# Hybrid Turbo (the Madmax way) >>>>>>



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I have been working on a hybrid setup for my car, and I think it's time that I share some stuff with the community. Those of you that are familiar with my approach to modding know that I don't like to just follow the trends. I look at everything from scratch and try to make the best out of it for my use. After playing with the stocker for way too long, I wanted something that would remain conscious of my thirst for early spool, but flow better up top (my old stock torque curve plummeted past the midrange due to anemic turbine flow). 


First, I made the decision to go with a Gonzo GTT-X (225TT/S3 AWD fitment) as my blank canvas. Before people get all crazy, I could have successfully used other hybrids as my blank canvas. I wanted a company I can work with that wouldn't question or try to bottle my philosophy of making power on stock frame turbos, and GTS tuning fit that profile. 


My first thing is that I wanted an 11 blade turbine wheel. The other hybrids with the stock K04-02x housing (this far) have used standard "RS6"12 blade or other standard-spec turbine wheels. There is nothing wrong with the standard-spec 12 blade turbines , but the new GTT-X/madmax project made the less restricting 11-blader possible for me (less restriction up top means higher flow without the inefficiency losses that a cut-back/clipped wheel would have introduced). 


From the GTT-x I'm getting roughly a 37 lbs/min compressor, and high flow 11 blade RS6 turbine wheel. Don't think for a second that this is an infomercial for Gonzo. The turbo is my blank canvas and this is where Madmax works begin. 


1) The most inherent flaw in the K04 IMO is the turbine housing flow characteristics. These things flow horribly (not only because of the choked down turbine throat area), but also because of the inherent offset in the housing that sends a good portion of gas flow towards a nasty wall/lip in the downpipe flange. My goal for a long time was to take care of that with porting (I spoke to Doug about this possibility circa 2010/2011 at dyno day at FFE). So, I went to town cutting and polishing that brand new GTT turbo until the BW turbine design/casting flaw was corrected. 


2) Manifold collector - to turbine inlet. These areas have plenty of meat and generally left untouched. There is quite a bit to gain from porting there and I'm not going to pass on it.


3) Wastegate and Actuator
The wastegate flap is usually uprated on all the off the shelf hybrid I've seen (including the GTT-x) but the bypass hole is left intact. I am port-matching this appropriately to fully use the larger flap door fitted on these hybrids. This will promote better boost control and eliminate any boost creep that usually hunt these hybrids. 


The highly debated actuator situation had to be addressed properly. I have done what I could in the past to bring to light how this is suppose to work, and how it should be done on a performance oriented hybrid setup. But I'll take one last crack at it - at least the mechanical part of the equation (not sure if it'll get through though when so many have years of misconceptions hardwired in their brain). The role of wastegate (internal or external) is to control shaft speed. By opening a flap/door and bypassing some exhaust flow away from the turbine wheel, shaft speed can be regulated and boost kept in check according to the goal of the tune. The actuator itself is basically a controller that activates and controls the wastegate door movements. It's a basic pressure activated diaphragm/spring valve that opens on a pressure reference sent from a mechanical device (MBC) or and electronic solenoid (EBC, N75 etc). I'm sure most of you knows all of that already, but the part that most seem to miss, or ignore, is that there is also turbine pressure in effect here. The pressure in the turbine (which could be quite high on a small turbo asked to do all that work) is also actively pushing against the wastegate flap and acting against the spring tension in the actuator. So to recap, forces acting on the actuator are:
pressure signal from the N75/MBC + housing pressure. When you have a 5-6-7-12 psi actuator on a turbo asked to boost 22 or more psi, the overall pressure is just too much for such low spring rates, control is going to be difficult, and inefficiencies as well as inconsistencies will be introduced (energy lossed through bypass that is not controlled by actuator duty but housing backpressure). If you look at the hybrid world outside of the VAG community, you'll see that several uprated actuators are usually offered to match the level that the turbo will be operating. The rule of thumb, in terms of performance, is to run an actuator with a spring rate that is slightly lower than the boost target (say 3-5 psi). The reason for this is because (once again) the actuator has the burden of controlling the wastegate flap from a pressure signal, plus has the backpressure from the housing also acting on it. 


My solution in the past was what have been called the MM external spring mod (didn't invent it, but made it popular in the community). With this new project, I decided to do it properly instead of adding external helper springs. I made a couple of prototypes actuators (18 psi and 25 psi) to use with the combo (not sure what my target boost pressure will be yet to reach my goal so that's why a couple are made). Maybe tunes will be developed in the future to control these uprated actuators I'm making, that are good step up points that will help bridge the gap between stockish sprung actuators that may or may not be appropriate for the boost levels targeted by the setup (aftermarket adjustable actuators are also an option but reintroduce the variable aspect that often become a problem between hardware and software). 


4) This hybrid is nothing without a supporting cast. Bringing exhaust flow to it will be a ported stock manifold. I feel that none of the existing options available fit my goals, and I fully ported a stocker to have the collector flow that I'm after (both turbo and manifold collector are port-matched to a sizable 1.83"). I'm not a big fan of tubular offering with long runners for a hybrid setup. Yes you want the flow, but you don't have to compromise spool characteristics and longevity to get there (just personal opinion there). On the exit side, turbine flow will be mated to a downpipe with a nice 4" expansion chamber that tapers to 3.5" then finally to 3" all the way to the dump.


I hope this thread will help remove some of the mysteries surrounding small frame turbos and how to make power with them. Hopefully it doesn't turn into the usual manufacturer and fanboy war that seems to derail every thread about this topic. This could be a good place to discuss options and possibilities.


Now the picture dump:

*
Turbine housing comparison (you can spot the slightly larger gate door on the hybrid)*











*
This is what you see when looking through the turbine throat headed to the downpipe flange. There is sharp lip left from the wastegate divider, and good percentage of airflow is directed toward a stepped wall at the exit flange.*






















*These marked area needs porting to promote unrestricted flow in and out of the turbine housing*










































*And now some 'after' shots of the porting results:*


*Inlet*


















*Outlet throat and stepped flange *


















*This what you see now looking down the turbine throat towards the downpipe flange. All the restrictions are gone but there is plenty of material on the housing wall. *


















*Porting done and hotside mounted together with everything matching*


















*Prototype 25 psi actuator with same travel and operating range as OEM. (This works from seat pressure to max rated psi).* 














*Downpipe and manifold that will complement the hybrid.


*​




















































More to follow, I think this combo should redefine what can be done with hybrids.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Reserved!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Reserved! .


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

Good job once again sir:beer:

Subscribed


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Very nice work... 

I can assure you what you've done will improve your setup ;-) 

Can I also suggest you look heavily into the compressor wheel design, larger isn't needed, more efficient is... 



Also the waste gate arm on that turbo needs looking at! It needs to be the same length as stock, short and it will cause issues.

Love the downpipe.. That's very nice


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

Oh Hell Yeah!!! Preparing for knowledge and greatness :beer:

Gonzo has a hydrid equivalent to the F23? (Fittingwise)

Sub'd!


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

Did I miss where you ported the bypass? Or have you not gotten to that yet?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

With regards the actuators . I am totally with you on this, I personally feel a 15psi is the ideal.. Something that you've missed and is an important thing to note is that the n75 diverts boost off the charge system to open the actuator, the higher the n75 DC the more air is bled off , you basically have a boost leak.. Running a higher rated actuator lowers n75 dc and thus reduces this leak, also as you stated the higher rating keeps the waste gate closed, loosing less exhaust pressure, win win ...


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

woodywoods86 said:


> Gonzo has a hydrid equivalent to the F23? (Fittingwise)


Yes


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Beachbuggy said:


> With regards the actuators . I am totally with you on this, I personally feel a 15psi is the ideal.. Something that you've missed and is an important thing to note is that the n75 diverts boost off the charge system to open the actuator, the higher the n75 DC the more air is bled off , you basically have a boost leak.. Running a higher rated actuator lowers n75 dc and thus reduces this leak, also as you stated the higher rating keeps the waste gate closed, loosing less exhaust pressure, win win ...


Yes, springs with higher ratings are ideal to running high boost. Length of the actuator and how far the flap opens are factors that one must pay attention too. Its not about just having a higher crack pressure.

I rather have a 7psi spring that has a proper range/length, then a super short and stiff actuator.

Also, one must remember that when mass producing tolerances should be bigger as there will be cars that will not be as sorted as others. I personally like to have limp mode as a safety net.

Thus I believe more than one option should be offered. Standard for the bolt on builds, and a stronger actuator for the more extreme setups.


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> Yes


Can you PM some details? Wasn't on your site.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> Yes, springs with higher ratings are ideal to running high boost. Length of the actuator and how far the flap opens are factors that one must pay attention too. Its not about just having a higher crack pressure.
> 
> I rather have a 7psi spring that has a proper range/length, then a super short and stiff actuator.
> 
> ...


You can have a strong actuator with exactly the same range/length .. 

When you offer a turbo/mapped Ecu you will always be limited.. When each setup is tuned on its own merits then it's not so important... 

Higher crack pressure is almost definitely needed.. Anything below 12psi and at 21+ psi you're waste gate is being blown open by the immense back pressures! add in a shorter arm length and this just compounds the issue! Add in a larger surface area waste gate penny and it compounds it more... Bigger isn't always better! 

I understand you like the 7psi , but it's costing you ..

A stock k04 waste gate, with stock k04 arm length and 15psi actuator will provide the best all round setup..


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Beachbuggy said:


> You can have a strong actuator with exactly the same range/length ..


I didn't say its impossible. I just said it should be considered 



Beachbuggy said:


> Higher crack pressure is almost definitely needed.. Anything below 12psi and at 21+ psi you're waste gate is being blown open by the immense back pressures! add in a shorter arm length and this just compounds the issue! Add in a larger surface area waste gate penny and it compounds it more... Bigger isn't always better!
> 
> I understand you like the 7psi , but it's costing you ..
> 
> A stock k04 waste gate, with stock k04 arm length and 15psi actuator will provide the best all round setup..


I understand this, sir. It's currently being worked on and being tested :thumbup:

Señor Marcus is pushing the limits, and Gonzo Tuning is right behind him


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Very nice work...
> 
> I can assure you what you've done will improve your setup ;-)
> 
> ...


Thank you Sir!

The billet (man I hate this word) compressor wheel, beside being bigger is pretty adanced in design compared to the OEM one it's replacing. :beer:

As for the wastegate actuator, if you look closely you'll see that the one I made has a shorter rod, but a longer canister (same overall length). This is done on purpose and has a calculated design function like everything else. The reason for this move is to gain more travel from the actuator. More travel means the flap will open farther than OEM spec and allow more air to be bypassed. I've used one of these in the past with the stocker and having more travel has decreased measured EGT a good amount. Pretty much everything I do will have purpose, and efficiency is the primary driving force behind all my modifications in the project. But very good eyes for spotting the difference.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

elRey said:


> Did I miss where you ported the bypass? Or have you not gotten to that yet?


I had my turbine housing in the oven for another round of ceramic coat when I posted and couldn't take pics of the wastegate porting. Here you go:


Untouched and marked for porting 










After porting the opening and the entire bypass port










With a quarter next to the opened bypass port










And a quarter next the stock bypass port for visual reference 












Finished work


----------



## mk4321 (Nov 14, 2010)

Sub'd


----------



## max13b2 (Jul 24, 2007)

This is the one I've been waiting for! Sub'd and watching closely! Can't wait for results which I'm sure will be astonishing!


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Without realising it you've done what you hoped to achieve by running a longer canister actuator in porting the waste gate!

Turbine speed and torque is maintained by the exhaust gas passing over it... To maintain a set boost level you need a set n75 duty cycle, to achieve this the wastage has to bypass enough gas to maintain the shaft speed to drive the compressor. 

If you have, as you now have, a good flowing waste gate, it doesn't need huge amounts of opening to relieve the pressures/gasses .. Stock turbine housings are poor flowing out the waste gate thus more opening is required to achieve the same , to a point where by even a fully opened waste gate won't relieve enough and boost creep and sky high egts occur..

The flip of this also becomes increased back pressures results in lower timing advance which sends egts higher still.. 

I bet you find you don't need that long canister actuator now!

Look at the tfsi turbos v 1.8t hybrids Same internals, same size scroll, better designed waste gate and manifold make 10% more power on the same engine. These don't need bigger actuators and run lower egts..


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> You can have a strong actuator with exactly the same range/length ..
> 
> When you offer a turbo/mapped Ecu you will always be limited.. When each setup is tuned on its own merits then it's not so important...
> 
> ...


I totally agree with this! It's just beyond me that the community (enthusiasts and hybrid manufacturers combined) have used actuators with such low spring rates with turbos that are far outside what the OEM hardware was designed to handle. When VAG engineer sent the cars out with a 5-7psi crack pressure actuators, they were spec'd to control low factory boost and turbine backpressure. When demanding for the turbo to push 2-3 time the OEM boost, the actuators must be re-spec'd accordingly. I feel that 18 and 25 psi crack pressure actuators will cover the wide umbrella of cars using these hybrids. The 21-26 psi boost target guys can use the 18 psi units and the bolder more advanced setup with 27-up psi could use a 25 psi unit. IMO, the ideal 15 psi (crack pressure at rest) sprung actuator you suggested is still a bit too low even for the mild tuned setups. However, it's a giant step in the right direction :thumbup:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I totally agree with this! It's just beyond me that the community (enthusiasts and hybrid manufacturers combined) have used actuators with such low spring rates with turbos that are far outside what the OEM hardware was designed to handle. When VAG engineer sent the cars out with a 5-7psi crack pressure actuators, they were spec'd to control low factory boost and turbine backpressure. When demanding for the turbo to push 2-3 time the OEM boost, the actuators must be re-spec'd accordingly. I feel that 18 and 25 psi crack pressure actuators will cover the wide umbrella of cars using these hybrids. The 21-26 psi boost target guys can use the 18 psi units and the bolder more advanced setup with 27-up psi could use a 25 psi unit. IMO, the ideal 15 psi (crack pressure at rest) sprung actuator you suggested is still a bit too low even for the mild tuned setups. However, it's a giant step in the right direction :thumbup:


All the testing we've done says anything over 23psi boost is wasting energy.. It's been shown numerous times when you go above this figure you increase egts, lower timing so make no more power.. Boost v timing. 

