|
Just picking a little man. I don't know about greddy, but I've just about found the way to wrestle mine in and out. I can manage to get it without touching the engine mount on the other side. The hardest thing for me is getting the 2" pipe from the turbo hooked up. That's a Tight effin squeeze.
|
Originally Posted by Brettus
(Post 4714524)
Turbo is all ready to go back in . Just getting ready to do battle again ...
|
He probably hit the point where the beer was no longer cutting the pain of the bruised knuckles.
|
Nope.
He got it in. Currently trouble shooting I believe. Travis |
Tried PMing already but this phone hates my. I may know what's going on there. Please stop boosting for now. I'll PM you when I get to my computer.
|
The 0.83 housing didn't work .....basically .
Going to plan D. |
Sorry to hear it, Brett. Glad to see you have a backup plan.
|
Something isn't right. No way should it basically match the larger housing to 5k, then hold essentially the same differential through the upper range. The peak differential seems right to me, but it should have been stronger down low then tapered off and crossed over more gradually higher in the powerband.
|
I was guessing it was a shift in required timing due to the increased back-pressure/temperatures.:dunno:
If it's not a drastic hardware problem it's got to be tune related. And if it's that noticeable it can't be good. |
I guess we need to wait for exactly how it didn't work?
|
Well I doubt it's any higher than with the Greddy derivative. It could be anything, mechanical or otherwise.
Too bad we can't get a GTX3576 comparison For a real-world example showing the effect of compressor efficiency on engine power, we go back to the Novak Time Attack Subaru. The dyno plots show a GTX3576R compared to a GTX3582R with the two turbos being tuned by Church Automotive to make the same power. Of course the GTX3576R spools up faster (the GTX3576R is a ~600whp turbo whereas the GTX3582R is ~725whp), but you can see for the same torque and power a higher engine speeds, the GTX3576R requires more boost pressure compared to the GTX3582R. This is due to smaller 76mm compressor having lower efficiency compared to the 82mm compressor and the high engine speed operating points. The lower compressor efficiency of the 76mm compressor means more shaft power is required from the turbine. Therefore, the turbine pressure ratio is higher resulting in greater back pressure. Thus, higher compressor boost pressure from the smaller compressor is required to make the same engine torque https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...a752b4c6f8.jpg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...9d74e40d60.jpg |
I actually think I know what the problem was . But seeing as I'm not having much luck lately I thought I would wait till plan D is tested before posting about it.
|
Ok, hope it works out.
|
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
(Post 4715829)
Ok, hope it works out.
|
all this secret talk!
|
|
Quick update :
Plan D .... (convert to 0.83 single scroll ) got all my torque back after losing it on plan C . I'm fairly sure making a change to the Siamese sleeve is what screwed up plan C so badly. BUT ............. LOST about 150-200 rpm of spoolup . Plan E : sending turbo back to supplier to re-machine the compressor cover . I think it has too much clearance on the radius part and possibly the face adjacent to the exducer . Crossing fingers ! |
Just curious what you tried to do with the sleeve? You previously mentioned it being cracked and having the option to replace it. Did you just remove it entirely?
I would still suggest that the size relationship between the compressor and turbine is not in your favor for a rotary application. |
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
(Post 4717192)
Just curious what you tried to do with the sleeve? You previously mentioned it being cracked and having the option to replace it. Did you just remove it entirely?
.
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
(Post 4717192)
I would still suggest that the size relationship between the compressor and turbine is not in your favor for a rotary application.
|
Virtual dyno at 13,15 and 17psi . Seems to be at about the limit for the system as power increases with increased boost are quite small .
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...5081432296.png |
Just for fun with dynojet correction :)
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...3bcb69d8f3.png Lookout Slash ! |
Originally Posted by Brettus
(Post 4717093)
Quick update :
Plan D .... (convert to 0.83 single scroll ) got all my torque back after losing it on plan C . I'm fairly sure making a change to the Siamese sleeve is what screwed up plan C so badly. BUT ............. LOST about 150-200 rpm of spoolup . Plan E : sending turbo back to supplier to re-machine the compressor cover . I think it has too much clearance on the radius part and possibly the face adjacent to the exducer . Crossing fingers ! A few Qs. Will you be moving back to the larger twin scroll turbine once the compressor housing has been re-machined? Will you be retaining the modified siamese sleeve? If retaining the (suspected) higher flowing siamese sleeve, will you increase the pipe size after the siamese primary meets with the front port, between this collector and the turbine flange? If the siamese port is flowing that much more, you'd probably want to reduce the backpressure now experienced by the front rotor. Of course this would likely hurt your spool up. Also in hind site after your testing to date, is the T3 still preferred over the T4? You may have covered this earlier in the thread, but rough calculations for x-sectional area (units are mm squared):
|
Originally Posted by JimmyBlack
(Post 4717257)
Been hanging out for an update/announcement. This thread has more suspense than X-factor.
A few Qs. Will you be moving back to the larger twin scroll turbine once the compressor housing has been re-machined?
Originally Posted by JimmyBlack
(Post 4717257)
Will you be retaining the modified siamese sleeve? If retaining the (suspected) higher flowing siamese sleeve, will you increase the pipe size after the siamese primary meets with the front port, between this collector and the turbine flange? If the siamese port is flowing that much more, you'd probably want to reduce the backpressure now experienced by the front rotor. Of course this would likely hurt your spool up. The point is .......... with a smaller AR housing , more flow goes through the WG ,which is serviced by the siamese. No change in pipe size necessary as there shouldn't be additional flow through that pipe at peak hp as the WG will be flowing almost half of what the engine produces.
Originally Posted by JimmyBlack
(Post 4717257)
Also in hind site after your testing to date, is the T3 still preferred over the T4? You may have covered this earlier in the thread, but rough calculations for x-sectional area (units are mm squared):
I think the T3 is perfect |
what is Maf V looking like?
|
Originally Posted by yomomspimp06
(Post 4717270)
what is Maf V looking like?
Flow is around 430-440 g/s FWIW . |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:33 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands