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.
So ....took the resonator out . Sound is perfect now . Quiet for cruising then when WG opens ....loud AF without being overbearing. Just what I was after.
The "one " that you produce commercially at sell to the mass market getting incredibly rich and like Bill Gates? Oh wait it's for an RX8 which is an incredibly small market of people that enjoy premium handling at less than premium pricing. Still great to see the further developments.
Did a decently long test drive yesterday on my favorite windy road ...it was awesome . Also did some more testing and found an emap issue, as a result have decided to take manifold out again for some alterations.
Disassembly with this new setup is an absolute breeze !
Reinstated the Twin scroll functionality and picked up 150 rpm spool which was nice, but still has an emap issue . So ............. will pull turbo out again tomorrow for another tweak to setup.
So I fitted the 0.83AR turbine housing (vs the 1.06) and this time the result is ................... great ! Manifold is obviously more balanced now with more Wastegating taking flow away from the side of the turbo that was showing high pressure.
Now can spool to 12psi by 3600rpm which is a further 400 rpm improvement. And the kicker ...no reduction in power up top, minimal change in EMAP!
Cheers Curtis. This is the result I was hoping for way back when I first started this thread! It's only taken me five years ....lol
*Great spool up *Manifold is super compact
*Factory ground clearance *The turbo and associated pipework all fits in beautifully and is easy to assemble/disassemble. *Heat management is great *Good flow paths for all associated pipework *Boost control is great with just a 38mm wastegate ... although after fitting the 0.83 there is now some boost creep to 8psi on a 6psi spring. Not a concern though.
Now remains to be seen if it will still produce a genuine 400whp at the dyno!
Very interesting and great result. Both of you guys; and Slash too, have excelled where most others either failed or fell way short.
So it’d seem like there is maybe more to this than you actually stated. Is there something else different between the two turbine housings besides AR?
.
Very interesting and great result. Both of you guys; and Slash too, have excelled where most others either failed or fell way short.
So it’d seem like there is maybe more to this than you actually stated. Is there something else different between the two turbine housings besides AR?
.
thanks .
Nope just AR . It's just the weird **** that happens when you have an unconventional design.
So here it is. Deliberately didn't post a pic of it till it was tested as I'm sure many would question how it could possibly work.
It may look like it is restrictive.... but if you think about what is actually happening here ...no............ it isn't.
Sure, the siamese ports don't have great flow dynamics (they are already terrible per Mazdas design) but both end ports do. It's almost the reverse of my original design and what I learn't from that made me realise that this could work.
I encorporated the twin scroll design which has meant that the manifold only suits a certain setup or gets out of balance (which it was with the 1.06 AR turbine hsg. ) . The design will work with an open housing too and I think may suit the new Garrett G series turbos particularly well.
W/out knowing of any internal "magic" which m/h been incorporated...it's reminiscent of the Greddy manifold design...which I believe was thought to be restrictive. Perhaps it wasn't the Greddy mani..., but only the turbo.
W/out knowing of any internal "magic" which m/h been incorporated...it's reminiscent of the Greddy manifold design...which I believe was thought to be restrictive. Perhaps it wasn't the Greddy mani..., but only the turbo.
Have a think about what is happening here under full boost at high rpm ............... left port exits directly into left side of turbine, siamese ports exit into right side of turbine , right port exits (almost) directly into wastegate. The log merely serves to balance flow between the siamese and right hand port.
Very little collision of gases , very short flow paths .... very little induced backpressure.
Compare with a Greddy ..... ALL the gases colliding together at one point to feed a (much smaller)T25 flange ...no comparison from a flow perspective.
Have a think about what is happening here under full boost at high rpm ............... left port exits directly into left side of turbine, siamese ports exit into right side of turbine , right port exits (almost) directly into wastegate. The log merely serves to balance flow between the siamese and right hand port.
Very little collision of gases , very short flow paths .... very little induced backpressure.
Compare with a Greddy ..... ALL the gases colliding together at one point to feed a (much smaller)T25 flange ...no comparison from a flow perspective.
Ah ok, the combination of short runs..., minimized reversion... d/t the twin scroll, and synergy of the (right port), (left + siamese ports) divided flow dynamics achieve the earlier boost threshold. 👍🏽
Quite a bit more going on compared to the Greddy...
Edit: Hmmm....Puff...puff...yes, I think I'll pass...
well it does have flow restriction, which is exactly why the lower AR appears to work better/balance it out. That's exactly what it’s balancing.
Imo if you really want to do something interesting, figure out how to put a heavily ported 84-85 GSLE center housing in place of the Renesis center housing to eliminate the siamese exhaust port
.
well it does have flow restriction, which is exactly why the lower AR appears to work better/balance it out. That's exactly what it’s balancing.
.
Don't think you understand . The reason the smaller AR works is because the pressure is even on both sides of the twin scroll now. With the 1.06 , the left side was not getting enough flow , so the right side was having to do more work which meant higher backpressure. Now that it's even, the right side doesn't need so much backpressure to power the turbine.
Ideally , it would work better if that were achieved with the 1.06.
maybe you don’t understand why the pressure wasn’t even on the larger AR?
Maybe , but it's way more likely that it's you that doesn't understand. Given that you don't have any data and are just throwing out theories on something you have no practical knowledge of.
08-07-2020, 07:58 PM
. Also did some more testing and found an emap issue, as a result have decided to take manifold out again for some alterations. 
Is there something else different between the two turbine housings besides AR?
