Close

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 69
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Encino,CA
    Posts
    8,039
    Rep Points
    5,733.6
    Mentioned
    179 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    58


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Ingeniator Click here to enlarge
    It's not after turbo back pressure tony is talking about. He is referring to manifold back pressure. The turbo is the restriction a larger housing ratio would allow for more flow. A .82 on a divided housing actually flows less then an .82 undivded.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    No offense here sir, but there is no real back pressure after the turbo. The turbo is just an inline restriction in the exhaust stream from exhaust valve back. Think of it like a hose, put a 1/2 restrictor in the hose, and no matter how much pressure you put before the restrictor you are going to get 1/2" worth of water out of it, not take a fire hose and hook it up tp the hose after the restrictor, what has that done to increase flow through the restrictor, nothing, that's your cut out. If you want more flow, make the restrictor bigger, period. Now this is assuming everything is working properly on the wastegate, and you have no boost leaks, etc. That you believe opening a cut out after the turbo will have anything to do with back pressure through the turbine housing is a little surprising as you are giving a lot of advice on turbochargers, and that's a pretty basic turbo principle. Like I said please do not take offense to that, just a little surprising.
    I understand what you are saying, I have taken a couple of physics courses lol. The turbo and manifold is the back pressure already. I just don't understand how the supra guys are making 40-60whp just from doing 3" to 3.5" downpipes and more torque all through the powerband.

    http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-11...ust-test-tech/

    We will do more testing as time permits. I will have a cut out and drop in 17 psi wg springs in my car as well. Looks like the only cars having this problem is the TS guys. @aflatau and @Ak335i don't have this problem and are doing 30+ psi with beautiful logs.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, S55s, N63s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please click here for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Fort Mac, AB
    Posts
    1,405
    Rep Points
    771.1
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by fastgti69 Click here to enlarge
    I understand what you are saying, I have taken a couple of physics courses lol. The turbo and manifold is the back pressure already. I just don't understand how the supra guys are making 40-60whp just from doing 3" to 3.5" downpipes and more torque all through the powerband.

    http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-11...ust-test-tech/

    We will do more testing as time permits. I will have a cut out and drop in 17 psi wg springs in my car as well. Looks like the only cars having this problem is the TS guys. @aflatau and @Ak335i don't have this problem and are doing 30+ psi with beautiful logs.

    The Turbine will make more power with a greater pressure delta between the intake and exhaust sides. Once you are flowing enough air to get positive pressure in the exhaust at 3" you will see a power boost by going to 3.5" or installing a cut out.

    I'm not sure what A/R they are running but a good rule of thumb is to upsize the A/R 1-2 sizes when going from a undivided to divided housing.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Encino,CA
    Posts
    8,039
    Rep Points
    5,733.6
    Mentioned
    179 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    58


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Ingeniator Click here to enlarge
    The Turbine will make more power with a greater pressure delta between the intake and exhaust sides. Once you are flowing enough air to get positive pressure in the exhaust at 3" you will see a power boost by going to 3.5" or installing a cut out.

    I'm not sure what A/R they are running but a good rule of thumb is to upsize the A/R 1-2 sizes when going from a undivided to divided housing.
    They're running similar size AR as I am but a single scroll. We will install a cutout and see if it makes a difference in holding boost on my kit. If it doesnt change, I will get a sensor to check the back pressure. After that analysis we will move forward to 1.00 AR divided TS if needed and 17 psi wg springs.

    @Terry@BMS is there way to hook up the sensor to the JB4 to log the pressure as well. I will have Anthony email you an tell you exactly what he's talking about.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, S55s, N63s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please click here for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by fastgti69 Click here to enlarge
    They're running similar size AR as I am but a single scroll. We will install a cutout and see if it makes a difference in holding boost on my kit. If it doesnt change, I will get a sensor to check the back pressure. After that analysis we will move forward to 1.00 AR divided TS if needed and 17 psi wg springs.

