Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 5/20/2022 at 9:51 AM, Kinkstaah said:

Borg Warner EFR's are the best at that. It is their entire thing. No turbo comes on that slowly (under full throttle) but you could set a boost controller to do that if you wanted to.

Boost by gear and artificial traction control by tapering boost on slowly is a thing that people do, but then you have a scenario where you either make the boost come on slow enough to keep grip in 4th (and thus 1-2-3 is wheelspin still) or you set your boost ramp for traction for example in 2nd, but you're leaving power on the table in higher gears.

The simplest answer is a new Garrett G series. Buying a G25-660 on a 2.5 would be great and still not annihilate gearboxes, overcome commonly available tyres, create clutches that are too annoying to drive, and is physically compact so you get plenty of space to run lines to and from it.

Yes I know that I can control with boost by gear and that is my plan, but as mentioned in the scenario the 3076 is small enough to.build that power around 4 k but is limited to 500whp

just not sure how a larger turbo power delivery would be 

A rb25 with headgasket and studs, standard exhaust manifold with external gate mod, gtx3076 w/.82 rear on ethanol be perfect make 300kw on 16psi and will be linear. Pick an ecu and fuel system (ID1050 injectors and a Bosch intank pump around 400lph)
Been running a similiar setup for years in my sil80 (gt3076) and is very responsive and quick. 
More than enough to have fun and is great to drive.
 

On 5/21/2022 at 3:37 AM, Rand0b said:

Yes I know that I can control with boost by gear and that is my plan, but as mentioned in the scenario the 3076 is small enough to.build that power around 4 k but is limited to 500whp

just not sure how a larger turbo power delivery would be 

I understand - The turbos I mentioned are superior to the GTX3076 in every single way. One is a BW, and the Garrett G series are a flat out upgrade by the same manufacturer.

I have also owned a GTX3076 for direct comparison :p. 500whp is a lot and is just past the issue free fun threshold.

  • Like 2
On 21/05/2022 at 12:38 PM, Kinkstaah said:

I understand - The turbos I mentioned are superior to the GTX3076 in every single way. One is a BW, and the Garrett G series are a flat out upgrade by the same manufacturer.

I have also owned a GTX3076 for direct comparison :p. 500whp is a lot and is just past the issue free fun threshold.

Every single way? Over speed them momentary and see what happens with the BW.

372.8kW is not a lot... Crossing 400kW is. 

On 5/20/2022 at 7:03 PM, Rand0b said:

Agreed, that’s why I was asking on power delivery. If a 3076 is going to hit like a light switch 20psi ~4000rpm

i would think a slightly bigger turbo that maybe would start spooling 3500 and then gradually lean into 20 psi around 5k would be better power delivery?

just don’t kno what that turbo is

 See that's the cool thing about boost. Once you have it you can control it ... 

Very easy to tame down a small turbo's power curve vs trying to get a big turbo to come on early enough for the car to be fun. 

  • Thanks 1
On 5/21/2022 at 10:53 AM, Butters said:

 See that's the cool thing about boost. Once you have it you can control it ... 

Very easy to tame down a small turbo's power curve vs trying to get a big turbo to come on early enough for the car to be fun. 

Agreed

This is a scenario of what I am willing to compromise with and see as acceptable 7163 is what a few have recommended. Example below

(7163) A 5psi :3k - 20psi: ~4k 

(8374) B 5psi :3.5k - 20psi ~4.5k 

(7163) if I am going to control boost to dial back a to make the power delivery more linear and hit target 20psi 500-750 RPM later so 20psi ~ 4,500 or 4,760 yes it would spool up quicker and range spread out over 1.5 a 1.75rpm 

(8374) could use adjustable cam gears to dial back a few hundred RPM so it could start spooling 3300rpm and then hit 20 psi 4300rpm. Yes it would take away from top end a bit but the factor of the larger turbo would still make more power per psi would put me closer to  my goals and get within the  acceptable street manners/spool range ?


not thinking of going from a 7163 to a 9174

Edited by Rand0b

Have you given thought to how much this is going to cost you. It’s all fine putting a $4k turbo on a car to make xxxhp but is it work it when a cheaper turbo will do the same. 
These big turbo names are just wank factor for 300kw. 
Next step is once you board of 300kw what’s next 

On 5/21/2022 at 1:59 PM, WR33KD said:

Have you given thought to how much this is going to cost you. It’s all fine putting a $4k turbo on a car to make xxxhp but is it work it when a cheaper turbo will do the same. 
These big turbo names are just wank factor for 300kw. 
Next step is once you board of 300kw what’s next 

Just don't get bored with 300 kW, problem solved.