I don't believe 27psi will see any more power than 22psi with buckets more timing... Also at 27psi you are more than likely way out side the efficiency range of the compressor.. Just my thoughts


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Without realising it you've done what you hoped to achieve by running a longer canister actuator in porting the waste gate!
> 
> Turbine speed and torque is maintained by the exhaust gas passing over it... To maintain a set boost level you need a set n75 duty cycle, to achieve this the wastage has to bypass enough gas to maintain the shaft speed to drive the compressor.
> 
> ...


You are correct and we are on the same wave length. Opening the wastegate port achieves the same thing that the longer canister actuator does. However, nothing says that compounding the effect is a bad thing (especially for my specific use). I don't know if you're familiar with how I push things but I usually make these babies sing at 30+ psi. At those levels of turbine backpressure and EGT, any EGT help is very welcomed. 

The other point not mentioned is boost creep. With my setups (I know it's not typical for regular Joe setup) I get major boost creep that not much could be done to tame until increasing the rod travel. The combination of longer travel and more bypass volume is a sure way to eliminate the problem completely and provide consistency my boost control.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> All the testing we've done says anything over 23psi boost is wasting energy.. It's been shown numerous times when you go above this figure you increase egts, lower timing so make no more power.. Boost v timing.
> 
> I don't believe 27psi will see any more power than 22psi with buckets more timing... Also at 27psi you are more than likely way out side the efficiency range of the compressor.. Just my thoughts


Again I pretty sure the things I've done are foreign to you since I usually post these threads in the TT section (but that place has turned into such a joke lately that I can't bring myself to post anything technical there anymore).


Anyway, I've defied this logic for so long on so many platforms that I can say with the outmost confidence that it's not true. Yes, raising boost past that imaginary frontier you've setup for yourself comes with some baggages. EGT with all else equal will be higher than baby-boosting at 22 psi - compressor efficiency will be reduced - and overall component longevity might suffer to a degree. However it is completely false that boosting higher than this equals no increase in power. To keep it simple for the rest of the audience, a compressor use x amount of energy to compress air (the ultimate goal in turbocharging) and the rest is used generating heat. Say you're running at 75% compressor efficiency, then 25 % is used generating heat. Then a lunatic like me comes and push it 30 psi, what happens is the compressor is running at say 60% efficiency and 40% of the energy is building heat. So far you're saying to yourself that this guy is just proving my case. But what's missing is that the compressed air flowed at 30 psi and 60% efficiency is still a lot higher than what is produced by 22 psi at 75% efficiency. 


The charge air will be more heated, that's a given. But that's why we have cooling devices, intercoolers, water injection etc. No matter how hot the air charge is at the compressor outlet, it can always be brought down to usable levels with the proper cooling and fueling strategy. I'm willing to bet that my manifold air charges at 37 psi on the stock turbo was lower than 99% of cars running a stock frame turbo at 22 psi. Not looking to turn this into a pissing contest, but it's a fact. With proper charge cooling and E85 I was making full use of 30+ psi and generating more power than anyone ever could with the same hardware at 22 psi. 


If the air charge is controlled properly, the timing compromise you mentioned is a moot point. Timing restrictions because of boost level and air temperature is a tuning strategy to make things work with what you have on an inefficient setup. This can not dictate the rule of how much boost and timing can be ran together. Timing limits is dictated by MBT, not by boost or combustion temperature. For example I've tested and reached MBT with my setup and guess what, it's the same at 15 psi then it is at 35 psi. This shows that it is very independent of boost, but mostly a function of combustion chamber design and the fuel used. I'll look for an old timing curve at 30+ psi on the stock K04 to demonstrate what I'm saying.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Ah yes...when Madmax is in the house!:wave:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I'll look for an old timing curve at 30+ psi on the stock K04 to demonstrate what I'm saying.


These are two consecutive, fully heat-soaked, pulls with no cool down period. They were done at 33 psi on the stock k04 and water injection deactivated because I was testing my old Air to Water intercooler system (wanted to know what it's do in as a single variable). Timing correction wasn't logged because it was virtually inexistent with my setup. The timing sustained and recorded IAT at 33 psi is proof that boosting past 22 psi while maintaining high timing can be done if you know what you're doing (dyno numbers can prove it too, but what's the point). :beer:


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

So by having more wastegate actuation (open further) your basically going to lower torque and also force the turbo work a lot harder at higher speeds to keep the hp numbers high. 

A ported setup like this would make me think a sharp torque curve that tapers off down around 3500ish rpm but maintaining a hp curve to 6800?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Slimjimmn said:


> So by having more wastegate actuation (open further) your basically going to lower torque and also force the turbo work a lot harder at higher speeds to keep the hp numbers high.
> 
> A ported setup like this would make me think a sharp torque curve that tapers off down around 3500ish rpm but maintaining a hp curve to 6800?


That's not how it works! The point behind bypassing exhaust gases around the turbine wheel is to create a way to control shaft speed. When the gate opens, it's to create a balancing act of bleeding exhaust gases, but just enough to maintain a desired shaft speed. Turbos would spin to self-destructing speed if it wasn't for this function and it's in action all the time. The dynamic function is multi-fold if you will, but at WOT the gate is only suppose to open a percentage (driven by the mapping via N75 duty cycle or mechanical control), this doesn't really affect torque or HP characteristics if done properly. I'm saying "if done properly" because the notion of the gate blowing open without a pressure signal from the control(s) shouldn't be seen as acceptable or be part of the equation. 

A ported setup like this should make for a sharp rising torque curve from boost onset, and hopefully maintain as much of it as possible through the rev range (at least more than typical setups with less involvement towards improving flow before, inside, and after the KKK stock frame). :beer:


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

So by porting and more wastegate control you hope to increase the torque curve over a longer area (like the stock up-long flat-down tq curve ) by having more airflow to the turbo and easier exit from the turbo (basically like a bt setup but only on a small frame kkk)


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Slimjimmn said:


> So by porting and more wastegate control you hope to increase the torque curve over a longer area (like the stock up-long flat-down tq curve ) by having more airflow to the turbo and easier exit from the turbo (basically like a bt setup but only on a small frame kkk)


Yes Sir, that's the plan and how power is made (big or small snails). We already know that the factory stock frame can produce massive TQ down low but not necessarily sustain it because of the inherent flow restrictions. With these flow improvements I should be able to dramatically increase and maintain the initial TQ profile through the operating range. As a byproduct of all this, much higher HP numbers will be achieved when going up the revolutions. 


For example if you look at this dyno of my car at 30 psi on the stock turbo, you can see that 400 AWTQ is achieved down low but because it's not sustained, only 300 AWHP resulted from it. That's what this project should change.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

"30 psi and 60% efficiency is still a lot higher than what is produced by 22 psi at 75% efficiency"

Only if you have more flow .. Unless you are measuring grams/flow at the same time you can not compare 30psi at 60% v 22psi at 75% ... 

As I'm sure you know, the compressor map is flow v pressure ratio.. So for any given flow (lbs) you can increase boost ( pressure ratio, lower effenciency and still flow the same amount of air through the engine! Basically you increase boost, increase temps, but actually flow no more! And considering the boost you measure is at the inlet, all it's shows is how inefficiently the engine is consuming the boost .. 


If you are running a compressor outside its efficiency range, then you have the wrong compressor, there is nothing to be gained by running it outside this.. Either get a bigger one or make it more efficient by adding or removing the number of blades.. 

What I hadn't appreciate was that you run e85 etc, and tbh I have no idea how this effects things, I can only speak for 99ron fuel and I stand by my statement that 22psi is the sweat spot..


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Timing limits is dictated by MBT, not by boost or combustion temperature. For example I've tested and reached MBT with my setup and guess what, it's the same at 15 psi then it is at 35 psi. This shows that it is very independent of boost, *but mostly a function of combustion chamber design* and the fuel used. I'll look for an old timing curve at 30+ psi on the stock K04 to demonstrate what I'm saying.


...and the geometry of the crankshaft, rod, and piston/pin arrangement (which are obviously fixed once the motor is built). That is all, carry on. :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Beachbuggy said:


> I can only speak for 99ron fuel and I stand by my statement that 22psi is the sweat spot..


Yes, but you can't increase timing advance forever or you run into pumping losses. At that point, you have to do something else if you want more power.


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Good work on the porting Marcus, 

The opened up wastegate path, and removal of ridges in the turbine exit path look identical to how Beachbuggy further ported my already ported housing about 18 months ago, it opened up the exhaust side fantastically at the time, allowing us to achieve the highest k04 framed turbo results seen in the UK to date. 12 months on from the final mapping session that figure still hasn't been beaten over here.

I think the work on the inlet throat and increasing the size at the collector could well yield further gains as well.

I assume the tunes posted above are using E85 Fuel? I know for sure that over here, 30psi + 30 degrees of timing advance is simply not possible on these setups using our pump fuel.


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Beachbuggy said:


> "30 psi and 60% efficiency is still a lot higher than what is produced by 22 psi at 75% efficiency"
> 
> Only if you have more flow .. Unless you are measuring grams/flow at the same time you can not compare 30psi at 60% v 22psi at 75% ...
> 
> ...


That's what he's trying to say. The turbo DOES flow more out of the efficiency range.

A customer and I was able to obtain 355whp on the GTT which is just a K04 (or K03 as you would say in Europe) hybrid with no extra porting and stock displacement and stock intake manifold. That was with E85 @ 27psi. I think there was some more power left in it if I advanced the timing even further.

Never mind the fact that the K03 hotside is *SUPER* restrictive.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> That's what he's trying to say. The turbo DOES flow more out of the efficiency range.
> 
> A customer and I was able to obtain 355whp on the GTT which is just a K04 (or K03 as you would say in Europe) hybrid with no extra porting and stock displacement and stock intake manifold. That was with E85 @ 27psi. I think there was some more power left in it if I advanced the timing even further.
> 
> Never mind the fact that the K03 hotside is *SUPER* restrictive.


I think I need e85 in my life!


----------



## fed0ra (Oct 24, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> That's what he's trying to say. The turbo DOES flow more out of the efficiency range.
> 
> A customer and I was able to obtain 355whp on the GTT which is just a K04 (or K03 as you would say in Europe) hybrid with no extra porting and stock displacement and stock intake manifold. That was with E85 @ 27psi. I think there was some more power left in it if I advanced the timing even further.
> 
> Never mind the fact that the K03 hotside is *SUPER* restrictive.


You guys *seriously *need to come out with a longitudinal GTT . If I had the money (and it existed) I would buy it up in a heartbeat. Maybe you guys will have one in the next year or two, when I have the funds/time to upgrade the turbo and have exhausted the K03S.


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Great minds think alike Max just last month I finished putting my car back together. I did the same exact things you did to the exhaust manifold, turbo hotside inlet, waste gate port and downpipe flange. 

Waiting for the usrt pump to take full advantage of my setup. It made a nice difference in terms of egt temps and power.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> "30 psi and 60% efficiency is still a lot higher than what is produced by 22 psi at 75% efficiency"
> 
> Only if you have more flow .. Unless you are measuring grams/flow at the same time you can not compare 30psi at 60% v 22psi at 75% ...
> 
> ...


I know it's only for the sake of a good technical discussion and that we've already reached a conclusion (beside the proven real life data that backs it up). But the gross generalization that boost is only a measure of restriction, or the motor's incapacity to ingest the air, is a misconception. I hear this all the time, but it would only be true if there wasn't a component in the system called a COMPRESSOR that is creating pressure at a faster rate than the motor naturally ingest and expel. If that logic was true, there would be no point to force-induce air and turbo/super charging would not exist. Whenever air can be compressed and crammed into an engine, there will be more power. Theere are limitations obviously, the wall you've reached at 22 psi on X fuel is a measure of this specific fuel limitation (and to some degree, the inability of the current system to cool the air charge). 

The formula isn't new, and the turbocharged rally cars (from which I borrowed the concept) have made a science out of it. These guys are making gobs of power through homologated small stock turbo/engines and with a restrictor to cap HP. How do they do it? Compress as much air that the compressor will physically do and cool the charge to usable levels with water injection. In my car for example, I've found that the upper limit for the stock k04 compressor is 37-38 psi, you could let it run unrestricted (wastegate locked shut) after that point and it would not compress more air but just make more heat. That's the true limit of the turbocharger and is independent of the motors capacity to ingest and expel the air.

To put it in perspective, I have reached a max of 245 G/S of metered air through the MAF. No stock k04 at 22 psi will move this much air. The same goes to the power figures, at 22 psi you're not achieving 400 WTQ and be in the 300 WHP with a stock turbo (E85, water injection or not).

*Graph of flowed air recorded at the MAF at the limit of the K04-02x
*


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> ...and the geometry of the crankshaft, rod, and piston/pin arrangement (which are obviously fixed once the motor is built). That is all, carry on. :beer:


Yes, if you want to be technically correct enough to pass the Adam test.  But for the rest of the non-ME mortals, "combustion chamber design" or better yet "characteristics" should be good enough to get the point across. :laugh: 



Prawn said:


> Good work on the porting Marcus,
> 
> The opened up wastegate path, and removal of ridges in the turbine exit path look identical to how Beachbuggy further ported my already ported housing about 18 months ago, it opened up the exhaust side fantastically at the time, allowing us to achieve the highest k04 framed turbo results seen in the UK to date. 12 months on from the final mapping session that figure still hasn't been beaten over here.
> 
> ...