    @Terry@BMS is there way to hook up the sensor to the JB4 to log the pressure as well. I will have Anthony email you an tell you exactly what he's talking about.
    If you put an EGT bung in the manifold that is easy to reach then you could connect a high temp mechanical boost gauge to monitor BP, and then swap that out later to monitor EGT. I don't have one on the 135i.

    Looking over the data again I think it has to be exhaust choking up though. Our 6466 has a larger AR (will update with exact number when I find it) and basically PWM and boost stay flat to redline. While the 5862 needs a lot more PWM to hold boost levels and when PWM maxes out boost noses over. Stiffer springs will help hold more boost but that is just an indication that it's working beyond its efficiency point I think. Maybe I'll just stay with the 15psi springs in the 5862 and accept it's only good for a solid 600whp in this application. It's not like anyone is faster yet and there is plenty of weight to remove from the car still. It might give you and Ando a chance to beat me at shift sector... Click here to enlarge

    In your case I'd swap in 17psi springs, the cutout, and get it bolted down on the dyno again. Email me for the updated JB4 ST firmware that lets you target and log up to 36psi.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Easiest way to monitor BP is to just tap the housing or manifold for a 1/8 pipe fitting, then run braided line to one of these, using 1/8 to -4 an adapter or something similar. Run the line as long as possible to keep the sensor alive, these are basically the sensors AEM uses for their BP kits, we have gone through 2 of them in like a year, so they last but not forever.

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

    That will give you proper 0-5V voltage to run any pressure gauge, datalogger, or other instrument that can turn a 0-5V signal into a number, if the JB4 can accept a 0-5v input you can even log it.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    102
    Rep Points
    220.8
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    It might give you and Ando a chance to beat me at shift sector... Click here to enlarge
    I will finally have a chance with you. I will make sure my GoPro is at a perfect angle Click here to enlarge
    Going on a no CARB diet. lol

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    197
    Rep Points
    311.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    No offense here sir, but there is no real back pressure after the turbo. The turbo is just an inline restriction in the exhaust stream from exhaust valve back. Think of it like a hose, put a 1/2 restrictor in the hose, and no matter how much pressure you put before the restrictor you are going to get 1/2" worth of water out of it, not take a fire hose and hook it up tp the hose after the restrictor, what has that done to increase flow through the restrictor, nothing, that's your cut out. If you want more flow, make the restrictor bigger, period. Now this is assuming everything is working properly on the wastegate, and you have no boost leaks, etc. That you believe opening a cut out after the turbo will have anything to do with back pressure through the turbine housing is a little surprising as you are giving a lot of advice on turbochargers, and that's a pretty basic turbo principle. Like I said please do not take offense to that, just a little surprising.
    No offense Tony, but that is not an accurate analogy. Exhaust gases (the fluid in question) are compressible, water (the fluid used in your analogy) is not (for all intents and purposes).

    It's pretty simple to pass a greater mass of air or (in this case) exhaust gas through an orifice--just increase the pressure. I seem to recall some device that we talk about a lot on this forum that performs this very task with intake air. Click here to enlarge

    Of course, with exhaust gases we're limited by the amount of pressure that can be applied to the fluid, hence this discussion.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    666
    Rep Points
    1,745.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Yes Reputation No
    An even better analogy would be a turbo being an exhaust restriction on an internal combustion engine. Wait...

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by EvanL Click here to enlarge
    No offense Tony, but that is not an accurate analogy. Exhaust gases (the fluid in question) are compressible, water (the fluid used in your analogy) is not (for all intents and purposes).

    It's pretty simple to pass a greater mass of air or (in this case) exhaust gas through an orifice--just increase the pressure. I seem to recall some device that we talk about a lot on this forum that performs this very task with intake air. Click here to enlarge