On 5/21/2022 at 8:08 PM, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

Every single way? Over speed them momentary and see what happens with the BW.

372.8kW is not a lot... Crossing 400kW is. 

372.8KW is indeed a lot. I usually put the happy mark closer to 320ish kw, have a look at how many track days john richo has done on his unopened motor vs someone like yourself (not digging) where it did eventually go kablamo at 372kw. You also have to choose a bigger clutch, less grip, comes on 500rpm later... 370 is still probably okay, but I would personally choose a little less.

When I said 'better in every way' I was referring to the G Series Garrett, as well as the BW EFR.

On 5/22/2022 at 6:59 AM, WR33KD said:

Have you given thought to how much this is going to cost you. It’s all fine putting a $4k turbo on a car to make xxxhp but is it work it when a cheaper turbo will do the same. 
These big turbo names are just wank factor for 300kw. 
Next step is once you board of 300kw what’s next 

At 300kw the brand name turbos come into their own. Their whole 'betterness' is is in all of the areas that are NOT full throttle operation. Log the time driving where you're between 1000 and 5000rpm, at throttle openings 0-75% and compare that to the time operating at 100% throttle at 5000-7000rpm.

Even when you're belting it through the streets as hard as you can, 90% of the time is in the 0-75% throttle and 1000 to 5000rpm. This is why people rate the newer tech so much.

  • Like 2
On 5/21/2022 at 4:59 PM, WR33KD said:

Have you given thought to how much this is going to cost you. It’s all fine putting a $4k turbo on a car to make xxxhp but is it work it when a cheaper turbo will do the same. 
These big turbo names are just wank factor for 300kw. 
Next step is once you board of 300kw what’s next 

Yes I am prepared and understand the costs, I think There may have been a misunderstanding of my question and this should clear it up for all do note that I originally mention I would love to hit

6-700whp on the DYNO

i do not expect to be at this level for fun street use , I want to know that I can turn it up and I am not at my ceiling

dyno run would be perfect conditions on VP race fuel or e85 / e98, turbo can be nearly maxed out. E85 is not easily accessible by me. Closest pump is 30 min in a direction I do not travel. So while I will go out to get it. It will also get pump gas so overall power will be down if mix fuels are mixed e50, e30, e10 ect 

looking for a turbo that I can hit. A 6-700whp on the dyno with boost being fast ramp 3-4,500rpm to hit 30psi. While on the street I could have e30,e50 / some mix of gas which if lower than e85 would have overall lower power output and I would have overall max effort rolled back to ~25psi with boost control being a linear ramp over 3-5500rpm

 

500rwkw in Aussie terms, 98 only, full boost at 3500-4500, 30psi?

Nothing exists with those requirements on a 2.5 on Petrol. Certainly would not be fun on the street unless your street is 200+kmh drag runs on the street. In the hills such a setup would be a mess, if it could exist.

  • Like 1
On 5/22/2022 at 9:11 AM, Rand0b said:

6-700whp on the DYNO

i do not expect to be at this level for fun street use , I want to know that I can turn it up and I am not at my ceiling

dyno run would be perfect conditions on VP race fuel or e85 / e98, turbo can be nearly maxed out. E85 is not easily accessible by me. Closest pump is 30 min in a direction I do not travel. So while I will go out to get it. It will also get pump gas so overall power will be down if mix fuels are mixed e50, e30, e10 ect 

This makes no sense.

There is absolutely no point in building an engine to make big power on a dyno then not to use that power for the vehicle's primary purpose, and WORSE, to suffer the compromises caused by the big power potential, aall of which make the car objectively worse in its primary usage model.

This is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Here's the thing - the things you say about big boost + torque made early putting stress into a motor are true. But, they are not true at the power level that actually makes sense on the street. At this magical 300rwkW (and I don't mean magical in a sarcastic sense, I mean magical as in it is actually magical that 300rwkW works well in a street application) you are NOT making enough torque at 3000rpm to actually do the damage you're talking about. At this level you want to ramp the boost on as fast as you can, because area under the curve = acceleration. The only compromise you need to make is to perhaps moderate your boost ramp for traction reasons.

