 psi of 3rd and up gears as they are now! We'll just have to see how it pans out. If the T7 engine computer doesn't like it I may be SOL ... but hey, what's a few $ for an old APC some resistors and some wire? Barely more than the MBC (less than some I've seen) and at least as good if not better!
But let's get back to the hp issue. Perhaps when Phillip's Viggen was on the dyno it was a little warmish out? Anytime it's over about 10-12 degrees celsius over here the g-tech displays a little less hp, and after a little hard running the boost doesn't peg itself at the edge of the red like it normally would. And also, using the g-tech in direct sunlight will cause it to give bad readings, and all my runs were at night as a result. Perhaps I'm missing something. But I probably made as much as 50 runs with that g-tech and it was pretty consistent. When it wasn't consistent it was obviously well off the standard deviation. I just don't see why it gets such a bad rap. Unless you misstreat it, it does seem to give relatively accurate results. Believe me if it were always reading "higher" than it should, my friend Pablo with a modified WRX wouldn't have been angry. lol He had a FMIC, MBC, AEM intake, and full 3" exhaust, and was only able to get 215 hp to the wheels without hitting the overboost. And you know what, his accelleration readings .. they were lower than mine as well. We actually did a moving start drag race (no way I'm racing AWD from a dead stop LOL), and the Viggen pulled him. He wouldn't believe the G-tech either till he saw that car pulling away slowly. He later took his car to a dyno, what did it put down? 217 wheel hp. A number of other people have noticed lower readings than they expected. Believe me when I bought the Viggen I was expecting 185-195 wheel hp at best because of how low my friends cars were reading. I thought maybe it was reading too low, but the very first run I made with it was 226 hp. Then 235 the next night, and while sometimes you would get slightly lower readings just like on a dyno, the peak readings usually were between 235-245, 252 was an especially cold night with high humidity (saabs LOVE humidity for some reason even though I personally don't) it put down 252 on way on the road, I drove it a bit further to cool the intercooler, then when I came back to the same spot the other way it put down 250. I will definetly need to take this car to a dyno. You have no idea how many skeptics I've had. But as Pablo, and James (with the EVO 8 who also came to regret meeting the mighty Viggen) found out the hard way, sometimes you get more than you bargained for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Hi Adrian,

just a few short corrections.

The Viggen in the video is not mine. Mine is a 99 convertible which is rather heaviliy modified (MapTun Stage III plus racecat)... and as a convertible, it is much heavier than your 5-door.

The car in the video is Vigge´s, and I think it´s a 2000 5-door with Speedparts stage I. It should be the same weight as yours.

To get past 60 mph, you have to shift... that´s the point where second gear ends. So either Vigge shifted - as you did - at 60 mph, or he shifted even earlier losing some precious seconds. Either way, there is no chance he could reach 120 kph in second gear. It is not unfair to compare the times.

Yours,

Philip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I'mma post a reply to my own thread! I'm special. hahaha *sings* It's my thread and I can post if I wanna ... post if I wanna ... post if I wanna ... you would post too if this thread were for you dun nuh nuh nuh nuh!

