Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all,

I recently purchased a 'turbosmart' wastegate from a fellow forum member (whom for now, I will not name). Prior to purchasing the gate, the guy swore to me that it was a genuine product. I did some background research on him, and also had him send me a few pictures. All seemed okay, and the price was low enough for me to accept the risk.

Well, it didn't pay off in the end, and now i'm stuck with what i'm pretty sure is a fake turbosmart wastegate, and feeling like an idiot for thinking I could get such a bargain (cost me $200 in the end).

Anyway, after pulling this thing apart and inspecting every peice I found that for a fake, it isn't built that bad... definitely has some flaws, but overall, it's not terrible.

The problem/question I have is, is it normal for these type of wastegates to leak? (even if the smallest amount). After pressure testing the one I have (Compressed air to top and bottom chambers, whilst gate is sitting in a tub of water) - I found that when pressure is applied to the bottom chamber, air would escape through the valve shaft (bubbles coming out from the exhaust bypass chamber) and the smallest amount would come out of the top chambers port (obviously getting past the diaphragm a little bit).

When pressure was applied to the top port/chamber of the gate, a small amount of bubbles would come out of the bottom chambers port, and also a very small amount from the valve shaft again.

So in summary, I found that the following 2 things are true;

- Diaphragm does not provide a perfect seal between top and bottom chambers.

- Valve shaft does not seal properly, and allows pressure to escape from bottom chamber.

*Note: - No visible cracks/holes were found in the diaphragm.

- It is a 50mm V-flange 'Furbosmart Pro Gate'

Is this at all normal, or acceptable for an External Diaphragm wastegate? Can anyone see it causing big issues? The valve opens pretty quickly when pressure is applied to the bottom chamber (and I only tested using very low pressure) It seems to function okay, although It hasn't been tested on a car yet. I'm just wondering if these minor leaks are going to cause me major headaches, or if it is relatively normal. Might also be worth mentioning, I'm running a MAP & IAT Sensor setup, and will be using a HKS EVC 2 Boost controller.

The obvious recommendation from most people I can already forsee, is going to be that I should just go and buy a genuine product, and solve all my problems that way. That is fair enough, and I agree... But at the moment, I just don't have the spare $700 - $800 to fork out for a wastegate, so am trying to determine if this one might be okay (even if only for temporary use).

Any advice/input is appreciated. Cheers.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/397952-external-diaphragm-wastegates/
Share on other sites

you will find the bottom chamber will leak around the valve stem on virtually all external wastegates, once its heated up/been used a bit (carbon buildup) the shaft would become tight and restrict/stop movement of the valve.

Thanks for the responses so far guys, very helpful! Has helped to confirm some suspicians my friend and I had already had.

Does anyone have any information regarding the diaphragm? Is it fairly normal to have a slight (very slight) leak between each side of the diaphragm, or is there meant to be a complete seal between both chambers in an external gate?

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...