Think about a 2.5L engine making good boost at 3000rpm (and only getting better from there up). Compare same to a 5 or 6 L engine running NA, and tell me that you would not want the torque of the 6L engine ALL THE TIME in the 2.5. Seriously.

  • Like 1
On 5/22/2022 at 11:55 AM, GTSBoy said:

Think about a 2.5L engine making good boost at 3000rpm (and only getting better from there up). Compare same to a 5 or 6 L engine running NA, and tell me that you would not want the torque of the 6L engine ALL THE TIME in the 2.5. Seriously.

👀
muahaha.

My car is slower now than it was with a 2.8 and 433rwkw and I'd never go back.

On 5/21/2022 at 9:55 PM, GTSBoy said:

This makes no sense.

There is absolutely no point in building an engine to make big power on a dyno then not to use that power for the vehicle's primary purpose, and WORSE, to suffer the compromises caused by the big power potential, aall of which make the car objectively worse in its primary usage model.

This is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Here's the thing - the things you say about big boost + torque made early putting stress into a motor are true. But, they are not true at the power level that actually makes sense on the street. At this magical 300rwkW (and I don't mean magical in a sarcastic sense, I mean magical as in it is actually magical that 300rwkW works well in a street application) you are NOT making enough torque at 3000rpm to actually do the damage you're talking about. At this level you want to ramp the boost on as fast as you can, because area under the curve = acceleration. The only compromise you need to make is to perhaps moderate your boost ramp for traction reasons.

Think about a 2.5L engine making good boost at 3000rpm (and only getting better from there up). Compare same to a 5 or 6 L engine running NA, and tell me that you would not want the torque of the 6L engine ALL THE TIME in the 2.5. Seriously.

99% of people asking for injectors size feedback say the calculator said I need 850cc,  do they ever say should I lower my goals to get the 750cc? what do most car guys say? , get 1000cc so you have room to grow you are going to want more power later on. It’s one less thing to purchase . That is what I am trying to accomplish. Finding something that has good street manners, potentially hit a number between 6-700whp on a Dyno 

It could end up being Turbo A on e85 622hp  maxed out on the dyno. Then  running  e30 on the street it’s more like a mid 500whp car and the turbo has  fantastic street characteristics.

or it could be Turbo B on e85 689whp maxed out on the dyno. ends up being a  low 600whp car when on e30 and has acceptable street characteristics for its overall power

I haven’t said 700whp+ At all times. I could drive like this forever OR could get bored in a year and decide only use e85 and now the car is at max effort And if I take it to track it will perform and I do not have to purchase a new turbo, upgrade injectors get a new tune ect

You said ‘tell me that you would not want the torque of the 6L engine ALL THE TIME in the 2.5. People have a low and high boost setting. Why wouldn’t you want to always be on high boost at all times if the car is capable to perform of that level? What’s the purpose of the low boost setting?

I don’t kno what you are referring to with ‘you are NOT making enough torque at 3000rpm to actually do the damage you're talking about’ I haven’t referred to damage. I have referred to power delivery with traction as the underlying item. 

Edited by Rand0b
On 5/22/2022 at 11:29 AM, Rand0b said:

99% of people asking for injectors size feedback say the calculator said I need 850cc,  do they ever say should I lower my goals to get the 750cc? what do most car guys say? , get 1000cc so you have room to grow you are going to want more power later on.

That's a logical fallacy. Injector headroom with little to no negative consequences is absolutely not equal to overbuilding an engine to make dyno queen numbers, then not even intending to use that power for real.

On 5/22/2022 at 11:29 AM, Rand0b said:

You said ‘tell me that you would not want the torque of the 6L engine ALL THE TIME in the 2.5. People have a low and high boost setting. Why wouldn’t you want to always be on high boost at all times if the car is capable to perform of that level? What’s the purpose of the low boost setting?

Have you missed the point that badly? Street car? Then torque is the boss. Power numbers only arrive in the top half of the rev range. Torque is useful everywhere.

And low boost is obvious. That's for your girlfriend who usually drives a FWD shopping trolley. It's for the guy at the tyre shop who does the round the block after the new rubber goes on. It's for the valet, should that ever happen. It's for wet weather.

On 5/22/2022 at 11:29 AM, Rand0b said:

I don’t kno what you are referring to with ‘you are NOT making enough torque at 3000rpm to actually do the damage you're talking about’ I haven’t referred to damage. I have referred to power delivery with traction as the underlying item. 