Just so you guys know, if I do take my car to a dyno and it shows waaaay less hp than the g-tech says, I'll be shocked, but I'll have a g-tech anyone is welcome to purchase at a 100% discount!! lmao Everyone else I know honestly ... thinks it's showing LESS than it should be. My friends Dodge truck which should have 235 at the crank STOCK only shows about 178-185 consistently after a Volant intake and dynomax muffler. Now for a car I've seen on dynos ... a Gold 1.8 T US model (of course) put down a consistent 160 hp to the wheels. It's only supposed to have 180 at the crank, but all the magazines were showing around 160 at the wheels. Again, that's about spot on. Any time I've ever tested a car that's been on the dyno with the same setup, it's been WELL within the standard deviation. Just doesn't make sense that the g-tech is accurate for everyone else's car, but not mine. Does the Viggen hold magical powers of g-tech interference? Does the little delta V on the side actually represent some kind of bermuda triangle for accellerometers? Remember that article with the g-tech and the other thingamabobber? When they tested the Honda? They said 130 hp didn't sound as "reasonable" as 108 give the manufacturer's claims. Well did they actually dyno it to find out what it had? Of course not! Why would they actually do that? lol And this is a magazine, I bet good money they didn't even read on the instructions where it clearly says "Do not use in direct sunlight". Heat won't hurt the g-tech itself, but it causes the accellerometer to be off slightly. Which would be why I never have the heater on, and I never test in the sun. I also always test on level roads, and always test in both directions in case of wind. If you can find something I'm doing wrong PLEASE tell me! Don't let the curse of the Bermuda Delta Wing afflict me any longer! Spare me from it's mystical interfering ways!!
OH!!! I just got a great idea. To make up for the warm weather, throw in some race gas, and spray the intercooler with CO2. :-D Would that be fair? I mean I AM running on 91 octane, once when I was in another state I was running on 93 and it felt much better in warm weather. Half a tank of 103 octane wouldn't be cheating would it? And the CO2 spray would just make the car think it was cooler. Well I guess I'll hafta get back to you guys on that one! Maybe that will work after all. *insert evil grin here* Remind me not to eat ice cream before posting here. LOL Adieu~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
LOL!!!!! Whoa whoa whoa ... LISTEN to the Video phillip ... tell me if he shifts. He was already in 3rd and stayed in 3rd the entire time. Watch it yourself if you like. :p Just listen, mine is muted and his doesn't shift
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Hi Adrian,

you have to understand us. We know quite a few Viggens, and we love them as you do. Most of them are pretty modified, but none of them is as strong as you claim your car to be. Perhaps you´ve got the magic Viggen. But the probability is higher that your whp-figure is simpy wrong. Your video also shows that your car isn´t quicker than any stock viggen and certainly slower than a modified one.

Yours,

Philip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Originally posted by Adrian W:
[qb]I've done 100 mph in maaaaaybe 14.6 seconds if I'm pushing it, and it's cool out.[/qb][/b]
BTW, 14.6 from 0-100 mph is quite good. Hirsch have timed the stock Viggen 16.4 sec. A Porsche Boxster S needs 14.2 sec. But a Hirsch tuned Viggen (step 3) only needs 13.3 sec... and it only has 240 whp (280 bhp), which is significantly less than your claimed 252 whp.

Yours,

Philip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Hmmmm ... perhaps you're right. I guess we have two totally different backgrounds coming towards this. You have more experiences by far with the same car as me (I've never even SEEN another Viggen on the road until I actually BOUGHT this one, not many here in Cali) and you're right the Video does seem kinda ... slow? Well just to offer a couple other possible explanations that I DON'T think are correct, but just for ... possibilities sake? Perhaps my video camera is ... not entirely accurate? Sometime I'll try just timing something like a watch and see if it gets progressively slower. By the video I sent you the accelleration of the car should have been only about .29 g's in 3rd gear! That's far below the .36 that the g-tech recorded. Now perhaps the g-tech really is faulty as is becoming more and more possible. I'm at somewhat of a loss to explain the kind of car beating power this thing seems to have on cold days. I really don't think the g-tech would be that far off on accelleration in pure g-force would it? When pointed straight down it shows exactly 1.00 g's. Perhaps a manufacturing flaw? As I said before, I'm getting more and more tempted to just throw in some race gas, spray that intercooler and see what this baby's got at a dyno. But what if it does show higher than 220 whp or so? The car feels much much stronger than other cars with similar rated hp's that I've driven. My friends who've driven it say on a cool day it's almost scary fast. Even with only 12 psi (maybe 12.5 when it's real cold) it will be squeeling the tires if there's even a small bump to upset the grip. Is that normal for all Viggens? And have any of the other Viggen owners found themselves leaving WRX's and EVO 8's in the dust (at least from a moving start). EVO 8's weigh only slightly more than the Viggen, and have roughly 230 wheel hp and shorter gearing! By all means one of them should walk a Viggen with the hp you say it has like it wasn't trying. I guess I can't say much for the WRX's around here in cali, they're lucky to get 175 hp on the dyno stock at the wheels. I've actually beaten a WRX at the dragstrip ... I ran a 15.01 and he ran a 15.2. (terrible run for a WRX but it wasn't just the launch, he still had me on the launch but the Viggen was at 100 mph by the end, the WRX only around 90 ... 'nuff said). I don't know. I will just have to dyno and see. I'd never heard of anyone having trouble with the g-tech before now, so I didn't question it much. Besides usually I was comparing it to other people who were using MY g-tech so I figured it didn't matter. LOL I wonder how mad the guy with the EVO 8 will be if I do only have about 195 wheel hp. He was mad enough that it was just a Saab, I think he felt better when I said the g-tech gave me 252 for wheel hp. Hmmm ... hope he doesn't hurt my car. :-D When I dyno it, I may have a cone filter on it. It's nothing fancy, just some $15 filter I picked up from AutoZone, it's not even an oil filter. Just a little more surface area than stock, and doesn't have to breathe through the stock box, and silencer. The g-tech said it didn't give me any horses. So I imagine it must be 5 hp or less. I might put the stock airbox back on just to make you guys happy so you're not all suspicious. But I'm pretty sure you all know some dinky $15 air filter won't give me anywhere remotely close to THAT kinda hp. And the 252 was without it soooo ... hmmm. I'm really at a loss. Seems the general concensus is that g-tech is innacurate. Which is a shame becuase I really liked how it worked. So much physics. Seemed almost fun. I'll keep everyone up to date on things. Hopefully it was just the Video recorder being gay. It was just a digital camera that happens to also record very short video as well. Nothing fancy by any means. And I am still curious why that car runs out of boost at high rpm. None of the other Saabs on here seem to. :S Some of them even have upgraded engines and stock turbos and still hold better! Well if (and yes it's not just IF) the car puts down 252 hp, or something like that, at least we'll know why it was running outta breath aye? lol OH well ... it's still a Viggen dammit! And feckin' fast too!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
Oh and someone said they pulled .75 g's out of their Saab???? Holy christ-pop!! My tires would break loose at .60 g's and turn into melted rubber!  [/b]
Adrian W, that was me

Get your Viggen on a dyno - then you will know for sure rather than speculating

I'll be putting my 9-3 Sport on the dyno again at the end of the month (recorded at pulling 0.75g the other night
) ...and it aint even a Viggen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Dear Adrian,

The car you see on the video is my 5-door year 2000 viggen. At the time when this video was recorded the car was "only" pushing 210 dyno measured wheel hp.
Based on the video taken from your car it seems to perform the way mine did when stock. I did not have the change to dyno the car stock, but i recall Phillip did.

On the video I do not shift, but you should you the a viggen does not perform to it best when acceleratin in third gear from 50mph.

You can make your on decision, I cant denay them, but what I can say is that you wont beat the time shown on that video with a stock viggen.
I can if you cheat, drive on a slope or speed up the video

And about G-tech, here is tip that you should try. Get a second unit a place them equally on the windshild. Try getting equal times with them. Me and my couple of my friend did some testing with G-tech's few year ago. Based on those results I have a hard time beliving on any on G-tech measured values. The unit is good if you are not looking for exact times or hp valus, but to see if your mods are taking you to the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,305 Posts
Just to prove it is possible... I've pulled over 1.3G's in my 9000. That's an average over 2.1 seconds, which is how long I timed the braking from 60mph-0. No doubt it would have exceeded that at some point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
1.3 g's is a buttload! Kudos. I mean't accellerating of course though. You can measure torque with accelleration g's. Was the .75 g's accellerating? That's really good it if it was. I mean if (For instance) that was in 2nd gear on a Saab that would be somewhere well over 300 lb ft at the wheels. :| I have no clue how you could have that stock though, so must have been cornering? Maybe 1st gear. You could get that in 1st with seriously awesome tires! And as far as the g-techs. I'm still hard pressed to just throw away the reading, it was a fairly consistent piece of machinery for me. I'll get out another accellerometer and compare readings for just a double check. I actually have something that would work better than the g-tech but have been far too lazy to get it all assembled and ready. It's a calculator based laborotory with accellerometer. Should measure the accelleration reasonably well. Oughtta be able to at least check to see if the g-tech was accurate about THAT aspect. Anyway, that video does look suspiciously slow. Kinda bugs me. lol Hmmmm ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Oh and mark ... here's a trick I learned from a guy with an Aero who put down 372 lf ft at the wheels. Take the naturally aspirated intake manifold, and put that on a turbo. Make sure to use hose clamps on the rubber isolators. The rubber helps keep the intake manifold away from the engine heat and the longer runners are great for torque. Just thought I'd share that with ya ... if you want to see how this guy did it, and all about HIS 90000 go to:

