Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

' date='11 May 2006, 07:38 PM' post='2159173']

thanks for the reply sk :)

i was under the impression that the apexi RX6 (IHI) was only oil cooled being plain bearing ?

so i am under the impression that all EVO which would be running Mitsubishi turbos would then be plain bearing yes?

Also can't it be said that because more than one main supply is using plain bearing turbos, that the tech behide them is fairly good and that they can match ball bearing? From a design point of view wouldnt the company choose the option that produces the best result at the best price.

So if the lose from using plain bearing is say 5% but the price saving is 20% then i dont see plain bearing being that bad in a price/performace comparisons to ball bearing?

As with all things mechanical, there are patents and royalties involved. Some things are not for sale at any price, it's about retaining ones competitive edge gained from your own in house R&D.

Personally I can't put a price (or a %) on response, poor response simply takes all of the enjoyment out of driving a car for me. I hate dowey cars, slow throttle response like vague steering and a lack of tactile feedback they all turn me off driving a car real fast.

>_< cheers :angry:

  • Replies 264
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Its just so hard to decide!!! Spend 1k or 2k?? ie plain bearing or ball bearing.

I still think of Cost of Ownership, so if you're saying Gary that there is extra maintnenace involved in the life of using a plain bearing turbo (such as oil changes every 2500kms instead of 5000kms etc) then this obviously adds to that cost, over time.

Its all so hard when you're on a budget!!!

On a side note, what sort of 'safe' psi can a standard 'unopened' Rb25det engine take with a nice highflowing turbo? More than 1bar?

On a side note, what sort of 'safe' psi can a standard 'unopened' Rb25det engine take with a nice highflowing turbo? More than 1bar?

Im running at least 1.3 bar and sometimes 1.4 bar on my internally unopened RB25DET

I think everyone's getting a little too riled up here, I don't think SK and PaulR33 are meaning to say that this is a bad turbo by any means, its just a case of you get what you pay for.

I'm not trying to shut Slide down or his product, i'm sure its very good value for money and it sounds like it is.

Its just that when you think about building an overall package, depending on what you're aiming for the car to achieve, its best to choose the turbo suitable for that application.

As has been said her a few times, Garret is a huge company that has been in the turbocharging game for a long time, when you're buying a turbo from them, you're not just buying some bits of metal, you're buying the R&D as well, so you'd expect the turbo to spool faster, be more efficient and have a longer life.

If I were thinking of upgrading my turbo (and i'm not just yet), the first thing i'd be doing is ringing Garret and talking to them about what I want my car to aim for (power wise, response wise, track, drift, qtr street etc) and build a whole package around it with the correct ancillaries (i'm sure I spelt that wrong) like intercooler, suspension, management, fuel issues etc.

Hmm i'm not sure if I made any point here, i'm not on any side, i'm just giving my 2c I guess.

This is an interesting thread, I don't believe that is it out of place to compare the plain bearing turbo in this discussion with alternative ball bearing turbos. If I was buying a turbo I would most certainly like to know what I am missing out on, not simply what I am getting.

Garrett make both ball bearing and plain bearing turbos and there is a considerable price difference. In many cases they sell the same compressor and turbine specs with plain bearing or ball bearing cores. So Garrett are constantly being asked to justify the extra cost of buying a ball bearing turbo for its superior performance.

Some time ago, in answer to these value for money questions, Garrrett carried out controlled testing of the same compressor and turbine specs with plain bearing and ball bearing cores. This was done on a 2 litre engine and the test was of response to throttle imputs. The idea was to open the throttle at 2,000 rpm and measure how long it took for various shaft rpm increases. This is the published result;

gallery_1903_124_17379.jpg

As you can see from the graph, it takes the plain bearing turbo 2 seconds to catch up to the shaft speed. Now, 2 seconds is a life time when you want/need/expect good throttle response. At many places on the curve you are looking at ~30% longer for the plain bearing turbo to gain speed.

You make up your own mind as to whether or not this is important to you.

:) cheers :D

PS; I have no turbos to sell, our cars have a variety of turbos on them, I use whatever will do the job and at the same time give value for money.

I've spoken to Aaron in depth about his turbos... and i'm keen to try a hiflow rebuild to replace my fooked turbo on my R33.

