Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

yep and i bought the dump pipe of (the mafia) its not the normal split dump

he made it i think from memory or am performance did but im in the process of getting a bell mouth made as ive got the rear housing machined tried different actuators, flapper travels fine and doesnt foul on anything

post-74999-0-68661100-1351202068_thumb.jpg

my rear housing is the photo stao put up on the 1ST page of this thread

when i removed the turbo there was a fair bit of carbon around the wastegate/screamer hole in the dump pipe so it looked like had trouble

i had to rule out the actuator so i tried a 1 bar 17psi 18 psi 20psi and they all went straight up to 23psi fairly quickly in 3rd/4th/5th

My issue with "split dumps" , particularly for these IW Garrett turbine housings . is that the fabricators often merely holesaw a round hole through the flange plate and weld the seperate tube to that .

This is my theory , the gasses out of a turbine housing are hot and getting real hor by the time the waste gate was to open to regulate turbine speed/boost pressure . Hot gasses want to expand and don't like a passage opening up and then closing particularly into a round hole with sharp edges , a bit like a non matching manifold/port flange .

I think to make a propper split dump you need to have a matching sized and shaped hole through the flange plate and the tube/duct then needs to grow in section to handle the gas flow rate .

I honestly can't say through experience but logic suggests that any restriction between the waste gate and where the seperate duct meets the exhaust down stream will limit how much the waste system flows and if it doesn't flow enough it won't control boost .A restriction doesn't have to be the waste gate itself and you should view the waste section as from the valve to where it rejoints the rest of the system .

If you go the seperate tube particularly with a modest AR turbine housing I think this is somewhere that a little overkill size wise is a good idea .

I don't want to reignite the split vs bell mouth dump debate but with these Garrett GT30 IW turbine housings you already have a partial divider between the turbines outlet and the waste gates valve so the waste flow won't go straight into the main outlets path IMO .

The bellmouth with give a large area for both to vent into and you shouldn't get any pressure rise higher than what the turbines outlet has , if you did with the split duct then you're behind the eight ball boost control wise anyway .

A .

to true from most posts and tuners ive spoke with ive been advised to use a bellmouth as my one from experience isnt the best lol prob would have something todo with getting my head/manifold/turbo flange and turbo all machined and port matched so id assume from those extra gasses are not going to be helping what so ever

im just wanting to know if it could be something else im overlooking or havent thought of

the boost source is of the hotside cooler piping not far from where most of the nipples are on the turbo front housing

it hits 16psi then raises with the rpm upto 23-25psi when i just have the actuator with no boost controller

when i use my gizzmo ebc it shoots straight to 23psi lol

Unsure if its been mentioned but is there anything obstructing the rod from the actuator to the gate? The actuator may be fine but if the rod hits something the flap may not b opening far enough for the gasses to pass through at higher rpm. Might be something free to check.

nothing is stopping it from opening completely and my gt3076 .82 make 289rwkw at 17psi by 5650rpm but that wasnt a complete tune as we were still trouble shooting so theres no real need for a ex gate as im wanting to stay internal

if a xr6 can make 450-500rwkw i think a little gt30 on a 2.5 litre can make 300-320rwkw without the need for a external gate so my next job is to make/fit a bell mouth dump pipe

just a little upset with the forum member off here who sold me the dump pipe and say it was perfect and made 312rwkw

No two setups are the same.

Try running a new hose directly from the boost source to the actuator. If that fails, perhaps try another pressure source? The .82 with a larger wastegate port should flow fine. Only by changing the dump will you know if it's a problem I guess.

My GTX over-boosts with a 45mm external gate hanging off the side, but it is caused by my soft limiter backing out timing at 7300 revs.

It may not suit me personally but for easier power and less regulating issues the mid sized turbine housing may have been a better choice for you .

I feel the big issue with most integral gates is that its hard to get the exhaust gas to turn 90 degrees and flow out the port when the gas speed is high .

The larger the housing AR the lower the gass speed is through the housing for a given output . Externals if located properly make life a lot easier because they tend to be larger and flow better when open - if located properly .

You occassionally see externals plumbed to an IW housings std outlet and you have to ask if its much better than the original flat valve .

Just on those XR6T hybrid GT3582R/GT3576Rs . Ford went with the larger 1.06 AR turbine housing - and like all Garrett IW T3 flanged GT turbos - used a GT35 turbine in a GT30 housing . They went bigish on the hotside and smallish on the compressor housing because it was intended to be a low boost pressure sollution for a reasonably big 250 Cube/4 litre I6 .

I reckon the later versions went back to the 76mm compressor because the overall package better suited their needs and boost control was probably easier as well . Anyway at over 300 Kw they are supposed to pull fairly hard in a guesses 1800 odd Kg barge .

That same Ford spec GT3576R could be an interesting turbo to try on a street RB30 with the right sorts of things done to it .

A .

this prob has nothing to do with much, but last time i tried running my vac source from the hot side i got nothing but spiking, eventually going back 2 inlet manifold for vacum source and it worked perfectly.

Probably not related. I moved my boost source from the vacuum manifold to the top of the compressor housing on the turbo. You don't really want vacuum in that line.

It may not suit me personally but for easier power and less regulating issues the mid sized turbine housing may have been a better choice for you .

I feel the big issue with most integral gates is that its hard to get the exhaust gas to turn 90 degrees and flow out the port when the gas speed is high .

The larger the housing AR the lower the gass speed is through the housing for a given output . Externals if located properly make life a lot easier because they tend to be larger and flow better when open - if located properly .

You occassionally see externals plumbed to an IW housings std outlet and you have to ask if its much better than the original flat valve .

Just on those XR6T hybrid GT3582R/GT3576Rs . Ford went with the larger 1.06 AR turbine housing - and like all Garrett IW T3 flanged GT turbos - used a GT35 turbine in a GT30 housing . They went bigish on the hotside and smallish on the compressor housing because it was intended to be a low boost pressure sollution for a reasonably big 250 Cube/4 litre I6 .

I reckon the later versions went back to the 76mm compressor because the overall package better suited their needs and boost control was probably easier as well . Anyway at over 300 Kw they are supposed to pull fairly hard in a guesses 1800 odd Kg barge .

That same Ford spec GT3576R could be an interesting turbo to try on a street RB30 with the right sorts of things done to it .

A .

Exactly.

Which is why the XR6 Turbo doesn't suffer from these same issues.

Finally someone who agrees with me :D

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...