Yes, the figures are with the cars running on E85 ethanol (it is to be noted that on top of that, my car had direct port water injection and AWIC). I've followed your build and progress but never posted on the UK forums because the philosophy there is not necessarily welcoming to our crazy Yankee approach to modification. Great build "mate"! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> I think I need e85 in my life!


Yes you do! That thing is God's gift to forced induction cars. Seriously good stuff! :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

spartiati said:


> Great minds think alike Max just last month I finished putting my car back together. I did the same exact things you did to the exhaust manifold, turbo hotside inlet, waste gate port and downpipe flange.
> 
> Waiting for the usrt pump to take full advantage of my setup. It made a nice difference in terms of egt temps and power.


Yeah Steve, I remember the pics of your porting progress that you sent me. I'm anxious to get my car all buttoned up so we can rent another load bearing dyno, and we (you, Jeff and I) can re-write the limit once again. I'm excited to finally join the hybrid ranks and be able to hang with the small "big boys".


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

I'm interested to see how this pans out. Bummer it has not been done on ko3s hybrid as a majority of people just buy basic ko3s hybrids not the ko4 ones. 
If I end up keeping my gti I want a larger turbo but I am used to bigger t3/t4 style on prior cars I have owned.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I know it's only for the sake of a good technical discussion and that we've already reached a conclusion (beside the proven real life data that backs it up). But the gross generalization that boost is only a measure of restriction, or the motor's incapacity to ingest the air, is a misconception. I hear this all the time, but it would only be true if there wasn't a component in the system called a COMPRESSOR that is creating pressure at a faster rate than the motor naturally ingest and expel. If that logic was true, there would be no point to force-induce air and turbo/super charging would not exist. Whenever air can be compressed and crammed into an engine, there will be more power. Theere are limitations obviously, the wall you've reached at 22 psi on X fuel is a measure of this specific fuel limitation (and to some degree, the inability of the current system to cool the air charge).
> 
> The formula isn't new, and the turbocharged rally cars (from which I borrowed the concept) have made a science out of it. These guys are making gobs of power through homologated small stock turbo/engines and with a restrictor to cap HP. How do they do it? Compress as much air that the compressor will physically do and cool the charge to usable levels with water injection. In my car for example, I've found that the upper limit for the stock k04 compressor is 37-38 psi, you could let it run unrestricted (wastegate locked shut) after that point and it would not compress more air but just make more heat. That's the true limit of the turbocharger and is independent of the motors capacity to ingest and expel the air.
> 
> ...


We have made 340bhp from 246grams on a stock sized k04 compressor at 22psi today! And we did this because the engine and turbo flowed effeciently! Only reason you needed 37psi was to over come the huge exhaust back pressure you had created! Reduce those by modifying the turbine housing, increasing clearance on the turbine and you end up flowing the same air for less effort and restriction! Inlet boost pressures drop! 

The force your talking about of the compressor continually spinning is only there to over come the increasingly rising exhaust back pressure, ie 1psi of inlet equates to rough 2psi exhaust gas pressure!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> We have made 340bhp from 246grams on a stock sized k04 compressor at 22psi today! And we did this because the engine and turbo flowed effeciently! Only reason you needed 37psi was to over come the huge exhaust back pressure you had created! Reduce those by modifying the turbine housing, increasing clearance on the turbine and you end up flowing the same air for less effort and restriction! Inlet boost pressures drop!
> 
> The force your talking about of the compressor continually spinning is only there to over come the increasingly rising exhaust back pressure, ie 1psi of inlet equates to rough 2psi exhaust gas pressure!


I'm not going to keep arguing the same point over and over, but that setup must be a lot more efficient overall, from Turbo Inlet Hose to exhaust dump, than mine (I was still on stock intake and exhaust manifolds). The fact remains though, *with all else equal*, increasing boost past that 22 psi magic mark you've came up with, makes more power and registers more grams of air flowed (the ability to cool down the charge and the capacity of the fuel are separate issues). There is too much verifiable evidence (from various sources) that have tried boosting past 22 psi and made more power, to ignore the hard cold fact. Let's leave it at that and move on! 


PS: just out of curiosity, was that "stock sized K04" that made 340 bhp and 246 g/s a completely stock turbo? Because mine was, and could only achieve about 170 g/s with a lot less power at around 22 psi (which was my wastegate pressure with external helper springs).


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I'm not going to keep arguing the same point over and over, but that setup must be a lot more efficient overall, from Turbo Inlet Hose to exhaust dump, than mine (I was still on stock intake and exhaust manifolds). The fact remains though, *with all else equal*, increasing boost past that 22 psi magic mark you've came up with, makes more power and registers more grams of air flowed (the ability to cool down the charge and the capacity of the fuel are separate issues). There is too much verifiable evidence (from various sources) that have tried boosting past 22 psi and made more power, to ignore the hard cold fact. Let's leave it at that and move on!
> 
> 
> PS: just out of curiosity, was that "stock sized K04" that made 340 bhp and 246 g/s a completely stock turbo? Because mine was, and could only achieve about 170 g/s with a lot less power at around 22 psi (which was my wastegate pressure with external helper springs).


bravo!! this is great stuff.

nice to see some boundaries being expanded. scrib'd:beer::thumbup:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Props to you Max on the porting and continued innovation. 

Being the vanilla person I am, I am going to continue to use the Gonzo hardware as it arrives, on my stock head, no WMI engine with a 2.5" exhaust and see what I can wring out of it. The race to 400whp on a hybrid turbo is definitely on!


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus

Thank you for the reply, I am agoing to agree to disagree..

Good luck with the rest of the work, I hope it works out as you expect or hope

PS No it wasn't a stock sized K04, the Hotside was Ported as you have done in this thread and a larger turbine with extra clearance.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

```
Group A:	'002				Group B:	'020				Group C:	'118			
	Engine Speed	Engine Load	Injection Timing	Mass Air Flow		Timing Retardation	Timing Retardation	Timing Retardation	Timing Retardation		Engine Speed	Intake Air	Boost Pressure	Boost Pressure
TIME	(G28)			Sensor (G70)	TIME	Cylinder 1	Cylinder 2	Cylinder 3	Cylinder 4	TIME	(G28)	Temperature (G42)	Control (N75)	(actual)
STAMP	 /min	 %	 ms	 g/s	STAMP	°KW	°KW	°KW	°KW	STAMP	 /min	°C	 %	 mbar

3	1560	73.7	5.33	23.06	3.3	0	0	0	0	2.71	1560	23	0	1050
3.9	1560	86.5	7.38	26.53	4.2	0	0	0	0	3.6	1560	21	95.3	1090
4.8	1720	88.7	7.38	29.61	5.1	0	0	0	0	4.5	1600	18	95.3	1120
5.7	2120	97	8.2	41.61	6.01	0	0	0	0	5.4	2000	17	95.3	1170
6.6	2480	109	9.02	53.81	6.91	0	0	0	0	6.31	2360	15	95.3	1280
7.51	2880	126.3	10.25	73.17	7.81	0	0	0	0	7.2	2760	15	95.3	1480
8.4	3320	168.4	14.35	114.5	8.7	3	0	3	3	8.1	3160	15	71.8	1910
9.3	3840	181.2	16.81	135.08	9.6	2.3	3	2.3	2.3	9.01	3680	13	56.9	2440
10.2	4280	191.7	18.86	169.75	10.5	2.3	3	2.3	2.3	9.91	4120	12	58	2450
11.1	4680	191.7	20.5	202.64	11.4	2.3	2.3	2.3	2.3	10.8	4560	12	62	2530
12	5080	191.7	21.32	220.5	12.3	1.5	2.3	1.5	1.5	11.7	4960	12	62	2540
12.9	5440	191.7	22.14	231.64	13.2	1.5	2.3	1.5	1.5	12.6	5320	12	62	2530
13.8	5760	191.7	22.14	241.72	14.1	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5	13.5	5640	12	66.7	2510
14.7	6080	191.7	22.14	246.67	15	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5	14.4	5960	14	70.2	2510
15.6	6320	191.7	21.32	243.94	15.9	0.8	1.5	0.8	0.8	15.31	6280	15	70.2	2500
16.5	6600	191.7	20.91	243.28	16.8	0.8	0.8	3.8	0.8	16.2	6520	15	70.2	2490
17.4	6880	185.7	20.09	244.28	17.7	0.8	0.8	3.8	0.8	17.1	6800	16	70.2	2470
18.3	7200	191.7	20.91	246.86	18.6	0.8	0.8	3.8	0.8	18	7080	17	70.2	2450
```
K-04 from today. hybrid.. mini hybrid. billet comp wheel, K04 size, K04 TFSi turbine wheel
relentless v2 mani, 3" downpipe, badger5 intake, toyosport 600x300x76 fmic, 50/50 water meth on vpower fuel.
peak boost 23psi.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> PS: just out of curiosity, was that "stock sized K04" that made 340 bhp and 246 g/s a completely stock turbo? Because mine was, and could only achieve about 170 g/s with a lot less power at around 22 psi (which was my wastegate pressure with external helper springs).


It was'nt stock k04.. Stock sized comp wheel I believe in inducer/exducer terms but a billet version... turbine was not std, actuator was 10-12psi

22psi @ what rpm is what I ask..
The max I have seen on genuine std k04 turbos in airflow terms is 230g/s region... and they will not hold more than 18psi past 5.5krpm as they are out of puff.. on std 5psi actuators. IF a little more preloaded then I can sometimes see 20psi max up there but thats flat out.... might have boost but its not making more power because of it.

In my experience of hybrids, pushing higher boost early, hurts the top end and causes torque to fall away sooner..

As you are doing your sprints, this shove of torque early on vs less top end is what you want for good acceleration of of the corners if you are not on a more open road coarse where you would be using the higher revs more and the power delivery for that application for would to me be better suited to the building torque and it peaking higher up the revs and holding top end power more and longer. This is on regular pump fuel we have here in the uk, vpower 99, with 50/50wmi.

:thumbup:


----------



## KmosK04 (Dec 18, 2012)

Great thread! Subed


----------



## ModsTTand (Jul 8, 2009)

*"Low-mid range"* output versus* "mid-high range"* output debate opcorn:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

ModsTTand said:


> *"Low-mid range"* output versus* "mid-high range"* output debate opcorn:


not a debate.. but a perspective........


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Marcus
> 
> Thank you for the reply, I am agoing to agree to disagree..
> 
> ...


Thanks! To me, reaching the 400 AWHP mark is the goal, but the thread is about my hybrid experience, sharing it and discussing it with the community, therefore your input is always welcomed and appreciated. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> It was'nt stock k04.. Stock sized comp wheel I believe in inducer/exducer terms but a billet version... turbine was not std, actuator was 10-12psi
> 
> 22psi @ what rpm is what I ask..
> The max I have seen on genuine std k04 turbos in airflow terms is 230g/s region... and they will not hold more than 18psi past 5.5krpm as they are out of puff.. on std 5psi actuators. IF a little more preloaded then I can sometimes see 20psi max up there but thats flat out.... might have boost but its not making more power because of it.
> ...


Bill, thanks for chiming in! It was a given that this "stock framed" K04 would not be completely stock to be able to achieve 
246 G/S of air flowed at 22 psi of boost. The idea that a completely stock K04-02x (like the one I had to spin unimaginably fast at 30+ psi to generate 245 G/s) would flow that much while casually boosting 22 psi, is against everything I've tested and experienced playing this hardware for years. Obviously, a forged compressor wheel with updated design will be more efficient than the old archaic BW design from the last century (regardless of being the same physical inducer/exducer size). 

Then on top of that, a modified hotside made it really an 'apple to water melon' comparison, simply introduced as an attempt to solidify a claim that we've proven wrong times and times again here in the states. There are other examples, but 4cefed4' s car runs his hybrid at 27 psi and has the highest WHP record to date on an hybrid on this side of the pond. My car has been on load bearing dynos for countless hours at all psi and degree of timing advance to find what will produce the most usable powerband, and I know (not guessing) that the gravy is well above 22 psi. 

Of course, there is a point of diminishing returns, but it's not at 22 psi - Sure, compressor outlet temps are higher the more pressure you squeeze, but appropriate charge cooling strategies are a requirement when getting the most out of any turbo - Yes, the compressor/turbine pressure ratio must not have been ideal, but for this specific turbo, it yielded the most power, and EGT was well in check because of an optimized timing curve and the fuel used. My point in this little side-tracking "ideal pressure" debate was to explain that because a setup isn't developed to take advantage of higher pressures doesn't mean that it's the ultimate limit (or sweet spot) for all situations. 

As far as the aggressive onset of TQ being limiting to the top end, I believe you're correct (although not as drastic as one would imagine). In my case, where the meat of the powerband needs to be low, it's a healthy compromise. Having a car that can get out of its way coming out of corners is the most rewarding thing IMO, and worth giving up a bit up top. You're also right that if one were to optimize for long circuits were top end is an advantage, taming the early grunt would yield better results as the revs go up. :beer:


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

badger5 said:


> In my experience of hybrids, pushing higher boost early, hurts the top end and causes torque to fall away sooner..





Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You're also right that if one were to optimize for long circuits were top end is an advantage, taming the early grunt would yield better results as the revs go up. :beer:


Are you both saying with ALL ELSE untouched, that by reducing boost request early, you can maintain a higher boost/power later? How? By just the heat, or lack of heat generated early with early boost? And by enough to noticeably move the powerband as opposed to just leaving low-end torque on the table?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> As far as the aggressive onset of TQ being limiting to the top end, I believe you're correct (although not as drastic as one would imagine). In my case, where the meat of the powerband needs to be low, it's a healthy compromise. Having a car that can get out of its way coming out of corners is the most rewarding thing IMO, and worth giving up a bit up top. You're also right that if one were to optimize for long circuits were top end is an advantage, taming the early grunt would yield better results as the revs go up. :beer:


Did you say earlier that you saw a max of 170g/s on your stock k04 previously as a maximum? did I misread that bit?

One thing I do see, which does fly in the face of what you describe is the pushing hard early not compromising top end power levels tho. I see the motors not tolerate timing up top, killing torque, when pushing a modest (by your measurements) 24psi early on... My personal thoughts on this are that the cyl temps are getting to hot to sustain the ign advance and the knock sensors doing their thing in the upper rev band, pulling back and hurting torque. When I build to approx 20psi on spool, then build again to 23-24psi level and hold there if it will, I get higher power figures. The torque peak is at a higher rpm also as I build up the load with rpm. Seems to work for me.. I've never had a hybrid or stock k04 like a high boost on spool, without it falling away much sooner up the rev range. I put this down to heat myself.

Back pressures... will also be playing their part in the upper rev range also and fighting against the efficient flow..

My experiences anyhows.

example from yesterday on the mini hybrid mentioned earlier (logs)
earlier higher onset of boost hurt the torque sustained.. this is what I frequently see. AITs were excellent with wmi enhancement


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Hey Bill, what is a "mini hybrid"?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Twopnt016v said:


> Hey Bill, what is a "mini hybrid"?


its ended up a misnomer as its results pretty much got 95% of the bigger wheeled hybrids...

TFSi flat back turbine wheel, with std k04 sized comp wheel but a billet version, 12psi actuator, ported etc

from the man who made it himself (beachbuggy)


> 42/56mm wheel. Although billet and larger exducer taper
> tfsi turbine
> ported turbine housing
> ported wastegate
> 12psi actuator


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

badger5 said:


> its ended up a misnomer as its results pretty much got 95% of the bigger wheeled hybrids...
> 
> TFSi flat back turbine wheel, with std k04 sized comp wheel but a billet version, 12psi actuator, ported etc
> 
> from the man who made it himself (beachbuggy)


Thanks for the clarification.:thumbup::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

elRey said:


> Are you both saying with ALL ELSE untouched, that by reducing boost request early, you can maintain a higher boost/power later? How? By just the heat, or lack of heat generated early with early boost? And by enough to noticeably move the powerband as opposed to just leaving low-end torque on the table?



I know you're mostly interested in the tuning aspect of things, but for me it was the early bottleneck created by the flow inadequacy of the turbine side that was hard to recover from. So, by letting the compressor totally rip at onset, the restriction created in the hotside ended up hurting the torque output and the effect is carried over somewhat to the top end. In my particular case, ECU boost request/actual means nothing because I purely control pressure mechanically. Heat was never an issue for me either because of my elaborate approach to charge cooling. It's purely a matter of a lack of flow with the anemic stock turbine. 


If you look at this particular dyno graph of my car at 30 psi, you can see that the sharply-rising TQ curve is meet by a wall of restriction that it never recovers from. Taming the TQ onset early on (cap on boost onset) would have moved the wall to the right and allowed more HP (which is a TQ multiplication factor) to be generated with increased revolutions. This is what Bill and I are essentially saying! 












The stock housing itself was restrictive, but the super small turbine wheel on my early narrowband AMU car was just not designed for all the power we're looking to extract from the turbo. The standard K04-02x spec turbine rotor is a 49/41 mm wheel but for some reason I had this baby (almost straight-cut) 42/41mm wheel that belongs on a lawnmower.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> Did you say earlier that you saw a max of 170g/s on your stock k04 previously as a maximum? did I misread that bit?
> 
> One thing I do see, which does fly in the face of what you describe is the pushing hard early not compromising top end power levels tho. I see the motors not tolerate timing up top, killing torque, when pushing a modest (by your measurements) 24psi early on... My personal thoughts on this are that the cyl temps are getting to hot to sustain the ign advance and the knock sensors doing their thing in the upper rev band, pulling back and hurting torque. When I build to approx 20psi on spool, then build again to 23-24psi level and hold there if it will, I get higher power figures. The torque peak is at a higher rpm also as I build up the load with rpm. Seems to work for me.. I've never had a hybrid or stock k04 like a high boost on spool, without it falling away much sooner up the rev range. I put this down to heat myself.
> 
> ...


What I was referring to (in response to beachbuggy) was that at my wastegate pressure, which happen to be about 22 psi, I only generated 170-180 g/s of air flowed. And at full tilt I was maxing 245 g/s (proving that more boost flowed more air and the engine not a restriction yet). 


In my car, EGT was never a problem and timing corrections are literally nonexistent (the timing graph I posted earlier reflects that). The real problem was the backpressure wall meet at the turbine that virtual stalls the party.


I often see the engine VE mentioned as the problem (the explanation that the motor's inability to ingest the air fast enough causing the European hybrid surge debacle, is a prime example). If this was true, all those big turbo cars with stock head would be suffering from this too. The problem is in "stockish" turbine sized wheels that creates backpressure big enough to slow the compressor and put it out of operational range. 


This is what my max airflow curve looks like:


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

Why are we STILL discussing boost pressure?

Max, you have posted this info many times before. I don't see why you have to keep posting this info/data.

The Europeans will simply not accept it. Its a fact.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

Dude gonzo, how many screen names do you have?


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

Slimjimmn said:


> Dude gonzo, how many screen names do you have?


Only 2 afaik


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...The stock housing itself was restrictive, but the super small turbine wheel on my early narrowband AMU car was just not designed for all the power we're looking to extract from the turbo. The standard K04-02x spec turbine rotor is a 49/41 mm wheel but for some reason I had this baby (almost straight-cut) 42/41mm wheel that belongs on a lawnmower...


Hey, first off - thanks for taking the time to put this thread together in such a detailed fashion. Big plus for the community for sure :beer:

I've got a K04-022 that's just begging for this treatment. It's from a 2001 TT 225 though, so AMU... lawnmower wheel I guess  Just measured a K03-52 turbine wheel and it's 45/40!

*Edit:* Were all your previous testing and performance figures done with the small turbine wheel?!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Hey, first off - thanks for taking the time to put this thread together in such a detailed fashion. Big plus for the community for sure
> 
> 
> I've got a K04-022 that's just begging for this treatment. It's from a 2001 TT 225 though, so AMU... lawnmower wheel I guess Just measured a K03-52 turbine wheel and it's 45/40!
> ...



Thanks, I'm glad it's helpful to people!


The answer to your question is yes! All my testing and results were achieved using that lawnmower turbine wheel. Even the K03-052 turbine wheel has way more inducer bite than this, and expel nearly as much air at 40 mm exducer size. Although it made for great spooling characteristics, that wheel is not designed or suited for flow at all. IMO, anyone looking to push things should look to upgrade (if using this wheel) to later standard K04-02X turbine wheel spec'd at 49/41 mm (with much more advanced blade design too). 

The standard K04-02X turbine wheel will support up to the KKK 2280 compressor wheel (45/56 mm) comfortably without becoming too much of an imbalanced mismatch. Properly matching compressor to turbine wheel seems like a black art in this community and not understood of valued by many in the hybrid circles.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Gonzzz said:


> Why are we STILL discussing boost pressure?
> 
> Max, you have posted this info many times before. I don't see why you have to keep posting this info/data.
> 
> The Europeans will simply not accept it. Its a fact.



you have to be one of the most arrogant people I've come across in a long time.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> *Graph of flowed air recorded at the MAF at the limit of the K04-02x
> *



Do you have this graph plotted with boost onset?

In terms of power output, ign advance possible etc, your use of E85 makes comparisons difficult. Sadly we dont have such juice here 
Its a game changer...

Where we see and discuss differences, this is a huge differentiator

Re-reading the thread from the start again, eveything you have done to the housing, porting etc, with the exception of the uber actuator you have chosen, has been successfully applied by myself some years ago.. 
us europeans (I british not european btw! lol) are'nt as backward as some "muppet folks" would like to believe..
I have had 30psi at 7krpm on 12psi actuator on a k04 hybrid.... without maxing out available n75 duty cycles.. It kicked big torque but was not a happy bunny top end... temps, cyl pressures, backpressures etc etc..........

there as been some evidence on pushing hybrids hard that apparent timing could be held.. even without e85 fuel, but the reality was the exhaust back pressures overcame the exhaust valves and they were being held open dropping effective CR of the motor...

regards
bill


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

badger5 said:


> you have to be one of the most arrogant people I've come across in a long time.


Touché Bill, touché


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> Do you have this graph plotted with boost onset?
> 
> 
> In terms of power output, ign advance possible etc, your use of E85 makes comparisons difficult. Sadly we dont have such juice here
> ...



Unfortunately Bill, I could not have any of my airflow or timing graphs plotted with a boost reference. The sensor max capacity being too low makes readings maxed out from onset, all the way to near redline (when the boost finally tapers back down to where the sensor can accurately monitor it again). I also don't use a log-able electronic boost gauge as I like to have mechanical analogue gauges/needles for racing simplicity.


The fuel discrepancy is a valid point, as E85's capability to resist knock can't be rivaled by conventional fuels. The fact that the fuel burns 200* cooler in average, can take all the timing the motor will allow (even past pumping losses), and is highly oxygenated shows its superiority. It would ludicrous to suggest that the same aggressiveness of tuning can be achieved in comparison to conventional pump fuel. However, the point that needs to made and remembered in that regard, is that the limit reached by a fuel grade in terms of boost, timing, cyl pressure, and heat, isn't necessarily the ultimate limit. In your case, it only showcases the physical limit of that particular fuel in terms of tuning. For example, how aggressively 87 octane fuel can be tuned doesn't say anything about what can really be achieved on a setup without the fuel as the limiting factor. That's why when someone restricted by fuel boldly says to us Americans that using X boost is detrimental and doesn't amount to any power (again because of fuel-related corrections), it could be little frustrating to someone like Gonzo that has hands on experience and deal with it on a daily basis just like you do. To me it resonates as if we don't know what we're doing in the US because of the fuel limitations some of you guys have in Europe.

The backpressure issue, limitations of the turbine size and its capacity to evacuate pressure before there is reversal, and possible excess gas staying in the combustion chamber is what we should focus, and be interested in. That's what IMO is relevant to the thread, not a UK vs US ideal boost, timing and EGT issue because we're obviously playing with a different set of rule because of fuel. That's also why I did all the porting to the turbine, 4" expansion chambered downpipe, manifold discharge collector opened to 1.83", and went with an 11 blade wheel instead of the normal RS6 12 blade wheel everyone use in their hybrids. I already know that the fuel can take the incredible amount of pressure and timing, now the main interest is how efficient the system will be at moving air. Do you still think that I'll still be dealing with turbine flow restriction with all that work? And what else would you suggest to be done to improve on that?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

There, finally back on topic....


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Unfortunately Bill, I could not have any of my airflow or timing graphs plotted with a boost reference. The sensor max capacity being too low makes readings maxed out from onset, all the way to near redline (when the boost finally tapers back down to where the sensor can accurately monitor it again). I also don't use a log-able electronic boost gauge as I like to have mechanical analogue gauges/needles for racing simplicity.
> 
> 
> The fuel discrepancy is a valid point, as E85's capability to resist knock can't be rivaled by conventional fuels. The fact that the fuel burns 200* cooler in average, can take all the timing the motor will allow (even past pumping losses), and is highly oxygenated shows its superiority. It would ludicrous to suggest that the same aggressiveness of tuning can be achieved in comparison to conventional pump fuel. However, the point that needs to made and remembered in that regard, is that the limit reached by a fuel grade in terms of boost, timing, cyl pressure, and heat, isn't necessarily the ultimate limit. In your case, it only showcases the physical limit of that particular fuel in terms of tuning. For example, how aggressively 87 octane fuel can be tuned doesn't say anything about what can really be achieved on a setup without the fuel as the limiting factor. That's why when someone restricted by fuel boldly says to us Americans that using X boost is detrimental and doesn't amount to any power (again because of fuel-related corrections), it could be little frustrating to someone like Gonzo that has hands on experience and deal with it on a daily basis just like you do. To me it resonates as if we don't know what we're doing in the US because of the fuel limitations some of you guys have in Europe.
> ...



I think the "fuel" element has'nt been as clearly differentiated in the discussion..
Its the big differentiator, but makes also the development (interesting as it is) irrelevent to non E85 users... So much more capable fuel than pump UL..

The statements I and beachbuggy have made in this thread are obviously in this context relevant only to pump fuel.. UL.

I made a 4" downpipe expansion chamber myself earlier this year on a GTX3071 audi S3.. It seemed to me worth a try to relieve any turbine back pressure.
Hybrids ultimate performance to me will always be hotside limited, and thats where the work should be done, as you are doing, to help it out.

:thumbup:


----------



## fed0ra (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm curious to know just how much of a benefit the 4-inch expansion is to spoolup, backpressure and EGTs. I get that it opens it up but does opening it up for that short tract actually have much of a benefit? You guys seem to know what you are doing and I'm sure you've done some sort of testing on this before sticking with it so I'd be curious to know what the "gains" were.

Good work all around :beer:.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> There, finally back on topic....


Maybe not! :laugh:



badger5 said:


> I think the "fuel" element has'nt been as clearly differentiated in the discussion..
> Its the big differentiator, but *makes also the development (interesting as it is) irrelevent to non E85 users...* So much more capable fuel than pump UL..
> 
> The statements I and beachbuggy have made in this thread are obviously in this context relevant only to pump fuel.. UL.