    Of course, with exhaust gases we're limited by the amount of pressure that can be applied to the fluid, hence this discussion.
    The analogy is pretty dumbed down so a anyone could understand it. No where did I say it was accurate as far as fluid dynamics are concerned etc, but I knew it wouldn't be long before someone who is real smart decided to get super smart on it. The point made was and is, opening up flow after a restriction is not going to help the restriction, ie a cut out when the turbine housing is already at its flow limit. But hey carry on with your scientific debate, I'll be over here building stuff.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    197
    Rep Points
    311.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    5 out of 7 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    The analogy is pretty dumbed down so a anyone could understand it. No where did I say it was accurate as far as fluid dynamics are concerned etc, but I knew it wouldn't be long before someone who is real smart decided to get super smart on it. The point made was and is, opening up flow after a restriction is not going to help the restriction, ie a cut out when the turbine housing is already at its flow limit. But hey carry on with your scientific debate, I'll be over here building stuff.
    No, the analogy isn't, "pretty dumbed down," it is misleading at best. The way that I read it is that the only way to get more fluid through a known orifice is to increase the size of the orifice. How could I have come to such wild conclusions, you ask?

    "If you want more flow, make the restrictor bigger, period."

    (I'm not forum-savvy enough to put that in a proper box quote)

    Frankly, it has come to my attention that whenever someone corrects you (this case) or the discussion reaches a point that's beyond your experience or education (other cases), it's followed with a swift attacking response. This is not the first time I've heard you tell someone to carry on with 'scientific debate' and that you'd rather be off building something, when, in fact, it took only 39 minutes to respond to this one insignificant forum message. This is a place to learn from others and build a community of knowledge--you would be wise to treat it as such instead of rebuffing others' information.

    Moving along, let's keep the discussion going...

    Terry, do you have any logs from your dyno runs that you could post?

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    Yes Reputation No
    Just to get this thing back on topic... I'm wondering what if any role the manifold design has on this. I took one or two fluid dynamics classes 20 years ago, but it's certainly not something I work with regularly. Maybe someone can offer their insight. If everything else is fixed what would perform better here: Lower volume runners, more heat retention, at a higher exhaust back pressure. Or larger higher volume runners, presumably also less heat retention, proportionally more dense, but at a lower back pressure.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Fort Mac, AB
    Posts
    1,405
    Rep Points
    771.1
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Just to get this thing back on topic... I'm wondering what if any role the manifold design has on this. I took one or two fluid dynamics classes 20 years ago, but it's certainly not something I work with regularly. Maybe someone can offer their insight. If everything else is fixed what would perform better here: Lower volume runners, more heat retention, at a higher exhaust back pressure. Or larger higher volume runners, presumably also less heat retention, proportionally more dense, but at a lower back pressure.
    Well if you wanted to calculate out the cf of the manifold and size it for the turbo that would be the ideal method. As far as practicality it depends what you want to promote. If you want fast spool over high rpm flow you want a short runner small tube. If you want max high rpm flow you want a longer runner with larger diameter to allow maximum flow. If you tune the manifold correctly you will still get pulse scavenging from a short to mid tube header with runners sized for turbo volume. The larger the pre turbo volume the more spool time/lag. Also to see the benefits of a divided housing turbo you need a divided manifold. I'm not sure if your fftec one is tony. Heat retention is important but you want to size runner length/volume and angle and then choose the best material to accomplish that while running at suspected EGT's. I'm still surprised most of the kits are 304/304L. They should be 321/347 or the higher end manifolds should be using inconel 718 as it would cut weight.

    Take this all with a grain of salt I only run industrial process equipment not design it. I was too lazy to go to school for 4 years to make less money. I do however have a power engineering degree(Trade) that gives me some practical background in what I'm talking about.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by EvanL Click here to enlarge
    No, the analogy isn't, "pretty dumbed down," it is misleading at best. The way that I read it is that the only way to get more fluid through a known orifice is to increase the size of the orifice. How could I have come to such wild conclusions, you ask?

    "If you want more flow, make the restrictor bigger, period."

    (I'm not forum-savvy enough to put that in a proper box quote)

    Frankly, it has come to my attention that whenever someone corrects you (this case) or the discussion reaches a point that's beyond your experience or education (other cases), it's followed with a swift attacking response. This is not the first time I've heard you tell someone to carry on with 'scientific debate' and that you'd rather be off building something, when, in fact, it took only 39 minutes to respond to this one insignificant forum message. This is a place to learn from others and build a community of knowledge--you would be wise to treat it as such instead of rebuffing others' information.

