Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a a stupid question, ive just installed a fmic. It didnt cum with a pin/connection for my boost cont welded in i found out after i started putting on the piping. Ive bought a little valve that i just screw into the piping from autobarn, the problem is cos ive never taken notive really of which pipe it went into on the stock one, i dont know which pipe i need to drill and tap it into. Can someone please tell me or show me a pic. Is it the one that goes from the turbo?

Please be gentle to me

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/232117-embarrasing-question/
Share on other sites

but wouldnt the cold pipe see actual pressure after any drop through the cooler?

no. lets say you do put it on the cold pipe, eg: say you loose 1psi through your cooler, and you boost controller is set to 12psi, your turbo will actually be making 13psi, because of the pressure drop. you want your boost controller seeing the pressure that the turbo is making, thats why you put it on the hot side fairly close to the turbo.

no. lets say you do put it on the cold pipe, eg: say you loose 1psi through your cooler, and you boost controller is set to 12psi, your turbo will actually be making 13psi, because of the pressure drop. you want your boost controller seeing the pressure that the turbo is making, thats why you put it on the hot side fairly close to the turbo.

cheers for that

no. lets say you do put it on the cold pipe, eg: say you loose 1psi through your cooler, and you boost controller is set to 12psi, your turbo will actually be making 13psi, because of the pressure drop. you want your boost controller seeing the pressure that the turbo is making, thats why you put it on the hot side fairly close to the turbo.

But wouldn't it be better to have the boost controller seeing exactly what pressure is reaching the manifold... I mean I don't particularly care if my turbo is making 13PSI if the engine only sees 12... the 12 is what I want to limit yeah?

But wouldn't it be better to have the boost controller seeing exactly what pressure is reaching the manifold... I mean I don't particularly care if my turbo is making 13PSI if the engine only sees 12... the 12 is what I want to limit yeah?

you will care if your pushing the limit of the standard turbo, or any turbo for that matter. in then end you want your turbo producing the desired level of boost, and all the pipes and intercooler to have little effect on the overall pressure, you want the system to be the least restricting it can be, ie: using quality coolers with low pressure drop ratings.

The problem with controlling boost via the pre intercooler pressure is that boost will slowly drop off at high rpm. Why? Because no matter how good it is, the intercooler and pipework will suffer some pressure drop. Plumbed into the pre-intercooler pipework, the wastegate actuator will not be receiving the actually boost pressure, hence the drop off at high rpm (actually airflow).

Cheers

Gary

QWK32 - Hrrm, I think I disagree. The turbos a means to an end, it just moves air up against the intake valves, a location I care more about regulated pressure then out the comp outlet of the turbo. Assuming your not constrained by turbo outlet pressure (stock ceramic) I think maybe the pressure there is borderline insignificant.

OP - For a manual BC, I'd take it from close to the TB. For a EBC, I would take the closed loop boost sender feed from same location, though take the wastegate feed from close the compressor outlet.

Its kinda moot in most setups Id say, and depends on the specifics. If you are boost limited by a stock turbo (and going along with boost/heat kills em) then the feed taken from the comp outlet would be the way to go, to insure you don't go over 13psi (or woteva it is)

If your motors tuned close to the limit with a aftermarket turbo and built motor and you know you start to det on a hot day at 24psi... well then the a TB/plenum source is the go.

Hope that made sense... 2 of them even:)

Ok, so im getting my bro in law to weld it to the piping, i have a turbosmart t-boost which i will be getting rid off soon for a ebc. I have a power fc - untuned atm, stock turbo, exhaust and now the fmic. I was guna get it welded off the turbo but as i am getting the ebc soon and the tune, what you are saying is that im better of getting it on the outlet piping so i think ill go that way. I didnt think it would cause this much of stir seeing as this is a turbo forum and i assumed people on here would have them in pretty much the same location as being the best position for them all.

Thank you

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...