"Development irrelevant to non E85 user" is an interesting perspective (a bit patronizing if you ask me), but I respect it, just like I respect and welcome everyone's point of view. Personally, I fail to see how this could be, when I'm a guy that ran, with a stock turbo through a long period of time, with pump fuel, than a blend of 105 unleaded race fuel, back to pump with water injection, then direct-port water injection and E85, before finally entering the hybrid world now. Your statement is like saying that my experimenting at any of those stages was irrelevant to everyone else that wasn't on my specific combination of fuel and hardware. And to be honest, based on the amount of text and forum messages I got with a word of appreciation in it, the rest of the US community find it very relevant (E85-running or not). 




badger5 said:


> I made a 4" downpipe expansion chamber myself earlier this year on a GTX3071 audi S3.. It seemed to me worth a try to relieve any turbine back pressure.
> Hybrids ultimate performance to me will always be hotside limited, and thats where the work should be done, as you are doing, to help it out.


Fortunately, I got a chance to run the majority of an SCCA season with the expansion-chambered DP. I can absolutely, positively report, from actual experience with it on a stock frame snail, that it did a lot (not simply "worth a try"). I personally think it's awesome that you made one for a GTX3071, but in your line of thinking that information would be irrelevant to non-GTX3071 users (except maybe to say, oh I did one too).


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

When porting the hotside, how come you didn't smooth out the entire chamber or at least remove the divider b/t the wastegate and turbine?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

fed0ra said:


> I'm curious to know just how much of a benefit the 4-inch expansion is to spoolup, backpressure and EGTs. I get that it opens it up but does opening it up for that short tract actually have much of a benefit? You guys seem to know what you are doing and I'm sure you've done some sort of testing on this before sticking with it so I'd be curious to know what the "gains" were.
> 
> 
> Good work all around .



Thanks Ian! The expansion-chambered downpipe was a great improvement all around. In reference to the length of the chamber, it's NOT a volume thing, but mostly changing the exiting gas characteristics from spiral flow to turbulent flow. 


The hot and expanding gases out of the turbine blade comes out in circular flow pattern (the direction of rotation dictated by the speed of operation). That circular flow pattern is what is mostly detrimental to flow. By allowing a small expanding chamber for the gases to go break from that circular flow to turbulent flow, is where the benefit is. (here is visual diagram).














Why turbulent flow is better is better explained below than what I can ever scramble together in a few lines about it. 












- Did it help spool? 
Tremendously! I wasn't expecting this much from an already fast spooling setup, but it made me reconsider my notion of transient response. I really thought that it would mostly produce a noticeable difference to the top end, but I was surprised that it actually changed spool up that much. After this mod I had to find a way to bump my rev limiter because I was running through the usual gearing way too quickly at the track.


- Did it help with backpressure?
I'd like to believe it did. It was not measured as a single variable since I don't have a hotside pressure reference (this will be rectified with the hybrid via a turbine-mounted permanent pressure sender and gauge). What I can report, is that it's the only time I was able to get 38 psi out of the turbo down low (previous best was 36-37 psi). Logic would say that the backpressure reduction allowed more ideal conditions that trickled down to the compressor side. 


- Did it help EGT?
Surely! My data isn't necessarily applicable to all because of the nature of the fuel I run. What I can report is that my peak-n-hold EGT function was consistently lower by a good 50* C in similar racing conditions.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

woodywoods86 said:


> When porting the hotside, how come you didn't smooth out the entire chamber or at least remove the divider b/t the wastegate and turbine?


That divider is needed to prevent flow interference between the two paths. You have to think of the system as dynamic one, it's not always flowing through one or the other. There is quite a bit of a balancing act going on with air going through both main and bypass turbine ports, and allowing major interference would be a mistake. Another way to understand the effect of this functional divider is picturing an external wastegate plumbing. If the convergence piping is not done consciously to not impede both flow paths, there is some evident performance losses. :beer:


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> That divider is needed to prevent flow interference between the two paths. You have to think of the system as dynamic one, it's not always flowing through one or the other. There is quite a bit of a balancing act going on with air going through both main and bypass turbine ports, and allowing major interference would be a mistake. Another way to understand the effect of this functional divider is picturing an external wastegate plumbing. If the convergence piping is not done consciously to not impede both flow paths, there is some evident performance losses. :beer:


:beer:

So do you think the notch you removed assisted in preventing some of that flow interference?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Flow straightener in the turbine housing, after the turbine.


----------



## fed0ra (Oct 24, 2012)

Very cool! Thank you for that explanation, that makes a lot of sense. I never thought about the fact that gases moving spirally have to travel further.

This is something I will have to consider for my car. I am in the process of deciding how I want to handle the exhaust and my original idea was full 3", then 3" downpipe tapering into the stock system for discretion and all that, but now I may try the 4" expansion idea. Not sure how much it will cost to have made, but I wish I had the space/tools/welding prowess to build my own. Damn you apartment living :banghead:!


----------



## fed0ra (Oct 24, 2012)

Also, how would a 4" cat work as the expansion chamber work, either a stock cat that has been chopped or a high flow? The way I'm thinking about it the chamber would sit in roughly the same place as the cat would (at least on the A4) and the cell matrix may even act as a flow straightener similar to the ones inside of the MAF housings. That may not have any real effect on the exhaust gases but outside of slightly limiting total exhaust flow (which I would expect from any cat) it shouldn't reduce the overall effectiveness of the expansion chamber model, correct?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

fed0ra said:


> Also, how would a 4" cat work as the expansion chamber work, either a stock cat that has been chopped or a high flow? The way I'm thinking about it the chamber would sit in roughly the same place as the cat would (at least on the A4) and the cell matrix may even act as a flow straightener similar to the ones inside of the MAF housings. That may not have any real effect on the exhaust gases but outside of slightly limiting total exhaust flow (which I would expect from any cat)* it shouldn't reduce the overall effectiveness of the expansion chamber model, correct?*


See the last sentence of the snapshot I posted on the explanation of the concept. The expansion chamber must be right after the turbine exit to be effective. In my downpipe, we used an over-sized flange that got bored out, and a primary 3.5" short pipe was used to promote a smooth transition to the 4" chamber. I don't think that an oversized cat could serve you to gain the desired effect - too far downstream and what you see as flow straighteners are also very efficient flow restrictors (cell matrix density is way high even in high flow cats). :beer:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus

Have you looked at the TFSI turbo's they literally open out straight after the turbine, unlike the 20V one which has the 2-3" exit to get it past the divider. 
Interesting they don't have a divider and it spills straight out into the housing exit. The TTRS is even more prominent.

I think you run the risk if it opens out too much of loosing speed of the exit gasses..


----------



## CupraR Carl (Jul 28, 2013)

Great thread Marcus.
Back in 2006 five of us from the UK bought some of the first ever kO4 hybrids put together by a person active on this forum called Jaccob, his company was Beuhen Engineering. By today's standards they were very basic consisting only of a 2280 compressor wheel, very light porting and polishing, ceramic coated but the turbine remained standard with the extra turbine flow accommodated by providing clearance around the stock turbine.
When they were fitted we initially struggled to make any extra boost or power to be honest until we painstakingly realised the actuators were stock (5psi).most people sold them on in the meantime as we didn't know how to make good power nor did Jaccob to be honest. This same turbo currently makes 325bhp........only 25bhp off the best modern unit. The history of the hybrid is a short one and with each user experience comes a better understanding. Looking forward to your findings.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

T minus 6 months to Marcus releasing his own line of turbos haha


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Slimjimmn said:


> T minus 6 months to Marcus releasing his own line of turbos haha


He is working with us.

T minus 1 day before I release info about our new turbo line.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> T minus 1 day before I release info about our new turbo line.


I already know about it brah


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Slimjimmn said:


> I already know about it brah


Wizard


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> He is working with us.
> 
> T minus 1 day before I release info about our new turbo line.


:thumbup: opcorn:


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Wizard


Better than a fairy sprite


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Maybe not! :laugh:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We can dance about the wording max......... The E85 results make it E85 based, and changes the game compared to those reading this and not realising pump fuel will behave far less favourably. Thats my point.

The 4" downpipe on 4wd Audi S3 was a challenge... and I was working on the same principles as you also researched.
I will try something similar on our lupo k04 hybrid build over xmas... New manifold to test and hybrid spec to exercise. Sadly on 99UL Vpower plus wmi addition tho. No special E85 

keep up the interesting work ... your threads are always good to follow.. even when we dont see eye to eye. Respect back to you Sir..
:thumbup:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

badger5 said:


> We can dance about the wording max......... The E85 results make it E85 based, and changes the game compared to those reading this and not realising pump fuel will behave far less favourably. Thats my point.
> 
> The 4" downpipe on 4wd Audi S3 was a challenge... and I was working on the same principles as you also researched.
> I will try something similar on our lupo k04 hybrid build over xmas... New manifold to test and hybrid spec to exercise. Sadly on 99UL Vpower plus wmi addition tho. No special E85
> ...


You act like E85 is the exotic fuel that is impossible to find. I was in Europe over the summer and saw several stations where it was being dispensed. You can buy it pre-mixed from race fuel distributors, heck you can make your own from a chemical supply store. Is it less convenient to obtain than here in the states and in other countries? I'm sure, but if you were just using it for dyno tuning and track events its not that much of a hurdle. You don't see us complaining about the absence of anything greater than 91 octane at the pump in a good part of the US...


----------



## fed0ra (Oct 24, 2012)

I see we are getting off topic again!

Lets not focus on which fuels are better, how available they are or how important tuning on them is to people not using those fuels. Instead lets all focus on some kickass work to push k-series hybrids to their limit and probably beyond it :beer:.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Marcus
> 
> Have you looked at the TFSI turbo's they literally open out straight after the turbine, unlike the 20V one which has the 2-3" exit to get it past the divider.
> Interesting they don't have a divider and it spills straight out into the housing exit. The TTRS is even more prominent.


Very interesting indeed Beachbuggy, thanks for pointing it out! The engineers seem to have decided against adding the divider in the newer turbos, when they felt it was necessary before (even when the exit ports in both generation of turbos are similar in proximity in the exit section of the housing). Could it be possible that the angle of the flow coming out of the wastegate bypass port is converging at a more favorable angle in the newer turbos - or is it just technological advancement that proved that the divider apparatus didn't do much, and wasn't really needed? 

I could really uniformly open the exit path after the turbine (further reducing the pressure ratio difference pre/post turbine wheel) if I didn't have the divider to deal with. Do you think that there is more to gain (or less to loose) by doing this and eliminating the flow-separating divider? 




Beachbuggy said:


> I think you run the risk if it opens out too much of loosing speed of the exit gasses..


Is this in reference to the gases exiting the turbine wheel or the entire turbine housing, going into the modified downpipe?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

CupraR Carl said:


> Great thread Marcus.
> Back in 2006 five of us from the UK bought some of the first ever kO4 hybrids put together by a person active on this forum called Jaccob, his company was Beuhen Engineering. By today's standards they were very basic consisting only of a 2280 compressor wheel, very light porting and polishing, ceramic coated but the turbine remained standard with the extra turbine flow accommodated by providing clearance around the stock turbine.
> When they were fitted we initially struggled to make any extra boost or power to be honest until we painstakingly realised the actuators were stock (5psi).most people sold them on in the meantime as we didn't know how to make good power nor did Jaccob to be honest. This same turbo currently makes 325bhp........only 25bhp off the best modern unit. The history of the hybrid is a short one and with each user experience comes a better understanding. Looking forward to your findings.


Thank you Sir! Hopefully this thread can be a place where we can all put together the knowledge gathered and really push the limits of the stock frame turbos. :beer:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

4ceFed4 said:


> You act like E85 is the exotic fuel that is impossible to find. I was in Europe over the summer and saw several stations where it was being dispensed. You can buy it pre-mixed from race fuel distributors, heck you can make your own from a chemical supply store. Is it less convenient to obtain than here in the states and in other countries? I'm sure, but if you were just using it for dyno tuning and track events its not that much of a hurdle. You don't see us complaining about the absence of anything greater than 91 octane at the pump in a good part of the US...


Not that its relevant to the hybrid, but to answer your comment:
It is impossible to buy from pump E85 here. Wish it was'nt. It seems like empowering stuff.

You do realise UK is not mainland Europe.. Its not available aside from make your own.. but not practical 

99 Shell Vpower the best fuel we get here, short of race fuels which are expensive.
Water Meth is popular here though and helps with most things 1.8t


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> We can dance about the wording max......... The E85 results make it E85 based, and changes the game compared to those reading this and not realising pump fuel will behave far less favourably. Thats my point.
> 
> The 4" downpipe on 4wd Audi S3 was a challenge... and I was working on the same principles as you also researched.
> I will try something similar on our lupo k04 hybrid build over xmas... New manifold to test and hybrid spec to exercise. Sadly on 99UL Vpower plus wmi addition tho. No special E85
> ...


No problem Bill, and don't believe for a second that I don't understand where you're coming from with your point of view. As I said before, you're knowledge and inputs are always well received even if we may disagree on some minor technicalities. :beer:

Maybe at some point, when it's all sorted, I can throw a tank of US 93 pump gas in her, dial back the timing, boost, and AFR as needed to see what it does. Then we can gauge the real effect of the fuel as the main variable.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> No problem Bill, and don't believe for a second that I don't understand where you're coming from with your point of view. As I said before, you're knowledge and inputs are always well received even if we may disagree on some minor technicalities. :beer:
> 
> Maybe at some point, when it's all sorted, I can throw a tank of US 93 pump gas in her, dial back the timing, boost, and AFR as needed to see what it does. Then we can gauge the real effect of the fuel as the main variable.


maybe also.. I can cook up some E85 for our little lupo k04 hybrid over Xmas also..

