1 registered members (386ka),
201
guests, and 3
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums69
Topics113,645
Posts1,341,473
Members1,820
|
Most Online731 Jan 14th, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132214
19/06/2006 08:32
19/06/2006 08:32
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
See that you have .64 housing right?
How is your spool up without the induction mod will??
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132215
19/06/2006 13:05
19/06/2006 13:05
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 286 Germany
Stichl
Making a profit
|
Making a profit
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 286
Germany
|
Hmmm... I don't think that I did anything wrong to get this big lag... I think it is the turbo itself. Remember - The compressor wheel is the same like in the GT30-units. Therefore it is clear for me that you will gain a lot of lag with a GT2871R... Before I had installed a GT28R-unit with the same setup (one exception: the exhaust + pipe was a restrictive one - means the assumptions even were worse...). Nevertheless I got almost no lag - even a better respone than the original T28 unit... I did a run on rolling roads... here is the result (sorry for cutting off the peak power - the setting of the plotter was wrong when doing the run. We did not suspect such a peak power)... http://service.gmx.net/mc/5DV0MNAfl65qfCRGEJTIa6Bd9QYNMDpress:"multimediacenter starten", then you can see the "late response"... The engine has original internals - means original rods (lightened + shot peening) + original pistons. Next month I will have the possibility to gauge the length of the rods - then I will see, if the ~500NM will have damaged / compressed the rods (have been installed then for about 10000km). Juergen
20VT coupegrale 4x4
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132216
19/06/2006 17:47
19/06/2006 17:47
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Oh god is so much power/boost really possible on standard internals? :O I thought 350 was tops
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132217
19/06/2006 17:53
19/06/2006 17:53
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367 Staffordshire
Nigel
OP
Forum veteran
|
OP
Forum veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367
Staffordshire
|
I've spoken with Craig again at TD - he feels that Stichl has probably bought an off-the-shelf GT2871R with a 0.86 AR turbine housing - hence the lag.
Here's the exact spec of my turbo:
0.64AR turbine housing 76 trim turbine wheel (same as GT28RS)
48trim compressor wheel , with 49.19mm inducer and 71mm exducer, in a 60AR housing
1 bar actuator
Basically, the GT28RS turbine side, in 0.64 AR form is known to be good for the Coupe, and as long as the engine can flow the exhaust gasses, is plenty enough to drive a bigger compressor.
The 71mm compressor side of the 2871 will simply flow more air, without costing lag fom the turbine side.
I'm not 100% sure I understand all the above, but Craig is certain that I'll have no more lag than a 0.64 GT28RS, but will have better power than a 0.86 GT28RS
Best of both worlds?
Lets see......
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132218
19/06/2006 18:10
19/06/2006 18:10
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi nelson, ive put what i get for spool up in the post just before yours. The only induction mod i have is a cone filter. not a straight induction pipe or anything yet
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132219
19/06/2006 18:15
19/06/2006 18:15
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I have bought the one with 0.86 turbine also, and as i can see this is the same specs as the 2860rs 0.64 turbine specs: 53.8mm and 76 trim, so i dont get the extra lag issue? Anyways its still rated as 0.86 in the 2871rs, so i guess the housing must be different in some way...i guess i just bought myself into a laggy situation Well, lets see
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132220
19/06/2006 19:09
19/06/2006 19:09
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nigel, I can't wait to see the results , sounds interesting bbecause I too have seen websites saying the 2871R being no more laggy than the 28rs, but then also others and acutal installs that have shown this. Our cars will be very similarly modified, except I don't have the gas lowed head or the forged pistons ,but she ran 363 bhp and 323lb/ft this morning. What should put your mind at rest that this was at 30degC, and the clutch is holding well, so for sure the GTA /Walkers combo can handle 320 lb/ft and 360bhp+ , although I know when its cold ,she becomes even faster and on very cold days sub 5degC the clutch can slip, g*d knows what the torque must be like then I think with a more progressive turbo, it will be less strain on the clutch anyway Joe
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132221
19/06/2006 19:14
19/06/2006 19:14
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hey Doc
Nice results!! Are you then running on standard internals other than the C&B cams, all other standard?
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132222
19/06/2006 19:20
19/06/2006 19:20
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Stichl just watched your video and rolling road results, thats an amazing curve, incredible power band between 4250 and 5250!!
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132223
19/06/2006 19:32
19/06/2006 19:32
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi yogisdk yep, standard pistons rods and standard head. Joe its right at the limit of this turbo though, anymore boost and then I will start to get predetonation. I think more torque and maybe a little bit more power would be available on a cold day.
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132224
19/06/2006 19:34
19/06/2006 19:34
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367 Staffordshire
Nigel
OP
Forum veteran
|
OP
Forum veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367
Staffordshire
|
I've just spent a while trying to learn how to read compressor maps and how it will apply to my car. Basically, I THINK I should be able to get over 1 bar by 3,000rpm and still be close to the turbo's efficiency island (would be about 71% efficiency) take a look here http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/catelog/Turbochargers/GT28/GT2871R_743347_1.htmUsing a VE of 95% (which according to Begbie would be about right for a car with a flowed head), I've calculated that (everything else being optimum) it should deliver the following: 1 bar at 3,000 rpm @ 72% efficiency 1 bar at 4,000rpm at 75% (max) efficiency 1.5 bar at 5,000rpm at 75% (max) efficiency 1.5 bar at 6,00 rpm towards the edge of the efficiency island (about 70%) 1.2 bar at the redline at 70% efficient I also reckon it should give about 300bhp @ 1 - 1.1 bar All of this is using intake temps in the region of 25 - 30 degrees - any cooler and I can expect a bit more.
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132225
19/06/2006 19:36
19/06/2006 19:36
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Didn't noticed That's a very very good spool up for a RS unit If you have spoll up just after 2.5k you didn't noticed more lag than the original unit for sure So how many mates are saying that their units only start to spool at around 3.2 or above
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132226
19/06/2006 19:48
19/06/2006 19:48
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nigel, can you explain a bit more how to calculate these values, also if i am using the .86 housing? I would really like to know how much power I can expect with 1.3 bar or so, and when will this come (on std engine internals)...
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132227
19/06/2006 19:57
19/06/2006 19:57
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I dont know who else is running the same unit at the minute and has got it laggier. i think my 3" downpipe and decat system helps a lot though
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132228
19/06/2006 19:59
19/06/2006 19:59
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Good results there Doc need to go down in january to the rollers and do a power run me thinks as i bet the fuelling will need to be setup again for the amount of air you could flow on a cold day with a good FMIC it should be covered in ice at speed, i know the oil cooler sometimes gets it as ive seen it on my own coop but that was about 80-90leptons average when it was about 2deg 'c outside. this winter i think i may put a bit of card in front of half the oil cooler to help keep the oil a bit warmer on a run
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132229
19/06/2006 20:13
19/06/2006 20:13
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
LOl, Nigel, yours will be one of the most talked about coupes over the next month!!,.. even on my summer hols, I am sure and be sad and log in from time to time to see how the monster is shaping up ! Kingpleb joe
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132231
19/06/2006 20:28
19/06/2006 20:28
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,295 Sandhurst
Begbie
Ex El Presidente
|
Ex El Presidente
I AM a Coop
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,295
Sandhurst
|
Quote:
Nigel, can you explain a bit more how to calculate these values, also if i am using the .86 housing? I would really like to know how much power I can expect with 1.3 bar or so, and when will this come (on std engine internals)...
Understanding compressor maps
Refer to my post at the top of the page, simple calculation to get a understanding of airflow / efficiency, or for anyone who doesn't want to read it, i will paste it here
Quote:
Simple way:
the pressure ratio you have to always add 1bar on, this is for atmospheric pressure, so if you want to run 1.5bar of boost, you need to look at 2.5bar on the compressor map.
The lbs/min is your airflow. From various scouring of the t'internet it seems 1lb/min = 10bhp, so if you know what your BHP aim is, you know can work out your airflow.
So in whittlers case he is doing 320bhp/10=32lbs/min
There is a more complicated way of working your airflow out which is...
(L x rpm x VE x Pr)/5660
L = Litres rpm = Max rpm you want to run VE = Volumetric efficency (90% for std engine, 95% for headwork and 100 or 105% for race engine) Pr = Pressure (boost)
So for my engine it would be something like this
(2 x 8000 x 95 x 2.2) / 5660 = 590.81CFM
to convert this into lbs/min multiply it by 0.7
590.81 x 0.7 = 413 (add a decimal place in)
so my airflow @ 8000rpm with 1.2bar boost is 41.3lbs/min, so you go and look at the compressor map and plot the boost against the airflow, then you know whow efficent it is at max rpm
Your car is Usain Bolt with wellies
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132232
19/06/2006 20:32
19/06/2006 20:32
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
really great thread (nigel,doc,fergie,will)
oh , and you too Stichl , phenomenal power !!
cheers.
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132233
19/06/2006 20:38
19/06/2006 20:38
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Looks good and maybe try and get a pic of it this winter should i get it again but i hope to avoid it as it cant be good for the oil. Noticed this in the xantia as well coming back from stranrear down the A74 and M6 at the top that the engine temp would never go above 60 either Anyway back on topic i cant wait to see what this gives you Nigel, hopefully it wont be too laggy if at all and maybe be another route for others to follow. How much is this costing you from turbo dynamics if i may ask as im guessing about £1200+?
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132234
19/06/2006 22:37
19/06/2006 22:37
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367 Staffordshire
Nigel
OP
Forum veteran
|
OP
Forum veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367
Staffordshire
|
Quote:
How much is this costing you from turbo dynamics if i may ask as im guessing about £1200+?
No, you can't ask - my wife occasionally looks over my shoulder when I'm browsing the forum
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132236
19/06/2006 23:20
19/06/2006 23:20
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Gulp thats not going to be cheap then!!! lol
I bet she wishs she had let you buy the massa when she sees all the bits come for it!!!
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132237
20/06/2006 02:53
20/06/2006 02:53
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 286 Germany
Stichl
Making a profit
|
Making a profit
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 286
Germany
|
Quote:
I've spoken with Craig again at TD - he feels that Stichl has probably bought an off-the-shelf GT2871R with a 0.86 AR turbine housing - hence the lag.
Here's the exact spec of my turbo:
0.64AR turbine housing 76 trim turbine wheel (same as GT28RS)
48trim compressor wheel , with 49.19mm inducer and 71mm exducer, in a 60AR housing
1 bar actuator
Basically, the GT28RS turbine side, in 0.64 AR form is known to be good for the Coupe, and as long as the engine can flow the exhaust gasses, is plenty enough to drive a bigger compressor.
The 71mm compressor side of the 2871 will simply flow more air, without costing lag fom the turbine side.
I'm not 100% sure I understand all the above, but Craig is certain that I'll have no more lag than a 0.64 GT28RS, but will have better power than a 0.86 GT28RS
Best of both worlds?
Lets see......
Meanwhile there are are three different types of gt2871r.
You will install the smaller version - http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/catelog/Turbochargers/GT28/GT2871R_743347_1.htm capable to support 385HP
I have the version with bigger compressor wheel capable of doing 475HP http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/catelog/Turbochargers/GT28/GT2871R_743347_2.htm
Interesting would be the very new version 15 - have a look at this: http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/catelog/Turbochargers/GT28/GT2871R_472560_15.htm This turbo is capable of doing 460HP and should be the best GT2871R regarding response!
All these turbos are off-the-shelf. Juergen
Last edited by Stichl; 20/06/2006 03:02.
20VT coupegrale 4x4
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132241
07/07/2006 15:30
07/07/2006 15:30
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,158 Near Reading
JohnS
I need some sleep
|
I need some sleep
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,158
Near Reading
|
What if I were to say that for the money you would get more benefit by fitting an external wastegate and screamer pipe? I have never used an intermediate adapter - I have always had a full GT25 flanged 3"+ downpipe. There are people on here who have made that transition and so are far more qualified to say the exact difference. What I would say is that there is just as much restriction on the other side of the turbine housing - not just the cr*ppy manifold but the internal wastegate too which creates a lot of turbulence and back pressure. Thus my first statement
Former low boost hero - 616BHP@1.5 bar. 2.4 20VT RIP
|
|
|
Re: Turbo choice
#132242
07/07/2006 17:52
07/07/2006 17:52
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Jamie tried to fit a Nissan twin pipe exit off the turbo, but apparently it was very very difficult to fit due to extreme space considerations, although if you were very inventive with the routing it might just be possible?, certainly anyone who's taken off a 3"downpipe knows how little room there is.
I did notice a difference when I changed from the v-band to the full 5-stud setup, but also ported the manifold at the same time,.. not a huge difference mind you, but say 100-150 rpm spool-up and extra 'urgency' throughout the rev range.
joe
|
|
|
|