In that case you have quoted common wisdom without understanding where it comes from and why it originates.

If you make massive torque down low, such as you could/would with a turbo setup able to make stupidly large power and somehow get a lot of the boost to come in as early as possible..... then you place extremely large mechanical loads on conrods and bearings and can hammer them so badly that they actually do get damaged. There is also the thing about squeezing all the boost you can into an engine in the region around peak torque being a bad thing, and that is because this is where you will cause detonation.

So don't tell me you didn't, because you did, even if you didn't realise it.

  • Like 2
On 21/05/2022 at 10:08 PM, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

Every single way? Over speed them momentary and see what happens with the BW.

Wat.   

Lets just break this nonsense down shall we:

1) I don't know anyone who has actually broken an EFR directly, I *do* know plenty who have run them off the max compressor speed.
 

2) ^ You read that right, the "failure" warning is misattributed to a magical turbine speed limit but the actual max speeds published are to do with compressor max speed - there is no max turbine speed published for the EFRs.  If there is a turbine failure, the thing would have been WELL past the max compressor speed so whoever has put the car together has f**ked something up if they've got to the point the EFR fails due to turbine speed.

3) Taking the top two points into account, you're basically saying "Sure the EFR is a way better performing turbo than the Garrett GTX equivalent, but if someone is incompetent with the match and installation there is a remote chance the EFR will fail sooner than the Garrett."


Basically the EFRs are better.  But get a Garrett if you have legit concerns that you are an idiot, it will also fail if you poorly match it- but you might have a longer grace period to work it out.
 

Edited by Lithium
  • Like 1
On 5/21/2022 at 11:46 PM, GTSBoy said:

 

I am not trying to argue

I am rebuilding a engine that needs a rebuild, I am opting to upgrade parts now since I don’t know what power I would want potentially 2 or 5 years down the road.

I’m agree on engine stress under load with added forced induction. I have referred to power delivery As to the wheels. I do not want a turbo to be 3psi 3k to light up 25psi at ~4k and all it does is spin the tires, that is what I am referring to as power delivery. If I can get that 6L pull feeling Hells yea I would want it all the time but I know I may need to make it linear to ensure proper traction.

so what would you say a good turbo would be?

e85 dyno into 6xxwhp

but still acceptable to drive on the street  if not on e85 (e30, e50)

 

Edited by Rand0b
On 5/22/2022 at 2:59 PM, Rand0b said:

I am not trying to argue

I am rebuilding a engine that needs a rebuild, I am opting to upgrade parts now since I don’t know what power I would want potentially 2 or 5 years down the road.

I’m agree on engine stress under load with added forced induction. I have referred to power delivery As to the wheels. I do not want a turbo to be 3psi 3k to light up 25psi at ~4k and all it does is spin the tires, that is what I am referring to as power delivery. If I can get that 6L pull feeling Hells yea I would want it all the time but I know I may need to make it linear to ensure proper traction.

so what would you say a good turbo would be?

e85 dyno into 6xxwhp

but still acceptable to drive on the street  if not on e85 (e30, e50)

 

I'm not trying to derail this thread, but I'm curious why you are talking about driving the car on e30 or e50? Surely if you have access to e85, you'd just run that all the time and only drive on 98 when you don't have access to e85? 