What size injectors you using? I'm on 550's but will drop in some 630's next if they have room for the extra req'd from e85.
( my local methanol bio fuel supplier offered me a 200ltr barrel of Ethanol last time I went in there) Hmmmm


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> maybe also.. I can cook up some E85 for our little lupo k04 hybrid over Xmas also..
> 
> What size injectors you using? I'm on 550's but will drop in some 630's next if they have room for the extra req'd from e85.
> ( my local methanol bio fuel supplier offered me a 200ltr barrel of Ethanol last time I went in there) Hmmmm


I ran the stock turbo on 630's at 3 bar with plenty of injector duty cycle headroom left. My short term plan with this, is to run the same 630's at 4 bar (switching to 1000's later when it's all sorted), they will provide enough fuel at 4 bar for a hybrid without a doubt. The only issue for me with the 630's, been used at 4 bar of base pressure, is that this limits me to 30 psi of boost before running the risk of the stock rail going static (the OEM rail starts to do so at around 90 psi when supplying fuel to injectors flowing 500+ cc/min). Not really a big deal deal normally, as 30 psi is plenty of boost, but as you'll discover, e85 loves boost (even with a timing curve at MBT). 

Should be interesting to see your results! :beer:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

:thumbup:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The only issue for me with the 630's, been used at 4 bar of base pressure, is that this limits me to 30 psi of boost before running the risk of the stock rail going static (the OEM rail starts to do so at around 90 psi when supplying fuel to injectors flowing 500+ cc/min). Not really a big deal deal normally, as 30 psi is plenty of boost, but as you'll discover, e85 loves boost (even with a timing curve at MBT).



I've heard you mention this a few times Marcus and still puzzled by this. By definition a fuel rail is static. So, did you make a jig to test the 90psi? From seeing this car perform with good results (with e85 + 30psi and 1680cc injectors) makes me question your statement: http://forums.fourtitude.com/showthread.php?5935823-Seat-Leon-Cupra-R-Build-PPT-GT3071R


----------



## T-Boy (Jul 16, 2003)

18T_BT said:


> I've heard you mention this a few times Marcus and still puzzled by this. By definition a fuel rail is static. So, did you make a jig to test the 90psi? From seeing this car perform with good results (with e85 + 30psi and 1680cc injectors) makes me question your statement: http://forums.fourtitude.com/showthread.php?5935823-Seat-Leon-Cupra-R-Build-PPT-GT3071R


I think he's talking about the point where the pump can no longer overcome the pressure of the FPR and injectors due to boost pressure exceeding the pumps capability.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

T-Boy said:


> I think he's talking about the point where the pump can no longer overcome the pressure of the FPR and injectors due to boost pressure exceeding the pumps capability.


at some point injectors will get pintle lockout also...
7bar seemingly a common number on some bosch injectors


----------



## T-Boy (Jul 16, 2003)

badger5 said:


> at some point injectors will get pintle lockout also...
> 7bar seemingly a common number on some bosch injectors


:thumbup:


----------



## turbo2.24.1990 (Jun 2, 2008)

Max, what are you doing for gaskets for the manifold to turbo flange where you've ported pretty heavily?-I imagine you've ported bigger than the inside diameter of the oem gasket.


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

turbo2.24.1990 said:


> Max, what are you doing for gaskets for the manifold to turbo flange where you've ported pretty heavily?-I imagine you've ported bigger than the inside diameter of the oem gasket.


Likely no gasket. I've done exactly what Max has done and been on the road for some time. 

As long as both mating surfaces are decked and flat then you can get away with no gasket.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Reserved!


?????


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

I love you. No really, I do. Your posts and threads make my logic broner grow. Keep up the good work sir. :thumbup:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

spartiati said:


> Likely no gasket. I've done exactly what Max has done and been on the road for some time.
> 
> As long as both mating surfaces are decked and flat then you can get away with no gasket.


I've heard some people are running that way. Do you also have problems with the turbo to manifold bolts coming loose? Mine come loose all the time and need to be re tightened and when I do the car feels better:laugh:
I've tried the expensive high temp thread locker but it doesn't do squat. I'm familiar with wire, locking plate from 034 and a ball of exhaust repair putty. Just curious what you do? :beer:


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Twopnt016v said:


> I've heard some people are running that way. Do you also have problems with the turbo to manifold bolts coming loose? Mine come loose all the time and need to be re tightened and when I do the car feels better:laugh:
> I've tried the expensive high temp thread locker but it doesn't do squat. I'm familiar with wire, locking plate from 034 and a ball of exhaust repair putty. Just curious what you do? :beer:


Ive found Nordlocks to be the only thing that doesnt back out.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

warranty225cpe said:


> Ive found Nordlocks to be the only thing that doesnt back out.


:thumbup:Yeah I forgot to mention I have those and they still come loose. Real deal nordlocks and not some cheap crap either..


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> :thumbup:Yeah I forgot to mention I have those and they still come loose. Real deal nordlocks and not some cheap crap either..


This 
Oem bolts and washers are the way to go with oem gasket. 
Not sure about aftermarket stuff though.


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Twopnt016v said:


> :thumbup:Yeah I forgot to mention I have those and they still come loose. Real deal nordlocks and not some cheap crap either..


Once I changed my bolts and put Nordlocks in, the problem went away and hasnt coming back. Been close to a year now.


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

warranty225cpe said:


> Once I changed my bolts and put Nordlocks in, the problem went away and hasnt coming back. Been close to a year now.


Lucky you. I have studs with nordlocks, still comes loose about every 1000 miles or so. I just keep a crow's foot in the trunk :laugh:


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

Everything listed here failed for me with a ported k03S on a "high flow" manifold. It all came loose. I just made sure to tighten stuff down weekly. It sucked. This is probably another reason why the higher power new factory hybrids have a manifold/turbine housing in a single casting.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

gdoggmoney said:


> This is probably another reason why the higher power new factory hybrids have a manifold/turbine housing in a single casting.


That and its cheaper to produce and has better more even flow.


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Twopnt016v said:


> I've heard some people are running that way. Do you also have problems with the turbo to manifold bolts coming loose? Mine come loose all the time and need to be re tightened and when I do the car feels better:laugh:
> I've tried the expensive high temp thread locker but it doesn't do squat. I'm familiar with wire, locking plate from 034 and a ball of exhaust repair putty. Just curious what you do? :beer:


Actually I never really have any problems with my jbs manifold and f23. I had studs for a while and they never backed out. Now I have 12.9 grade bolts torqued to 25ft lbs and its been solid for a while.


----------



## CupraR Carl (Jul 28, 2013)

Have you considered using stock K04 turbo downpipe studs and downpipe nuts. I've never heard of those backing out, Also use the big ass stock washers that are fitted to the stock K04-023 turbo bolts that provides a very flat surface for the bolts to torque to. Its also worth mentioning that Audi/vw use a hot bolt paste when fitting the mani to turbo bolts in the factory. Check on the grade of stainless your using too on your bolt/nut.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Every ko3/ko4 I ever work on has loose bolts lol. 
I am not using studs, I was using the bolts supplied with the FT prior to Doug switching to studs. Now I am using 10.9 grade vw main cap bolts, nordlocks, torqued to 25ftlbs and they loosen weekly. I'm gonna be switching turbos soon and I will try a different angle of attack. :beer:


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> Every ko3/ko4 I ever work on has loose bolts lol.
> I am not using studs, I was using the bolts supplied with the FT prior to Doug switching to studs. Now I am using 10.9 grade vw main cap bolts, nordlocks, torqued to 25ftlbs and they loosen weekly. I'm gonna be switching turbos soon and I will try a different angle of attack. :beer:


FYI nordlocks are one time use washers. Especially if they are over torqued and the slots squish flat


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

I've never heard that. We use/reuse nordlocks all the time on steam/gas turbines.

The trick to nordlocks is to tighten the bolt, listen it slightly, then retighten and torque. This ensures the washers seat properly. If you're .010" out of alignment, the washers don't work.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Slimjimmn said:


> ?????


Been working slowly because it got cold here in the northeast, but progress is being made. I decided to go externally wastegated with external dump to completely avoid gases re-entering the flow-restricted turbine housing. The idea came when beachbuggy mentioned that the newer factory-bound KKK aren't using the wastegate divider in the discharge portion of the housing. I tried to find concrete evidence that the divider is needed (or not), but came up empty. Not wanting to take the chance of hurting flow (if deleted), or leaving room on the table for improving flow (if left intact), I went for something that will outflow any other combination. In the process, I knocked down the divider and really opened up the discharge portion after the turbine wheel. I will update the thread when I get back from vacation next month.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

gdoggmoney said:


> I love you. No really, I do. Your posts and threads make my logic broner grow. Keep up the good work sir. :thumbup:


Thanks buddy, good to see you coming out of hibernation and posting again!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

how thin is the casting on the turbine area? I ask as I was porting my test one further and its got mighty thin wall on the turbine exit section.. time will tell how it will survive, but its very thing there now.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Don't know how I missed this thread to busy between Thanksgiving and New Years :laugh: On board now  :thumbup:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

:beer::thumbup:opcorn:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> how thin is the casting on the turbine area? I ask as I was porting my test one further and its got mighty thin wall on the turbine exit section.. time will tell how it will survive, but its very thing there now.


Bill, it's thinner on the side where the original-casting inner lip interfered with the airflow path exit. I can't measure right now since I'm not home from vacation for another couple of days, but you can see where a section of the turbine exit was massaged to promote flow in the last picture I posted. When porting the turbine, I never felt that I was removing too much material and that the walls where becoming structurally compromised, but as you said time will tell. opcorn:


*Edit*: Here are some pictures and measurement of the thinnest part of the turbine exit. As mentioned before, it's definitely thinner after the porting, but there is plenty of wall thickness at well over 0.25" in the thinnest section.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> Don't know how I missed this thread to busy between Thanksgiving and New Years :laugh: On board now  :thumbup:


Ted, how the hell have you been? You definitely need to update us on your setup, especially if you made progress while not posting on the forums. Good to have you back aboard! 


Big_Tom said:


> :beer::thumbup:opcorn:


Tom is in the house! :beer:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

you gaped that hole and then sprayed all over it

Sure you're not a pornstar?


----------



## cwyamz (Aug 1, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Tom is in the house! :beer:


Tom is a pimp. Boss status.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Tom is in the house! :beer:





cwyamz said:


> Tom is a pimp. Boss status.


thx for the love fellas :heart:


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

Hibnernating is a good term :x This forum has sort of been..... dead ish. Been busy with a cross country move, new job and keeping cars running.


----------



## Slimjimmn (Apr 8, 2006)

Looks like I will have to keep my mk4 longer than anticipated so I might end up buying a ft or gtt and such this summer. Might be buying another house so need to save for that


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Bill, it's thinner on the side where the original-casting inner lip interfered with the airflow path exit. I can't measure right now since I'm not home from vacation for another couple of days, but you can see where a section of the turbine exit was massaged to promote flow in the last picture I posted. When porting the turbine, I never felt that I was removing too much material and that the walls where becoming structurally compromised, but as you said time will tell. opcorn:


We have had some +ve success with our chinafold and badger5 modding..
highest (in uk) hybrid k04 power with some very appealing egt's
372bhp and 855'c measured in std k04 OE position. 1.4-1.5bar boost

Yours should be mental  (in a nice way)


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Nice results Bill. I will hopefully be dynoing within the next two weeks... I have done similar porting to my turbo as Max. I am curious to see the results. I'm optimistic as I am approaching 85-90% Injector duty cycle on G2 630's.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> We have had some +ve success with our chinafold and badger5 modding..
> highest (in uk) hybrid k04 power with some very appealing egt's
> 372bhp and 855'c measured in std k04 OE position. 1.4-1.5bar boost
> 
> Yours should be mental  (in a nice way)


That's some solid numbers for 1.5 bar of boost! This gets me excited and optimistic about what I'll get out of mine on E85 and an additional .5 bar of boost target. I think the re-worked JBS knockoffs are becoming the gold standard for the standard hybrids, I'm using one myself because of the flat collector to flange out my external wastegate gases... should be mental as you put it. :beer:

PS: updated my previous post that answered your question about the bored out wall thickness with some measurements and pictures. 



spartiati said:


> Nice results Bill. I will hopefully be dynoing within the next two weeks... I have done similar porting to my turbo as Max. I am curious to see the results. I'm optimistic as I am approaching 85-90% Injector duty cycle on G2 630's.


Can't wait to see what you squeeze out of yours Steeve, next racing season should be epic with Jeff, you, and I taking the hybrid thing to the next level. :thumbup:


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

badger5 said:


> We have had some +ve success with our chinafold and badger5 modding..
> highest (in uk) hybrid k04 power with some very appealing egt's
> 372bhp and 855'c measured in std k04 OE position. 1.4-1.5bar boost
> 
> Yours should be mental  (in a nice way)


FWD or AWHP?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

gdoggmoney said:


> FWD or AWHP?


@fly power on my dyno.
fwd vw lupo is the car it lives in 970kg
fun.. and my wifes car - haha


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


>


The thin section on mine on your picture, with the support bracket lug sat down at 6 o'clock, is from the 12 o'clock area, going clockwise to the 6 o'clock area as staring at the hotsides turbine wheel.. The area of the throat machining for the turbine wheel. Very thin on mine there. K16 turbine wheel in there tho, so machined bigger than most + me getting jiggy with the flap wheels and carbide cutter.

so far so good.. its driving about now ok.


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

badger5 said:


> @fly power on my dyno.
> fwd vw lupo is the car it lives in 970kg
> fun.. and my wifes car - haha


That is still very very impressive. I may go with a Garrett Hybrid for the daily driver and give up the dyno slip & numbers for a broad powerband useful in traffic and etc. I'm still limping along on a stocker with a cracked housing -- as most are somewhere cracked and leaky.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

gdoggmoney said:


> I'm still limping along on a stocker with a cracked housing -- as most are somewhere cracked and leaky.


