Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

but you have NEVER seen it in action howcan you say it is not worth it?? what if you put it in and your car picks up .5 of a sec down the 1/4??? i know heaps of ppl that have spent alot more than that to make up simular resaults....

as i said ppl with ANY controller come try it out and compare

sewid...

"Gas filled what? A valve like this works using a spring and a diaphragm. Are you thinking we're all complete morons or something?"

No, do some homework, and then come install this in your car and call me an idiot if it goes the same...

This is coming from a guy that says "using gas ... keeps the temps cooler inside the valve"... Yeah you're a real expert. :rofl::P

No wonder this thing improved your performance, you were using a hairbrush as a bleed valve before.

If its not simply a spring/diaphragm device and actually uses gas, the gas sure isn't there for keeping the temperature down.

Dude you are an idiot.

Gas filled what? A valve like this works using a spring and a diaphragm. Are you thinking we're all complete morons or something?

"Gas keeps the temps inside the valve down"? Are you a complete imbecile and believe your own BS? What relevance does the temperature of a bleed valve have to anything.

Go and crawl back under the rock from whence you came little man.

Sewid you really need to do some research befor making comments like this....it may save you from presenting as a complete twit.

Ok,

At the end of the day, there just isnt enough facts supporting this 'very special boost controller'

This is a small world, and something thats this good would travell in no time, and a week after it came out, it would be used everywhere and be as common as a bogan in an old commonwhore.

Ive been into imports and turbos specifically for a few years now, i own one myself, know people that own turbos and have done a fair bit of work on turbos.. and i must say, in all that time ive never heard or seen of this 'very special boost controller'

Now if it came out as part of the Audi's or whatever, then surely major workshops etc would know about it, and be using it?

why arent they?

'Tis a scientific world we live in, without proof, im just not sold, sorry

the gas is used because when you push more power/boost air temp inside the turbo raise correct??? ok let go back to year 7 science.... what happens to air particals when they heat up.... thats right they expand (see where this is going here)... when it expands the air becomes thinner (looses viscosity) ...would i be correct in saying alot of boost controllers start slowly raising the boost (higher boost in taller gears sound familier???) now what if that air is cooled when comes into the valve .... shall i keep going????

reson for em not getting around yet is that they have been under developement for ages getting the porting gas type ect correct and consistant

Guest INASNT

when u raise the boost the boosted air isent going into the pressure pipe that controls the wastegate opening and closing. The amount of thermal transfer going from the turbo to the wastegate to the rubber hose to the boost controller is so minimal in a 1/4 run, the gas would not do shit to make u do any quicker 1/4 time.

listen. Can i get a accurate answer to this question. Will this super doopa pneamatic valve do a better job than my APexi AVCR?

Im using the apexi to limit wheelspin in 1st gear. That alone is reason enough to leave it there.

mx83toy whats your answer to that?

Sewid   you really need to do some research befor making comments like this....it may save you from presenting as a complete twit.

Huh?

I've pulled apart valves like this many times myself. im yet to see one that isnt built like that.

My guess is it would do just as good if not better than the Apexi in terms of control of the set boost. it does not have any of the extra functions of the electronic boosters except to control "how the boost comes on"

ps Hope to find out for myself towards the end of the month.

the gas is used because when you push more power/boost air temp inside the turbo raise correct??? ok let go back to year 7 science.... what happens to air particals when they heat up.... thats right they expand (see where this is going here)... when it expands the air becomes thinner (looses viscosity) ...would i be correct in saying alot of boost controllers start slowly raising the boost (higher boost in taller gears sound familier???) now what if that air is cooled when comes into the valve  ....   shall i keep going????

reson for em not getting around yet is that they have been under developement for ages getting the porting gas type ect correct and consistant

Look I admit i might be wrong about EVERY relief valve being built using springs/diaphragms because i cant say ive looked at lots of different valves from every manufacturer. I have looked at many and pulled them apart to find that mostly they look the same inside.

But your attempt at explaining why gas is used here is technically flawed and completely wrong.

1) This valve is small, it has no cooling mechanism (compressor, radiator, etc)

2) Cooling air quickly requires a lot of effort and a lot more hardware than this valve provides. This is what we all get bigger and better intercoolers for.

3) Whatever gas they put in this valve is not immune to the laws of thermodynamics.

4) Ergo the gas will heat up to ambient or higher temperature before the car even starts up. The gas will then reach the same temperature as the air passing thru the valve quite quickly.

Even if the gas is stored compressed it is not going to be any cooler than ambient temperature. Only the expansion of that gas will result in any cooling effect. Of course the expansion of the gas means the gas has to go somewhere, into the atmosphere probably? And if not into the atmosphere it will need to be recompressed to perform the useful cooling work again. I dont see a compressor attached to this very special boost controller.

look man i didnt invent the thing....to my understanding this is one of the functions of the gass.... i've gone alot faster with it compared to other controllers full stop. you want to try one out, cool come down,

you want to bag it out come up with something better yourself, and then prove its better else...

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...