    Moving along, let's keep the discussion going...

    Terry, do you have any logs from your dyno runs that you could post?
    You are going to have to excuse my bedside manner today. My tech pulled a pretty epic blunder and instead of getting things done, I am dealing with trying to damage control. Not in the best of moods. Sorry to derail Terry. Honestly I do not think you have a problem at all with the manifold, that manifold has plenty of flow, the housing is just small, its the equivalent of running a .63 AR Single Scroll. Swap it out, lose a little spool, pick up top end.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    Sorry to derail Terry. Honestly I do not think you have a problem at all with the manifold, that manifold has plenty of flow, the housing is just small, its the equivalent of running a .63 AR Single Scroll. Swap it out, lose a little spool, pick up top end.
    No problem. On the manifold I know this one flows really well. I'm wondering what effect going to a small volume twin scroll, say something like Jake's only in a twin scroll format, would have on both spool and higher RPM flow. Since the turbo is the choke point would it even matter?
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    No problem. On the manifold I know this one flows really well. I'm wondering what effect going to a small volume twin scroll, say something like Jake's only in a twin scroll format, would have on both spool and higher RPM flow. Since the turbo is the choke point would it even matter?
    This is a good question. This was exactly our plans when we were going to do a single. We actually were in talks to make a cummins style bottom mount TS with Doc Race before they dropped the ball on the Stage 3. Now its become a pretty heavy back burner with all the kits out there and trying to get the shotguns, and stage 3 out the door. We will revisit it as soon as we have a chance.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    30
    Rep Points
    111.9
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    4 out of 4 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    QUOTE=fastgti69;587290]I understand what you are saying, I have taken a couple of physics courses lol. The turbo and manifold is the back pressure already. I just don't understand how the supra guys are making 40-60whp just from doing 3" to 3.5" downpipes and more torque all through the powerband..[/QUOTE]



    The AMS EMS on the Supra has an anti-lag feature, this allows the use of larger housing, turbine and compressor wheel and still have good engine response but with much lower back pressure.
    You can also program the anti-lag feature for a better launch, the negative ignition timing and excess fuel allow for a late burn that builds boost quickly (due to the high gas pressure on the turbine) without the use of excessive RPM


    MOTEC has been doing anti-lag for over a decade, their stand-alone systems offer much more tuning capabilities
    I have to wait a day to post the Link

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    72
    Rep Points
    83.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Just to get this thing back on topic... I'm wondering what if any role the manifold design has on this. I took one or two fluid dynamics classes 20 years ago, but it's certainly not something I work with regularly. Maybe someone can offer their insight. If everything else is fixed what would perform better here: Lower volume runners, more heat retention, at a higher exhaust back pressure. Or larger higher volume runners, presumably also less heat retention, proportionally more dense, but at a lower back pressure.
    Sounds like you are an electrical engineer? I know a little bit about fluid dynamics (I took a few classes last year). I'll give some input when I'm in from of a computer. But as Tony has said, that turbine housing is your choke point.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,949
    Rep Points
    2,882.2
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    29


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Just to get this thing back on topic... I'm wondering what if any role the manifold design has on this. I took one or two fluid dynamics classes 20 years ago, but it's certainly not something I work with regularly. Maybe someone can offer their insight. If everything else is fixed what would perform better here: Lower volume runners, more heat retention, at a higher exhaust back pressure. Or larger higher volume runners, presumably also less heat retention, proportionally more dense, but at a lower back pressure.
    I talked with Full-Race the other day and they were test fitting their prototype turbo kit. Maybe you should just wait and see what they have in store or contact them to ask about beta testing? They generally have the most desirable designs backed by actual engineering.
    2011 E90 M3 \ Melbourne Rot Metallic