Truth :/


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

thought I would share.. seeing as I know max like boost...

from yesterday.. shocked what happened










2ltr stroker motor, 99Vpower fuel, 80% meth wmi, largeport, my 3" intake, fmic 3" downpipe, decat etc

relentless v3.. glowed like the sun on reheat.. crazy egt's BUT, what it churned out was a shock.

Hybrid Beach Buggy K04 hybrid. K16 clipped/clearanced turbine, his 7+7 billet comp wheel.. 15psi actuator

Now.. the run was not the result of tuning but an n75 crapping out moment.. so all the boost.. CF's were tolerable and I lifted when I felt any more = melting from muchos hot egt's 1000'C+ @ turbo in stock measurement sensor.










Your 400bhp goal may in fact be possible now I've seen this.. on regular pump fuel..

Blimey!

going to be fun watching your progress Max


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

badger5 said:


> thought I would share.. seeing as I know max like boost...
> 
> from yesterday.. shocked what happened
> 
> ...


Is that 99 octane RON (it's morning and my brain is dumb) aka, the equivalent of 6 above our us 93 octane? Impressive.... Have to work on getting EGT's down, then again you are at or over the half dollar size K outlet/inlet.


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

But, but, I thought 23psi was the sweet spot of hybrids everywhere?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

"Sweet" spot

This is madness spot


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

I'll agree on that, but did it work or not?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Define worked?

Egts being as high as they are I'd say no! 

But yes it proved a point..


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> thought I would share.. seeing as I know max like boost...
> 
> from yesterday.. shocked what happened
> 
> ...


Great and exciting results, a bit accidental, but shows what's possible. I can't wait for the weather to give me a break here in the Northern USA so I can't put the car back and get on the rollers. Thank you for sharing!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Define worked?
> 
> Egts being as high as they are I'd say no!
> 
> But yes it proved a point..


Yes, the high EGT would make it not suitable for long term use at it sits. But as I always argued (based on extensive personal experience getting power this way with stock turbos), with the proper steps taken to lower the air charge, EGT, and raise the effective knock threshold, power-making boost like demonstrated there can be put to good use. 

For example people usually think I've lost my marbles to always seek MBT on my setups and run that much timing advance, not realizing that advancing timing past the usual norm (obviously staying right under MBT) always bring EGT way down, and make high boost usable safely. It's all about doing the supporting mods necessary to make it work safely. The point is that it's possible with the proper steps and knowledge to make the high boost work reliably and safely (my old stock k04 at 30+ psi for years, and not always on E85 is a testament). At least we can get past the imaginary psi wall that were previously argued in the thread. Let's keep the discussion going and see how far we can collectively push this hybrid thing (and keep us posted with the progress you guys make over the pond). :beer:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> But, but, I thought 23psi was the sweet spot of hybrids everywhere?


It is for sensible egt's on our pump fuel...

this was unexpected.. and would last barely minutes given its temps.
still shocked it managed it...


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> I'll agree on that, but did it work or not?


depends on what you deem "worked"... lol
managed it once.. yea.

sustainable egt's - nope.
It would end badly.

However, stroker and this spec of hybrid, which I believe is larger than others, it proved there's more in it..

We will be swapping the v3 for my manifold and opening the turbo throat to match my upsize manifold and see whats possible with a more "sensible" level of egt..
We have 372bhp @ 855'c on our lupo on very similar spec hybrid on smallport from 1.4bar.. I did'nt push that hard as timing was fighting me a this point.. Smallport on lupo, largeport on the crazy one I posted.. largeports in my experience help support decent timing up top.. so.. you never know.

Was interesting to me, so I thought I would share.
Normal Vpower 99 fuel, +80% meth mix on its wmi.
D03 nozzle from memory


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes, the high EGT would make it not suitable for long term use at it sits. But as I always argued (based on extensive personal experience getting power this way with stock turbos), with the proper steps taken to lower the air charge, EGT, and raise the effective knock threshold, power-making boost like demonstrated there can be put to good use.
> 
> For example people usually think I've lost my marbles to always seek MBT on my setups and run that much timing advance, not realizing that advancing timing past the usual norm (obviously staying right under MBT) always bring EGT way down, and make high boost usable safely. It's all about doing the supporting mods necessary to make it work safely. The point is that it's possible with the proper steps and knowledge to make the high boost work reliably and safely (my old stock k04 at 30+ psi for years, and not always on E85 is a testament). At least we can get past the imaginary psi wall that were previously argued in the thread. Let's keep the discussion going and see how far we can collectively push this hybrid thing (and keep us posted with the progress you guys make over the pond). :beer:


Are you on the "11 blade RS6 turbine wheel" you say in your early posts?
what inducer/exducer size is it?

:thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

badger5 said:


> depends on what you deem "worked"... lol
> managed it once.. yea.
> 
> sustainable egt's - nope.
> ...


:thumbup:

I understand what you are saying. Still a feat one way or another.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> Are you on the "11 blade RS6 turbine wheel" you say in your early posts?
> what inducer/exducer size is it?
> 
> :thumbup:


Yes Sir! The specs are 45 mm exducer and 50 mm on the inducer (turbine bore clearanced to my specs).


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes Sir! The specs are 45 mm exducer and 50 mm on the inducer (turbine bore clearanced to my specs).


customer supplied hotside I have opened up to match my manifold. Had to be a little more careful to not go my full diameter by the closest insert as this is a genuine BW hotside with those M10/14 inserts in there. China hotsides as we know are just m10 tapped direct into hotside.. so more room


























Are you using a chinafold or your ported oe one?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Bill, I'm using a chinafold turbine specifically because the insert-style on the factory housings prohibits fully opening the entrance throat. You can see here, I would be into the inserts if I ported the stock turbine to full manifold potential.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


>





I see you're still leaving the somewhat flow-restrictive bean shape on the turbine bore discharge after porting. I found that with a bit more work, you're capable of fully opening the bore and airflow path. You should give that a try on one of your test subjects and report. 



With divider:












Without divider:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

The divider is pretty much cut back.. This is with extra clearance as well so if it where ported to the clearance it would probably loose the divider. It was the most I was prepared to go.. maybe bill is more brave than me but it was for a customer so I had a certain amount " duty of care" to be push it too far..


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Beachbuggy said:


> The divider is pretty much cut back.. This is with extra clearance as well so if it where ported to the clearance it would probably loose the divider. It was the most I was prepared to go.. maybe bill is more brave than me but it was for a customer so I had a certain amount " duty of care" to be push it too far..


And my new housings have had this divider moved back anyway


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I see you're still leaving the somewhat flow-restrictive bean shape on the turbine bore discharge after porting. I found that with a bit more work, you're capable of fully opening the bore and airflow path. You should give that a try on one of your test subjects and report.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The one I did for the lupo has no bumps.. more work done on that one.. but its @ my risk, vs customer one..
the divider might as well not be there its that thin once I finished with it.. hehe.. hell, it might have melted and shot down the downpipe for what I know.. it was mighty wafer thin..
the castings do subtly differ from the assortment I see, and the degree of whats there to remove and from where is surprisingly inconsistent. 

the customer one is genuine BW hotside, the ones I use from BBT are like yours.. more meat to play with. Soft to port too. nice.
The K16 turbine I am using is a little larger I believe than the RS6 versions so I believe.

What are you doing on the wastegate.. Did I read you planning on external gating ot did I dream that? (possible I may have halucinated that bit)

other bit I tickled on lupo's was,....


----------



## theswoleguy (Jan 25, 2006)

sooooo someone else just as crazy (well more crazy) than i was with stock snails...

so which one of you two bastards are going to work over my k03s on my ecoboost :-D


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

They use Ko3s on them? That's pretty interesting.....

Sent from my LG-D801 using Tapatalk


----------



## abacorrado (Apr 5, 2005)

Sub'd


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> And my new housings have had this divider moved back anyway


Interesting! So, you're getting the housing made with the casting correction? If that's the case, why stop there and not implement other enhancing features that would make it even better?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> The one I did for the lupo has no bumps.. more work done on that one.. but its @ my risk, vs customer one..
> the divider might as well not be there its that thin once I finished with it.. hehe.. hell, it might have melted and shot down the downpipe for what I know.. it was mighty wafer thin..
> the castings do subtly differ from the assortment I see, and the degree of whats there to remove and from where is surprisingly inconsistent.
> 
> ...



k16 turbine wheel... Nice! That's a pretty big wheel considering how anemic of a turbine wheel this turbos started with. I would assume that you're matching this with some compressor wheel that's bigger than the usual 2283 to 2380 spec ones that are popular. K16-spec turbine wheel and a larger than 2380 size compressor wheel would be really 'mental' on 2.0 stroked 1.8t.

As for the wastegate, you weren't dreaming. I'm going with a TIAL unit and using a modified manifold to route the bypass outlet. I also won't recirculate and will have an external dump (screamer pipe) to vent the exhaust gases. I'll snap some pics of what I have going on when it's not below zero in my garage.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

theswoleguy said:


> sooooo someone else just as crazy (well more crazy) than i was with stock snails...
> 
> so which one of you two bastards are going to work over my k03s on my ecoboost :-D


What happened to the old crazy Josh that got his hands dirty and pushed the norms? :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

abacorrado said:


> Sub'd


Check your PMs!


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> k16 turbine wheel... Nice! That's a pretty big wheel considering how anemic of a turbine wheel this turbos started with. I would assume that you're matching this with some compressor wheel that's bigger than the usual 2283 to 2380 spec ones that are popular. K16-spec turbine wheel and a larger than 2380 size compressor wheel would be really 'mental' on 2.0 stroked 1.8t.
> 
> As for the wastegate, you weren't dreaming. I'm going with a TIAL unit and using a modified manifold to route the bypass outlet. I also won't recirculate and will have an external dump (screamer pipe) to vent the exhaust gases. I'll snap some pics of what I have going on when it's not below zero in my garage.




Maybe I need to dig this one out.. Gt35 in a k04


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

Beachbuggy said:


> Maybe I need to dig this one out.. Gt35 in a k04


HA. That can't be good!


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Beachbuggy said:


>


"Stock Turbo Frame"


----------



## theswoleguy (Jan 25, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> What happened to the old crazy Josh that got his hands dirty and pushed the norms? :laugh:


I'm still here just don't want to do the eco turbos Lol. Porting I leave to others. 

I did a motor mount today and changed the front gear oil on the hair dresser car. Waiting for my 1200s to arrive. Now to fix this annoying buzz/rattle. I think it was stock oil Lol 96k miles 13 years old. 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Max,
Having the same problems here waiting for some warmer weather before digging into my engine. Spending more time adding to my disappearing wood supply and getting educated by your links.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time to give an update on this project! The long and harsh winter has prevented any wrenching time for a few months, but I'm back at it. I just finished my JBS-style cast manifold modified for an external wastegate setup. As mentioned before, I have decided to go externally wastegated with the hybrid turbo. The idea is to not recirculate bypass gases back into the mainstream flow and turbine discharge area. This will help reduce the high temperature and backpressure that always hunt these stock frame turbos. I am going with an atmospheric dump that will dump the bypassed gases in the driveshaft tunnel away from the bay. 


The flat collector on the JBS design offers a perfect spot for a welded or bolt-on outlet flange. I went with a welded v-band to test the prototype, but I'm having v-band flanges made that will make it a bolt-on mod if anyone wants to replicate my insanity. 


I also ported the runner entrances (gasket match) to avoid restriction there since JBS designed and casted this unit with smaller runner ID than OEM. This opens the door for me to also port match the exhaust ports on the head. 

Now that this is done, turbo assembly is scheduled for this weekend... Finally! 















In-car fitment









Runner entrance before and after:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Good stuff! :thumbup:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Why haven't you opened up the collector? The stock size is restrictive .. opening out as done with the B5 version really assists the flow along with porting the turbine housing opening .


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Why haven't you opened up the collector? The stock size is restrictive .. opening out as done with the B5 version really assists the flow along with porting the turbine housing opening .



I think you're looking at the manifold top. The wastegate outlet opening there is 35mm which is plenty big and much bigger than OEM




































*This is the turbine side that's also opened as much as safely possible. *




Before porting:












After porting:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

For those wondering if the JBS-style manifold fits with my 4" expansion chamber - it's a bit tight, but clears. 






















and with v-band installed:


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Ordered mine... Can't wait to add it into my setup! Thanks for confirming that for me...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

NP Steve! :beer:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

Very good thread
I anxious to see the results.
I have one k04 with 2.0 tfsi turbine and compressor K04-0064 5304-970-0064 Turbocharger Billet Compressor Wheel 7+7 Blades
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Kinugawa-...arts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item19ea247cee
does anyone have the compressor map?

Iam waiting for badger5 manifold, then i will put the results here


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

You won't find a compressor map as they are a special order item that was made to help prevent surge, readily copied over the last few years!

It flows very similar to the 6+6 version but it doesn't surge as the surge line is more to the left... I wouldn't recommend anyone fitting the 6+6 original if planning on boosting hard.. The larger exducer version I tested a year or so ago allowed higher boost to be run due higher PR


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

This is so epic.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

woodywoods86 said:


> This is so epic.


Yes sir:thumbup: You know if Max is involved it will always be epic. Glad is stock unit finally failed so he can play with us and the hybrids.:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

In page 4, there was a lengthy discussion about what to use for manifold-to-turbo gasket and hardware backing out. Not sure about the k03 stuff, but on the K04-02x equipped cars using factory hardware, the bolts are a bit too long (especially in one of the turbine volute entrance inserts). That causes the bolt to bottom out in the hotside before some good clamping can be applied. The solution is to run shorter hardware that clamp the turbo to the manifold before they get a chance to bottom out). 