Bolt on performance upgrade, for only $860 delivered to my door... nothing to loose

I would like to see how these turbo's perfrom.

Also they claim to be Garett and Biaggio combined. Which part is what???

Biaggio compressures and wheels and garret bearing core???

Also we all know you get what you pay for, and as it stands Biaggio is a large manufacturer in Spain, that supplies a considerable number of OEM manufacturers.

I would like ot know what the BB version of the turbo would be both price and performance wise??? And see it compared to a comparable Garrett product!!

Stan,

I am often in Sydney, mostly with mates for such events as the Evo Forums Wakefield track day, but I will message you should the offer still be open.

Also I will have a chat to Slide via PM.

Cheers

Neill

P.S. No one should discount this product until proven otherwise, the KKR turbo's were mocked repeatedly, now they have partly proven themselves, some keyboard mechanics should shut the f**k up

P.S. No one should discount this product until proven otherwise, the KKR turbo's were mocked repeatedly, now they have partly proven themselves, some keyboard mechanics should shut the f**k up

Who would that be? SK? or PaulR33? I wouldn't be calling them keyboard mechanics....

The purpose of this post and forum is to promote open discussion and information, from all sides.

I havent heard anyone say that these turbos were shit, all I've heard is people's opinions, own trials and information they've provided, ultimately it is each persons own choice to choice their turbo for their own uses.

If anything I'd say most people have had positive feedback, and that's a good thing.

  • 2 weeks later...

Well the turbo is on my car now, it's done 1000kms and the bearing is run-in nicely, boost response is extremely good. It's never going to be as good as the stock 'toy' turbo I took off, but the extra oomph makes up for any low-end response. Spooling to 10psi at 3000rpm is good enough for me anyway, I'm more than happy with it :(

Well the turbo is on my car now, it's done 1000kms and the bearing is run-in nicely, boost response is extremely good. It's never going to be as good as the stock 'toy' turbo I took off, but the extra oomph makes up for any low-end response. Spooling to 10psi at 3000rpm is good enough for me anyway, I'm more than happy with it :D

Sounds good mate just a few questions. What mods do you have? What boost you running? What is your power output

thanks for the review

Don't have a final power output until I get a full tune on the dyno...feels quicker than before and I had 175rwkw

I've got a full CES turbo-back, front-mount, daughterboard ECU (to be tuned), standard GTR fuel reg and GTR fuel pump...only on 10psi at the moment...will wind the turbo out a bit more when it's tuned, even more when I get some new injectors.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Ah ok. I seem to be mixing it like everyone else does so not sure what's happening. Will experiment with it more.
    • Depends on what you mean by OK. First up, was this done cold or hot? Are they reasonably consistent? Yes, they are reasonably consistent. Could be better. But unless it has had a build at some point, it is a ~30 year old engine and you'd expect some variation. Some of the difference could also be in user technique Is it good compression? Well....not numerically, no. New they were >160 psi. The one at 140 would be fine, in that context. If they were all ~140, you'd be reasonably happy. But the one that is @120 is twice as far down from the original numbers as the one @ 140. But.. (again)... technique can play a part in the absolute magnitude of these numbers, and the quality/state of repair/accuracy of the pressure gauge is not known. In the context of the above, the compression tester that was used last on my car is regularly compared to a known good pressure gauge. Not calibrated, exactly, but compared to a reference instrument that is not used for any other purpose, so cops no abuse. So we can trust the measurements off that tester. But another tester in the same workshop wasn't being compared against the standard and was reading a good 30ish psi lower. When you're reading 100 psu but the engine is really doing 130, you can make bad decisions.
    • More likely from tiny bubbles in the filler/putty. Maybe be less aggressive when mixing it. Perhaps invest in a vacuum chamber to pull the air bubbles out?** **I don't know if this is a thing for body filler. I see hardcore epoxy makers degassing their mixed resin on the regular.
    • IIRC, the speedo on these is fed from the sensor in/on the snout of the diff.
    • They were. I bought the AWD for experimenting but racing it would disqualify or disadvantage me from a few race classes. Def getting a FWD for racing.
×
×
  • Create New...