Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Basically I want to know what the point of having a top mount system for the turbo improves? Do people just get it for look so show off their turbo or does it actually improve any performance? Or is it also a bit like the front facing plenum where some people get it just because they like the ease of access to parts.

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/404900-turbo-top-mounts/
Share on other sites

Use of space mainly. It's easier to top mount a larger turbo, and cheaper because to low mount you'd generally need a 1-off manifold.

I mean I've seen a GT40 low mounted so it can be done, there is just no room to work on it without major arse ache :)

Centre of gravity/weight distribution and all that shit, low mounting in theory would be better. For street cars it matters not.

And a front facing plenum, generally makes shit harder to work on (save for a plug change). When you split hoses under the plenum, you'll understand the pain that a larger FFP creates hehe. ;)

Ahh thank you very much!!!

I now Understand the Top Mount part, but am more lost ont he front facing plenum, Im assuming you have a front facing plenum so would you say it is still more advantageous to have? I just am nto lookign forward to the day I have to change a plug and have to go through a significant amount of unbolting to do so.

A proper top mount manifold with a good waste gating system will make a gain in performance. Same can also he archived using proper low mount. Inlet manifold how ever doesn't gain much or I have seen people went backwards. not much of point changing unless maybe hug power or for looks or intercooler popping installation convenience.

Inlet manifold how ever doesn't gain much or I have seen people went backwards. guess not much of point changing unless maybe hug power or for looks or intercooler popping installation convenience.

Haha well you've certainly changed your mind on that! :P

I normally like the FFP for giving more flexibility on injector choice. Makes it nice and easy to use a china rail and top feed injectors.

I also believe a top mount is generally beneficial for packaging reasons. If you were to build a nice low mount it would work just as well as the high mount, and as Ash said probably yield better centre of gravity which is a moot point on the street anyway.

in general terms it has been said that the stock plenum has more torque than an FFP due to the longer runners.

also try not to get confused as most people say low mount referring to the stock manifold (because it is a low mount of a sort). as a rule of thumb a quality high mount will have nice gains over the stock lowmount, but if u paid the premium for a custom low mount the performance should match the highmount.

i hope that helps

A proper top mount manifold with a good waste gating system will make a gain in performance.

As opposed to a proper low mount manifold/gate setup?

Not one iota of difference between the two at all.

No the opposite - he's saying apart from ease of plug change everything else is harder to get at. You'll get quite good at pulling off the crossover pipe etc after a few goes!

:yes:

Essentially what I'm reaching for is over 250 rwkw, So I suppose the best question is, Will I require either or both of these to attain this goal? or what are peoples preference to this?

Also is there a quick how to guide for the Crossover pipe removal? Everytime I look at it it just seems a much bigger task than you say

Essentially what I'm reaching for is over 250 rwkw, So I suppose the best question is, Will I require either or both of these to attain this goal? or what are peoples preference to this?

Also is there a quick how to guide for the Crossover pipe removal? Everytime I look at it it just seems a much bigger task than you say

It's two/four clamps, not hard at all!? lol.

Also, 250rwkw is very easily achievable, you don't need a manifold or anything. ECU, injectors, turbo. Assuming you've got the other bolt ons already, exhaust, FMIC, etc.

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...