    Click here to enlarge

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by lulz_m3 Click here to enlarge
    I talked with Full-Race the other day and they were test fitting their prototype turbo kit. Maybe you should just wait and see what they have in store or contact them to ask about beta testing? They generally have the most desirable designs backed by actual engineering.
    Yup, Full Race is doing a kit too, been in the works for a long while now. Can you say floooooooded single turbo market. Also they do all their testing in house, they won't be doing any beta testing.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Speaking of Full Race. Terry check this out and you will see exactly what I am referring to. They compared the exact same car on a Single Scroll .85 AR to a .80 TS, car picked up spool, and low end torque but traded it off for top end power, you can also see boost dropping off just like your car is doing. This why the VM kit is making more than you and can hold boost longer, that you are spooling the same, is most likely due to the manifold design. Honestly looking at that graph, I think I prefer the single scroll set up, the spool isn't that much better, they reach peak boost about the same time, the TS just builds a little quicker in lower boost

    https://www.facebook.com/FullRaceMot...117527/?type=1

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by CannonFodder Click here to enlarge
    Sounds like you are an electrical engineer? I know a little bit about fluid dynamics (I took a few classes last year). I'll give some input when I'm in from of a computer. But as Tony has said, that turbine housing is your choke point.
    I'm a BSCS but moved in to embedded & electrical engineering out of necessity. Click here to enlarge
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by lulz_m3 Click here to enlarge
    I talked with Full-Race the other day and they were test fitting their prototype turbo kit. Maybe you should just wait and see what they have in store or contact them to ask about beta testing? They generally have the most desirable designs backed by actual engineering.
    I'd be very interested to see the data! Sometimes it seems like I'm the only one posting anything about these kits and we don't even sell them...
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    Speaking of Full Race. Terry check this out and you will see exactly what I am referring to. They compared the exact same car on a Single Scroll .85 AR to a .80 TS, car picked up spool, and low end torque but traded it off for top end power, you can also see boost dropping off just like your car is doing. This why the VM kit is making more than you and can hold boost longer, that you are spooling the same, is most likely due to the manifold design. Honestly looking at that graph, I think I prefer the single scroll set up, the spool isn't that much better, they reach peak boost about the same time, the TS just builds a little quicker in lower boost

    https://www.facebook.com/FullRaceMot...117527/?type=1
    Interesting data! Looks like they picked up 300rpm but lost 2psi up top. I wonder if they stuck the same larger AR turbo on the TS manifold if they'd wind up better off.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    668
    Rep Points
    1,593.3
    Mentioned
    68 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16


    Yes Reputation No
    Ecuts and better flowing exhaust make more power because the pressure differential across the turbine is greater. Bigger a/r housings make more power because the throat is larger. Both are things to keep an eye on when you start splitting hairs.

    This manifold should have emap ports if you're going to play musical turbos and housings. True data would require two ports on a divided manifold. Divided manifold WILL run different backpressures from bank to bank. This separation increases the higher the backpressure. Emap bungs should have nothing between them and the head ports. I.e. placed headside of the wastegate. After all, the true use of this data is to see what the exhaust port sees and essentially determine how out of wack engine efficiency is effected.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by andy_divers Click here to enlarge
    Ecuts and better flowing exhaust make more power because the pressure differential across the turbine is greater. Bigger a/r housings make more power because the throat is larger. Both are things to keep an eye on when you start splitting hairs.

    This manifold should have emap ports if you're going to play musical turbos and housings. True data would require two ports on a divided manifold. Divided manifold WILL run different backpressures from bank to bank. This separation increases the higher the backpressure. Emap bungs should have nothing between them and the head ports. I.e. placed headside of the wastegate. After all, the true use of this data is to see what the exhaust port sees and essentially determine how out of wack engine efficiency is effected.
    Looking forward to some people actually plumbing some sensors into these things besides us so we can see some more data for the singles.

    Terry, I am not sure they changed the manifold, I think just swapped the turbos. EFR housing options are limited on the 7163, that is the largest divided housing they make at this point, you can go bigger if you go with a 7064 or 7670, but the 7163 is there newest offering and has some exciting technology we have only seen in the newest turbos on the market, such as the 2015 VW Golf R and GTI's. I would go with a Single Scoll in this configuration, 300 RPM down that low wouldn't be worth the top end for me personally. I highly doubt the Ecut is making any difference in power since you're maxing out flow in the housing, did you dyno with the cut on and off?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •