When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yet ..... the 3582 has, up until recently , been considered THE rotary turbo of choice
Sorry I could not remember the size. Its a compturbo unit. A CT2-5862 with a tial 1.06 rear housing. All of the comp turbo units feature the billet compressor wheel. Turbine dimensions are the same as a gt35r, and compressor the same size as gtx3076r.
Sorry I could not remember the size. Its a compturbo unit. A CT2-5862 with a tial 1.06 rear housing. All of the comp turbo units feature the billet compressor wheel. Turbine dimensions are the same as a gt35r, and compressor the same size as gtx3076r.
Nice ! That should be a pretty good comparison with my setup . Very interested to see how you get on !
With that turbo , you could run 2x 45ID runners to the t4 divided flange and still use the siamese to WG . Down pipe wouldn't even need to be that large with no WG gases going through it ...
All you're doing is moving the power up the rpm range. How much power do you need; 550+ at the rw isn't enough? I would rather have the response and don't agree, but that's just my opinion.
Sorry I could not remember the size. Its a compturbo unit. A CT2-5862 with a tial 1.06 rear housing. All of the comp turbo units feature the billet compressor wheel. Turbine dimensions are the same as a gt35r, and compressor the same size as gtx3076r.
All you're doing is moving the power up the rpm range. How much power do you need; 550+ at the rw isn't enough? I would rather have the response and don't agree, but that's just my opinion.
.
You couldn't run the smaller AR twin scroll because it's IWG . Unless of course you split the siamese flow to seperate the two rotors. So the 1.05 becomes the next best thing.
The spoolup on these EFRs is so spectacular ......... it's a moot point anyway.
And no , I'm aiming for 400 - 450 reliably . with the emphasis on that last word .Something that has not been achieved to date .
But if I can achieve that , someone else may want to take the next step perhaps ...?
you can handle it several different ways, but if that's all you want then the 1.06 is too much and only adds more cons than pros again IMO
All hypothetical because I'm not ever planning to do that . But IMO , if you are going top mount , the ONLY reason to do so (apart from the bling factor) is to give you the ability to choose any turbo you want and make BIG power.
That 7670 is too small for that aim . As a side note ..... I see the first guy to fit one recently blew his engine AND turbo . ...... Maybe..................... because it's overspooling ??????
8374 makes that easily without the laggy 1.06 AR, again no need to go there
your facts are off, he broke the front plate where the turbo oil feed line was, turbo seems to be fine, but clearly it wasn't a turbo failure issue that took out the motor
Originally Posted by BLUE TII @ RX7Club
Sad news from my garage.
I just started stripping down my TII and got to the turbo; the no play but the 7670 shaft takes some effort to spin now.
Turbo probably toast from when the front plate cracked right at the turbo oil feed passage.
After talking to a friend who had a similar experience of cranky turbo I put some Seafoam in the turbo oil feel and let it sit overnight and spun the turbo up while hosing WD40 into the turbo oil feel hose.
It spins better than when it was new (wd40 is thinner than motor oil) and has that tiny bit of shaft play back like when new instead of feeling all bound up.
Hopefully it was just coked up from cooking the little bit of oil that was in it on hot shut down after the engine failure. I guess I will see what is in the turbo oil drain hose when I get that off!
not compared to old technology, but the main basis to my opinion is there's no need to go there, larger A/R on an otherwise all-else-being-equal turbo is always slower to respond, always ...
Originally Posted by Brettus
I didn't state it as fact
Still , cracked front plate from what ? Only a major detonation would cause that.
So you just say anything to get other people to believe what you want??? (just joking back atchya )
Detonation is always a possibility an any turbo system. The reasons why are endless ... got anything to offer other than speculation?
not compared to old technology, but the main basis to my opinion is there's no need to go there, larger A/R on an otherwise all-else-being-equal turbo is always slower to respond, always ...
True ... we seem to be going around in circles on this one so I'll stop .
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
Detonation is always a possibility an any turbo system. The reasons why are endless ... got anything to offer other than speculation?
Nope ... just speculation . Time will tell whether these guys running the 7670 well into the choke zone is a really bad idea .........................or not .
I suspect that people will realise in time that the 8374 spoolup is so good that there is no reason to overspin a smaller turbo anyway and people will just stop using it .
The dyno graphs for both the 0.92 and 1.06 ARs on a 13B are out there, i just didn't want to belabor the point either. The 1.06 is more like an on/off switch below 4000 with a very steep curve and almost nothing at 3000 compared to the .92 making 15 psi there
The dyno graphs for both the 0.92 and 1.06 ARs on a 13B are out there, i just didn't want to belabor the point either. The 1.06 is more like an on/off switch below 4000 with a very steep curve and almost nothing at 3000 compared to the .92 making 15 psi there
Can't find one ..... got a link ? Would be interesting to see what the manifold differences are too .
I feel like you still don't fully get the AR vs turbine design vs engine requirement relationship
it's not just a 1.05, it's a T4 1.05, which is not the same as a T3 1.05. I can't see a 500+hp 2-rotor engine having sufficient wastegate control through the restricted siamese center port, but maybe I'm wrong.
Turblown had a good post in Hoss-05's thread about why a larger than normal (normal = piston engine) turbine wheel is a better fit on the rotary. Since you had participated in the discussion, you may have forgotten about it from several years ago ...
as for an EFR 7670, more than a few highly experienced turbo gurus think it's perfectly acceptable for up to 400 rwhp 2-rotor application. Their reasoning is that for a street/autox application the low rpm boost response is superior to the 8374 and they aren't running continuous WOT for long periods of time. As always, the right configuration and tune matters.
As you eluded to earlier, a T3 1.06 with a GT3582R is a known quantity. You won't have any real issues and should hit your goal fine *assuming* the 3rd-port wastegate deal works. That doesn't mean it couldn't have been improved on with a different compressor wheel and turbine housing. You are already risking on the manifold setup so it was reasonable to play it safe otherwise.
07-07-2015, 09:01 PM
) 
