• Registered users are encouraged to enable MFA/2FA to add an aditional layer of security to their account. More information can be found here: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/collection/top-tips-for-staying-secure-online/activate-2-step-verification-on-your-email

ITG Vs TEG M/ 6bhp down but better?

devil84

devil84

Messages
983
Okay, today I made the trip to Eurospec to get my K100 tweaked specifically for my mods.
I previously bought a second hand K100 that was already mapped (to a different car) by Eurospec (235bhp) with near identical mods to mine, with the main exception of Teg M against my ITG Maxogen kit. Off the bat, I knew my ITG would lose power at the top end.. and I was not wrong, however there is a big however.

The previous map (on a different car) made 235bhp, but obviously I wanted it to get tuned to my car and exactly my mods. So naturally I was a bit disappointed when Romain mentioned I made 229bhp (RBC, Piper with Sports Cat, ITG, Supersprint Mid pipe and 2.5inch aftermarket backbox). However, then I took it for a drive, and instantly, I noticed that my car was more responsive down the 3-4k rev (ie driving range). Romain specfically mentioned that ITG is well known for its torque gains before he tuned. And this was true, when I look at the Dyno map (previous map on previous car against mine on my car), my torque figures makes about 162 torque at 3700 revs, compared to the old map making 143 torques at the same revs...

At 4000 revs, my new map is making 120bhp, against the old map of 110bhp at 4000 revs.

These are the two noticable differences I can see up to 7800 revs... from 7800 revs, from what I can see, the old map makes the extra 6 horses, most likley due to the TEG M/GM kit. Apart from that the BHP curve is similar, with my new map just slightly better (hard to tell from the axis). I tried to overlay my map against the previous map on a window, but its not that simple, as the axle are the not same scale.

So two questions I would like to answer

ITG or TEG M: ITG gives better torque and bhp (at a certain rev range), but from about 7700 revs, the TEG M/GM may make the extra few horses that would give you cred in the pub. As a result, the Vtec kick is has been lowered to 3500 against 4000 (only on full throttle). The car feels great now (felt great before, but feels better now despite "losing 6bhp"...) Do I regret keeping the ITG? No.

Does the car feel better after the tweak despite K100 being mapped to near identical mods? Hell yeah, I did not what to expect, as the K100 was already mapped to near identical mods, but the car is feeling so much more responsive from the small tweak. Thanks to Eurospec and Romain for their services.

Yes, if I had a GM, decat, and took it to different roller, I may have made 240bhp plus, but this car has a cat, looks OEM from the bonnet, and still pulls like a train when you drive it!

Hope that helps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One thing you are doing here is comparing a map done on another car to slightly different mods, running on your car and assuming it was running the same power and torque as the graph in your hand from the previous car. It wasn't.
 
Loxy said:
One thing you are doing here is comparing a map done on another car to slightly different mods, running on your car and assuming it was running the same power and torque as the graph in your hand from the previous car. It wasn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah totally agree, unfortunately I have not got a before and after on my car. But at the end of the day, car feels better. And safe in the knowledge mods has been tuned to my car,

I am trying to, I guess, pinpoint why the previous guy made 6bhp more, yes there could be loads of variables, but the teg m vs the itg is the one variable that is currently glaring out.

As I said, happy with the outcome when I sit in the car and drive it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your car hasn't lost 6 bhp by the way, it is 6 bhp less at peak than another car with similar mods.

You are talking about two completely different engines, with different histories, servicing, mileage etc, etc. The difference could be explained by pitting on the valves, valve clearances, carbon deposits on the exhaust side of the head/manifolds/exhaust, valve seals, fuel pump, injector condition and so on...

The new map is now ideal to your car like you say, rather than the mismatched map you were running before.

Good numbers by the way. 229 on Romain's rollers isn't too shy to be honest.
 
Loxy said:
Your car hasn't lost 6 bhp by the way, it is 6 bhp less at peak than another car with similar mods.

You are talking about two completely different engines, with different histories, servicing etc, etc. The difference could be explained by pitting on the valves, valve clearances, carbon deposits on the exhaust side of the head/manifolds/exhaust, valve seals, fuel pump and so on...

The new map is now ideal to your car like you say, rather than the mismatched map you were running before.

Good numbers by the way. 229 on Romain's rollers isn't too shy to be honest.
Click to expand...

I guess something in me, was saying get it over 230bhp for pub talk, but when I drove it, it just feels more responsive....

What is fact though is that the itg makes bundles of torque down in the rev range per my example above.
 
devil84 said:
I guess something in me, was saying get it over 230bhp for pub talk, but when I drove it, it just feels more responsive....
Click to expand...

Aye, it's easy to get caught up chasing numbers.

devil84 said:
What is fact though is that the itg makes bundles of torque down in the rev range per my example above.
Click to expand...

Mmmm, maybe, maybe not. Combination of factors here.

The old map had VTEC crossover at 4,000 rpm, the new map has it at 3,500 rpm, so the difference at 3,700 rpm like you mention the old map is still on the low cam, the new map is on the high cam.

All it proves is the ITG works better on the high cam, which gives you your conclusion that it makes more torque, which it does.

Anyhow, enough pishing about, stick both graphs up. ;)
 
Loxy said:
Aye, it's easy to get caught up chasing numbers.



Mmmm, maybe, maybe not. Combination of factors here.

The old map had VTEC crossover at 4,000 rpm, the new map has it at 3,500 rpm, so the difference at 3,700 rpm like you mention the old map is still on the low cam, the new map is on the high cam.

All it proves is the ITG works better on the high cam, which gives you your conclusion that it makes more torque, which it does.


Anyhow, enough pishing about, stick both graphs up. ;)
Click to expand...

Yah true try again lol, romain did say however itgp is good for torque but did say will lose, peak power.
:)

Will try to upload now,:)
 
Old map, on another car, with near identical mods (from memory, RBC, PIper Mani with cat, TEG M and spoon catback) Excuse the "dirt"

DSC_0885.jpg


New map, my car, with MY mods (again from memory :), RBC, Piper with sports cat, ITG, 60mm Supersprint Mid PIpe, 2.5inch aftermarket backbox)

DSC_0884.jpg
 
Aye, there's a lot more torque under 4,500, then it's not far off after that on both graphs.

Your power is pretty much identical after the VTEC crossovers. Look at 160 bhp for example, both around 5,700, 200 both at 6,500, both hit 220 around 7,250 more or less. Your graph just tails off at the top end. That could be airflow into the engine, so yep maybe the ITG is slightly more restrictive at the top end, but it could equally be your exhaust set-up as that will change the dynamics of the exhaust gasses coming out of the engine, how the pressure in the cylinders sits when the exhaust valves close etc.

The key thing now though is the fuelling, ignition and intake cam angles will be spot on for that top end, and as your setup is for you, in the mid range where you get that bit more torque.
 
Years ago when we ran a back to back intake test on the same dyno, on the same car on the same day, the ITG made the most low down torque of all the intakes, GruppeM made the most top end power, with the AEM and ITG coming in behind the GruppeM respectively.
 
I've overlaid the graphs to help the comparison (red line your car). The biggest difference I see in the chart is the VTEC crossover, everything else looks similar until high revs where the GM design comes into its own.

devil84-graphs.jpg


But as Loxy says, two different cars, so are not truly comparable...
 
Loxy said:
Your car hasn't lost 6 bhp by the way, it is 6 bhp less at peak than another car with similar mods.

You are talking about two completely different engines, with different histories, servicing, mileage etc, etc. The difference could be explained by pitting on the valves, valve clearances, carbon deposits on the exhaust side of the head/manifolds/exhaust, valve seals, fuel pump, injector condition and so on...

The new map is now ideal to your car like you say, rather than the mismatched map you were running before.

Good numbers by the way. 229 on Romain's rollers isn't too shy to be honest.
Click to expand...

This

Plus the runs were months apart with different air temp, humidity and air pressure.
 
Car is running like a dream, power is so much more effortless now.. Really pleased with the tweaked....

Car is now fully modded... What do people do next..... Enjoy..
 
Hahah Fn2 then? Has anyone got away from NA to a turbo hatchback and regretted it? E.g, Gti, s3 etc
 
devil84 said:
Is the FN2 really that inferior? In the real world a great all rounder? Eh Loxy?
Click to expand...

Now I've spent nearly £14k plus purchase price I'd say it's a good all rounder. :lol:

You don't need to spend that much granted, FRSU and brakes and it's a good all round package.

I thought it better suited my needs than the EP3 at the time I bought it and I still do. I hated the steering on the EP3 I drove recently, but the brakes and how you could place it on the road once I got used to the steering again was still spot on for a 9 year old motor...

Horses for courses though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top