http://www.kyankton.net./Intake.htm

Hope you enjoy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Ahhhh ... and reguarding the 0-100 posting of 14.6 seconds or so. That's one thing I doubt the g-tech was innacurate about. This is because juuuust before I finished the quarter mile I always had to shift to 4th gear which is at 100 mph. I'm pretty sure if nothing else, the timer on the g-tech is at least accurate to within a 10th of a second, though I could get my stopwatch out of you like. lol I don't know how someone's 0-100 could be 16.4 seconds though. Geeez. I mean on a really bad run for me I'm looking at maybe 15.5 from 0-100? That would be lots-o-tirespin and a warmish day out. So maybe it does have slightly more power than stock Viggens seem to have? Even if not 252? I mean I can understand the g-tech being off some, but can you really say you think it would be consistently 60+ hp higher than it should be? And not be the same percentage higher on my friends cars who went to the Dyno? I don't know what to expect when I get to the dyno, but regardless of what I get as a hp figure, I'm going to be suprised. High or low. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,216 Posts
Gosh, Adrian! It'll take me all night just to read your post. Have you got turbocharged typing fingers?

Anyway, don't feel bad about hijacking the other thread - it was I who started it and being a facilitator on Saabscene, I should know better


Anyway, to answer your questions (I'll just write a load of babble and hope all the answers are in amongst it), here is some info about my 9000 Aero.

243hp at the wheels.

300+hp (305 was measured) at the flywheel, calculated from the wheel hp and transmission loss measurement as described here in another thread recently. I don't like "calculated" figures, but it must be over 290hp - 300 sounds good, though. Don't you think?

330lbft at the flywheel (compensated for transmission loss as for horsepower).
Most of that torque (310lbft of it) is available from 2500-5000rpm.

Peak boost about 1.6 bar (23.5psi?) at the time I shot the video (the factory gauge often goes higher now than it did then, since I raised the fuel pressure, but I haven't connected my graduated gauge since then to measure it properly).

The turbo is still the standard TD04HL-15T. I believe the turbine housing on the 9000 Aero is slightly larger than on the Viggen and 9-5 Aero. I understand this turbo is at the limit of its usefulness at about 300hp. I think that has something to do with the boost backing off at high RPM, but the main problem is likely to be that it was running out of fuel (300hp is also about the limit of the standard fuel system, hence the recent hike in fuel pressure for peace of mind). When it was on the dyno, I was told that although it wasn't running lean at maximum power, the operator would liek to have seen it running rich and it wasn't.

I have no boost limit in 2nd gear, but have a suspension setup that helps traction. I also have a limited-slip-diff, but surprisingly, that doesn't make a huge difference to straight-line traction. I use grippy tyres (Bridgestone S-03). The video was shot when I had the standard 16" Aero wheels. Now I have fitted 17" wheels, I expect straight-line traction would be reduced slightly on the new lower-profile tyres.
I'd like to measure the acceleration in 2nd gear. It certainly feels like a lot.

Boost limit is still in place for 1st gear. Anything else would be silly, no matter what I did to improve traction...

I have a slightly lowered final drive ratio. While this helps acceleration in any single gear, it does mean extra gear changes during acceleration. Swings and roundabouts...


What I was trying to show in the video was what you can do with less than 250hp at the wheels in a car that is otherwise similar to yours.

Anyway, we'll leave that question and someday soon we'll have the dyno figures to prove one way or the other. If they show that your car is putting out over 300hp, I'll accept that.

Nevertheless, I think your friends aren't familiar with cars with similar engine characteristics to yours. Perhaps in their experience, a car of the Viggen's weight needs over 300hp to do a sub-15-second 1/4 mile. That is true of normally-aspirated and even many turbocharged cars. Your car, however, has a huge torque band. From what I've read, you have about 258lbft from 2500-4000rpm (this is at the flywheel). That gives you massive acceleration in 3rd gear and above, where maximum boost is available. Last November, we got together for a rolling road (dyno) day and one of the guys brought his brother with a newly-acquired (and possibly modified) Imprezza WRX. While he achieved 280hp (at the flywheel), his peak torque was very unimpressive compared to the Saabs. Not only that, but he was only getting about 210hp through the wheels. I assume this was due to the 4WD system. Anyway, since it weighs not much less than your car, I'd say you'd be able to give him a run for his money


My point is that the Viggen, while specified at "only" 230hp at the flywheel, is a bloomin' quick car and your friends should indeed be most impressed. A 14.8 1/4 mile is not to be sniffed at and most normally-aspirated "boy-racer" cars (excuse my UK colloquialisms) would end up being very embarrassed after picking a race with a Viggen, especially with a rolling start.