  • Like 1

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

    • Next on the to-do list was an oil and filter change. Nothing exciting to add here except the oil filter is in a really stupid place (facing the engine mount/subframe/steering rack). GReddy do a relocation kit which puts it towards the gearbox, I would have preferred towards the front but there's obviously a lot more stuff there. Something I'll have to look at for the next service perhaps. First time using Valvoline oil, although I can't see it being any different to most other brands Nice... The oil filter location... At least the subframe wont rust any time soon I picked up a genuine fuel filter, this is part of the fuel pump assembly inside the fuel tank. Access can be found underneath the rear seat, you'll see this triangular cover Remove the 3x plastic 10mm nuts and lift the cover up, pushing the rubber grommet through The yellow fuel line clips push out in opposite directions, remove these completely. The two moulded fuel lines can now pull upwards to disconnect, along with the wire electrical plug. There's 8x 8mm bolts that secure the black retaining ring. The fuel pump assembly is now ready to lift out. Be mindful of the fuel hose on the side, the hose clamp on mine was catching the hose preventing it from lifting up The fuel pump/filter has an upper and lower section held on by 4 pressure clips. These did take a little bit of force, it sounded like the plastic tabs were going to break but they didn't (don't worry!) The lower section helps mount the fuel pump, there's a circular rubber gasket/grommet/seal thing on the bottom where the sock is. Undo the hose clip on the short fuel hose on the side to disconnect it from the 3 way distribution pipe to be able to lift the upper half away. Don't forget to unplug the fuel pump too! There's a few rubber O rings that will need transferring to the new filter housing, I show these in the video at the bottom of this write up. Reassembly is the reverse Here's a photo of the new filter installed, you'll be able to see where the tabs are more clearing against the yellow OEM plastic Once the assembly is re-installed, I turned the engine over a few times to help build up fuel pressure. I did panic when the car stopped turning over but I could hear the fuel pump making a noise. It eventually started and has been fine since. Found my 'lucky' coin underneath the rear seat too The Youtube video can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLJ65pmQt44&t=6s
    • It was picked up on the MOT/Inspection that the offside front wheel bearing had excessive play along with the ball joint. It made sense to do both sides so I sourced a pair of spare IS200 hubs to do the swap. Unfortunately I don't have any photos of the strip down but here's a quick run down. On the back of the hub is a large circular dust cover, using a flat head screw driver and a mallet I prised it off. Underneath will reveal a 32mm hub nut (impact gun recommended). With the hub nut removed the ABS ring can be removed (I ended up using a magnetic pick up tool to help). Next up is to remove the stub axle, this was a little trickier due to limited tools. I tried a 3 leg puller but the gap between the hub and stub axle wasn't enough for the legs to get in and under. Next option was a lump hammer and someone pulling the stub axle at the same time. After a few heavy hits it released. The lower bearing race had seized itself onto the stub axle, which was fine because I was replacing them anyway. With the upper bearing race removed and the grease cleaned off they looked like this The left one looked pristine inside but gave us the most trouble. The right one had some surface rust but came apart in a single hit, figure that out?! I got a local garage to press the new wheel bearings in, reassemble was the opposite and didn't take long at all. Removing the hub itself was simple. Starting with removing the brake caliper, 2x 14mm bolts for the caliper slider and 2x 19mm? for the carrier > hub bolts. I used a cable tie to secure the caliper to the upper arm so it was out of the way, there's a 10mm bolt securing the ABS sensor on. With the brake disc removed from the hub next are the three castle nuts for the upper and lower ball joints and track rod end. Two of these had their own R clip and one split pin. A few hits with the hammer and they're released (I left the castle nuts on by a couple of turns), the track rod ends gave me the most grief and I may have nipped the boots (oops). Fitting is the reversal and is very quick and easy to do. The lower ball joints are held onto the hub by 2x 17mm bolts. The castle nut did increase in socket size to 22mm from memory (this may vary from supplier) The two front tyres weren't in great condition, so I had those replaced with some budget tyres for the time being. I'll be replacing the wheels and tyres in the future, this was to get me on the road without the worry of the police hassling me.
    • Yep, the closest base tune available was for the GTT, I went with that and made all the logical changes I could find to convert it to Naturally Aspirated. It will rev fine in Neutral to redline but it will be cutting nearly 50% fuel the whole way.  If I let it tune the fuel map to start with that much less fuel it wont run right and has a hard time applying corrections.  These 50% cuts are with a fuel map already about half of what the GTT tune had.  I was having a whole lot of bogging when applying any throttle but seem to have fixed that for no load situations with very aggressive transient throttle settings. I made the corrections to my injectors with data I found for them online, FBCJC100 flowing 306cc.  I'll have to look to see if I can find the Cam section. I have the Bosch 4.9 from Haltech. My manifold pressure when watching it live is always in -5.9 psi/inHg
    • Hi My Tokico BM50 Brake master cylinder has a leak from the hole between the two outlets (M10x1) for brake pipes, I have attached a photo. Can anyone tell me what that hole is and what has failed to allow brake fluid to escape from it, I have looked on line and asked questions on UK forums but can not find the answer, if anyone can enlighten me I would be most grateful.
    • It will be a software setting. I don't believe many on here ever used AEM. And they're now a discontinued product,that's really hard to find any easy answers on. If it were Link or Haltech, someone would be able to just send you a ECU file though.
×
×
  • Create New...