Now, knowing that you have a very quick car in standard form, imagine what you could do with 35% more power and the means to get it on the road. 0-60 and 0-100 times, and even 1/4 mile times are just for fun, and not really representative of real-world performance where standing-start drag-races are very rare (at least where I live). I only posted the video to show the sort of performance a Saab with 240-250hp at the wheels can manage, and most people can relate to the standing-start acceleration figures published in magazines. OK, so I wanted to show off a bit too

You obviously know something about car tuning. I'd say get the Viggen's steering and suspension sorted out and you'll be itching to give it more power once you realise it can handle it


Looks like you're thinking about more boost already. I've never driven a Viggen, but I know from their reputation that their performance as standard is limited more by traction and handling than by power and torque. Again, I'd say consider the Abbott Viggen Rescue Kit and perhaps a decent suspension setup (mine uses the Abbott springs and Koni dampers). Then, instead of playing about with the old APC, I'd recommend going to one of the Swedish tuners who can tune T7. The old APC was a huge step forward in its day. However, Trionic is still one of the most advanced engine management systems in the world and you'll get great results out of a remapped T7, believe me. The original APC can't co-ordinate the ignition timing and fuel delivery with the boost pressure and combustion conditions, which is where Trionic makes much better use of the engine. How many C900s do you know of that boost to nearly 25psi without retarding the ignition so much as to make it not worth doing (on easily-available fuel, of course)?

As you already know, you've got a really fast car. It has the potential to enter "supercar" territory. You already know about Kevin Yankton (he posts here occasionally as "KevinY"). I had the pleasure of meeting him a few months ago and he certainly knows a lot about Saab tuning. I'll be tapping him for more ideas shortly. I didn't know about using the N/A intake pipe. I'll have to have a look as that must be quite recent. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,216 Posts
Originally posted by Adrian W:
[qb]Ahhhh ... and reguarding the 0-100 posting of 14.6 seconds or so.  That's one thing I doubt the g-tech was innacurate about.[/qb][/b]
No, that certainly sounds about right for a Viggen.

Are you sure you're not getting confused over wheel horsepower and flywheel horsepower? 252hp at the flywheel doesn't sound out of the question for a standard Viggen (yours is specified at 225 or 230hp?), given a bit of instrument error and a car that's producing a little bit above spec. 252hp at the wheels (well over 300hp at the flywheel) is beyond what many of the Swedish tuners could offer you with their upgrades, and to reach anywhere near that level, they'd insist on a 3" turbo-back exhaust system with sport cat to keep the backpressure and exhaust gas temperatures to within manageable levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
I'm really itchin' to get the car down to the dyno now. And the PRIMARY reason I haven't upgraded the T7 is that it seriously voids the warranty. Whereas the APC will be easily removable. This of course will be combined with water injection, which as you have see with Mr Yankton, can easily allow a Viggen to run more boost. I do wish to eventually get a T7 system, but I'm kind of hoping to at least wear the warranty out a little more than I have with only 21,000 miles (actually quite a lot for a car I bought not even a year ago). And besides, the APC is about $800 cheaper. lol Quite a bit of pocket change. Really I'm doing that for fun. Just because I love to engineer stuff, and hey, that's a fair project right? Oh and I'm not confusing wheel hp for crank hp. I know a lot of people do. lol But this was supposedly crank. May not be really too accurate though. OH and btw ... maybe you're in Europe. I forget where the person who talked about the WRX was from, but in the US, on California 91 octane gasoline, WRX's with a few thousand miles typically run mid to high 15's at the drag strip, and have about 168 wheel hp. That's probably why I can walk them left and right without even trying. I can literally step on the throttle on the freeway in 5th and keep with a WRX in 3rd ... soooooo. They're just really weak here I guess. haha
 
1 - 20 of 105 Posts
Top