As far as the gasket situation is concerned, the easiest approach is to check both surfaces for straighteness (machine them down if needed), and run without a gasket. A thin layer of wheel bearing grease, applied on both surfaces is a good practice if running sans-gasket. The wheel bearing turns into carbon after a few heat cycles and provide a perfect seal (re-torquing after said heat cycles is not a bad idea). 

I thought about just turning the mating surfaces and run without a gasket. However, as I was reassembling my turbo last night, I realized that the turbine housing volute entrance, being ported and opened, leaves such a narrow mating surface on the slightly eccentric bolt pattern, that I didn't want to chance it. A gasket would provide much better security since that one bolt hole is a bit close to the throat. I got myself a sheet of copper and made a gasket. I annealed it to get it softer so it give me a good compressable material to seal things up.











After annealing












Another thing worth noting is that I had to use my OEM compressor housing ring because I'm ditching the actuator and the braket doubles as a ring.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

have you used copper before max?

any success with it?

I like the grease idea.. not heard of that one before..

Our Lupo is running gasketless, since Jan so far so good.

Something I see a lot of currently is variance in the machined/drilled turbo hotside mounting holes and the bores concentricity..









Where I am porting customer supplied turbos/hotside to mate with my chinafolds own larger bore, I am seeing a wide variance of these bores..
I machine and port to a fixed template which matches the manifolds CNC machining I have done, so its ensured concentric. I was not expecting to see such differences between hotsides, both BW and China sourced ones.


coming along nicely Max

:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Bill, I've used copper before in my Mitsubishi Racing days and it holds perfectly. With roughly 1,100 * C melting point, if one can get the gasket to deform or even blow out without direct and constant contact to the exhaust stream, your EGT are way out of line and you got bigger problems. 

If the mating surfaces are true, and there enough meat between the throat and the hole/insert (2-3mm or more), gasketless is the way to go. The bearing grease trick works well too and a good insurance that you get a good, permanent seal. I am shocked that there is such big variance in the casting tolerances and bore concentricity. With my Chinese housing, I had 2mm of meat to one of the bolt holes, and that's why I chose to run a gasket to insure a good seal.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

:thumbup: to copper gaskets. I've always used them for head gaskets in my high performance small two stroke engines. The sealing there is EXTREMELY crucial and the copper gaskets have never blown out. I've actually reused the same copper HG on one of my engines (again, small two stroke engine, 11k+ RPMs) about a dozen times and it still shows no problematic signs of wear haha.

While I'm sure my machining of the head and the cylinder factor in to this, the point is copper makes an awesome gasket :thumbup: keep it up Max :beer:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

suffocatemymind said:


> :thumbup: to copper gaskets. I've always used them for head gaskets in my high performance small two stroke engines. The sealing there is EXTREMELY crucial and the copper gaskets have never blown out. I've actually reused the same copper HG on one of my engines (again, small two stroke engine, 11k+ RPMs) about a dozen times and it still shows no problematic signs of wear haha.
> 
> While I'm sure my machining of the head and the cylinder factor in to this, the point is copper makes an awesome gasket :thumbup: keep it up Max :beer:


we used a relentless supplied pos on a k03 tubular manifold they sent to test... did'nt last amonth before blowing out..

kinda made me think, hmmmmm about copper.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> we used a relentless supplied pos on a k03 tubular manifold they sent to test... did'nt last amonth before blowing out..
> 
> kinda made me think, hmmmmm about copper.


The possible reasons for this to happen are: 

- The gasket was too thin, and when fully compressed, wasn't providing a complete seal between the mating surfaces. 

- The bolts used were too long and bottoming out in the turbine before properly compressing/crushing the gasket to a seal. 

Using bolts that are too long seems to be very common for these turbos. The bolts are spec'ed the same, but the inserts or machined holes in the turbine aren't. One of the hole is much more shallow than the other two, and if that bolt is not shimed or replaced with a shorter one, it will bottom out before properly squeezing the turbine and mani together. The whole "bolt backing out" and "blowing gasket" trend can be attributed to the bolt length. Now, if a turbo is properly clamped and melting/blowing a copper gasket, EGT must be way out of line and other things are not far from melting!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The possible reasons for this to happen are:
> 
> - The gasket was too thin, and when fully compressed, wasn't providing a complete seal between the mating surfaces.
> 
> ...


not bolt length issue. it was on a k03 relentless manifold.. studded.
I know what you mean re length.. well aware of this..

What thickness copper have you used?

I may try and get some profiled to try


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

I haven't had an issue not using a gasket for a few years... If both mating surfaces are true and studs/bolts are torqued down properly there shouldn't be an issue...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> not bolt length issue. it was on a k03 relentless manifold.. studded.
> I know what you mean re length.. well aware of this..
> 
> What thickness copper have you used?
> ...


I've always used 0.025-in (0.635mm) with good success. 



spartiati said:


> I haven't had an issue not using a gasket for a few years... If both mating surfaces are true and studs/bolts are torqued down properly there shouldn't be an issue...


Yes Steve, if both surfaces are true and can keep a constant 2+mm of mating thickness, there is no need for a gasket. As Bill mentioned, there are wide inconsistencies with the turbine castings and bore concentricity, and this makes some turbine housings (obviously after porting) not suitable to run gasketless due to the lack of material.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I think you're looking at the manifold top. The wastegate outlet opening there is 35mm which is plenty big and much bigger than OEM
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you have any pictures of the collector area porting in finished guise max?

thanks


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

badger5 said:


> thought I would share.. seeing as I know max like boost...
> 
> from yesterday.. shocked what happened
> 
> ...


Badger5 can you post all Dyno


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> Do you have any pictures of the collector area porting in finished guise max?
> 
> thanks


Sorry Bill, I didn't take detailed pics of the collector area after drilling the outlet hole. Just picture the pics I posted with a 35mm hole in the middle. Turbo has been in the car, so I can't really snap pics at this point. 

Besides that, I only have a few things to finish up then it's start-up and dyno time! :beer:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Sorry Bill, I didn't take detailed pics of the collector area after drilling the outlet hole. Just picture the pics I posted with a 35mm hole in the middle. Turbo has been in the car, so I can't really snap pics at this point.
> 
> Besides that, I only have a few things to finish up then it's start-up and dyno time! :beer:


no worries.
getting close..

bet your looking fwd to seeing what it will do..

good luck

:thumbup:


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

badger5 said:


> no worries.
> getting close..
> 
> bet your looking fwd to seeing what it will do..
> ...


This x2!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Manifold, turbo, and downpipe all playing nice together!


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

Your absolutely killing us with anticipation. 

I'm not a hybrid guy, but your purpose it's perfect

Lets see 400whp+

Sent from my LG-D801 using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Dave926 said:


> Your absolutely killing us with anticipation.
> 
> I'm not a hybrid guy, but your purpose it's perfect
> 
> ...


The anticipation is killing me too!  If it wasn't for other suspension and chassis projects that needed to be finished, I'd fire it up and head to the dyno right now.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I'm posting this as it could be used by others looking to use a K04-023 turbine housing like I am. The main difference in the casting is that it has an EGT port that was used to house a factory EGT sensor in the later wideband TT ECUs. The problem with this port is that it comes with an odd M12 by 1.0 TPI that is hard to adapt and retrofit to common 1/8 NPT. If you're looking to use the port for something (I'm using it to incorporate a pressure sensor), or plug the port, I found this convenient adapter from Autometer. It makes it really easy to adapt to 1/8 NPT to run a sensor or even easily plug the port (M12x1.0 plugs are hard to find).


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

What compressor do You fit?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> What compressor do You fit?


I'm guessing you're asking what compressor was used? It's a machined factory-spec housing opened up to allow usage of a billet 2380 compressor wheel.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Turbo before it got mounted. I did add a rigid dummy actuator to act as a failsafe to keep the OEM flapper door shut, you never know with welds in that kind of environment. 










I did some slight revision on my external wastegate to move it away from the turbo outlet silicone hose.










And finally I reinforced my manifold by also welding the wastegate outlet pipe internally and adding a structural ring. I also extended the vband flange location higher, so the long bolts can clear and come out easily if needed. 










Car on the ground, turbo primed, and ready for baseline logs sometime this week hopefully. My Easter weekend is tied up instructing people racing Lambos and Ferraris with the Imagine Lifestyle program, so no time to play with the car and get it dynoed. :thumbdown:


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Why did you weld the waste gate to the flange? And you did put the valve seat in before welding, right?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I welded the wastegate to the angled extention piece to keep it clean. Sure, I could've have used a vband clamp, but they're a bit bulky and it would look redundant IMO -- and yes, fire ring was installed, preloaded, and clamped before welding. :laugh:


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

Looking forward to this, boost control should be easy with the wastegate as long as the turbine choice dosnt fight... Definitely in for dyno graph.

Please, please log boost and afr!!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> Looking forward to this, boost control should be easy with the wastegate as long as the turbine choice dosnt fight... Definitely in for dyno graph.Please, please log boost and afr!!


I'm narrowband, so my wideband is standalone and not integrated into vag logs - I also run an analog boost gauge, therefore the data will be monitored but not easily captured to be presented here (same with standalone EGT and pre-turbine pressure). However, I'll do my best to document everything the best I can.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I welded the wastegate to the angled extention piece to keep it clean. Sure, I could've have used a vband clamp, but they're a bit bulky and it would look redundant IMO -- and yes, fire ring was installed, preloaded, and clamped before welding. :laugh:


OK good! Just making sure. You might want to do a lap on that valve before running it. Welding the case causes a bunch of stresses on the case.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Will do! :thumbup: :beer:


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I'm narrowband, so my wideband is standalone and not integrated into vag logs - I also run an analog boost gauge, therefore the data will be monitored but not easily captured to be presented here (same with standalone EGT and pre-turbine pressure). However, I'll do my best to document everything the best I can.


Most of the dynos i've been do had data inputs for o/2 and MAP inputs to log with the graph segregated from the car...

But do what you can, this is definitely a unique setup.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Max, would you mind grabbing some measurements for me for what we discussed?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Max, would you mind grabbing some measurements for me for what we discussed?


Sure, I'm going to PM you my contact info and we can get started with that! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

It's alive! After a bit of monkeying around to get it running right, it's starting to feel pretty good. 

I had quite a bit of left over smoke at first from the oil blowby that was left by the previous dead turbo. I started with horrible idle, and no on-boost power. The thing was cutting hard (backfire) at 20 psi and around 4k. A Throttle body adaptation and some driving around took care of ECU adapting to the new 65mm TB. The breaking up problem was taken care by tightening the plug gap to .023" as I always had to before (I was hoping that the ls2 coils at stock dwell would allow more gap, but oh well, I'll give it more juice later with longer charging/dwell time). 

With clean pulls throughout the revs, here is the rundown of what is going on so far:

- I needed to substantially add fuel on the 630 cc injectors I'm running for the time being -- it took a 4.5 bar FPR to get IDC at 81.9% at 7,280 rpm (13.5 ms). 

- My EGT is maxing around 850-860 at 30 psi, so I'm good there. 

- I've removed half of my timing advance until I get on the rollers just to be safe. I'm running a conservative +7 (on top of what the tune calls for) instead of the +13.5 I'm accustomed to running, but the power still feels awesome. I can't wait to see how she feels with an optimized timing curve. 

- I've gained 36 G/s (from 245 to 281), some will initially think: that's it? Well, most of it is much higher in the rev range. My peak mass airflow is now at 6,360 rpm and is sustained very well to redline (only dropping a couple G/s at 7,200 rpm). While before, I used to peak 245 G/s at around 3,800-3,900 rpm and then fall drastically as the revs climbed. I'm very happy about that! 

- As far as driver feel, the low end to midrange hasn't dramatically changed, but the top end is night and day! It feels like driving a different car -- usually, 1.8t-powered machines are either quick down low or have monster top end. This feels like a bigger motor with a responsive turbo. I can tell that it's going to be a blast at the track, especially with that sweet open dump scream! 

I'm having ballz issues attempting more than one pass in 3rd or 4th gear. I have major traction problem on old, rock hard slicks and chilly weather (in the low 50's). It's not holding the ground for me and I'm getting lots wheel spin in my pulls. Last thing I want is to wreck the thing forcing myself to get clean pulls for logs. I will get back to trying to collect road data when it's warmer or once I get to the dyno. I also have a few things to rectify and I should be ready for roller time (adding hood pins to my lightened hood that's bowing up at 35+ mph, making a new bracket mounting spot for my coils that I decided to tuck under the manifold and is just laying there, etc.).


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> It's alive! After a bit of monkeying around to get it running right, it's starting to feel pretty good.
> 
> I had quite a bit of left over smoke at first from the oil blowby that was left by the previous dead turbo. I started with horrible idle, and no on-boost power. The thing was cutting hard (backfire) at 20 psi and around 4k. A Throttle body adaptation and some driving around took care of ECU adapting to the new 65mm TB. The breaking up problem was taken care by tightening the plug gap to .023" as I always had to before (I was hoping that the ls2 coils at stock dwell would allow more gap, but oh well, I'll give it more juice later with longer charging/dwell time).
> 
> ...


Highly jealous now Max.

Hoping mine all comes together soon but this is great news to hear from you!

Joe


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

I'm still pretty shocked that your not wideband. Will Gonzo be tuning it?


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)




----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

RabbitGTDguy said:


> Highly jealous now Max.
> 
> Hoping mine all comes together soon but this is great news to hear from you!
> 
> Joe


Yours should be running soon too, it's going to be an exciting summer with the new turbos. :beer:



Dave926 said:


> I'm still pretty shocked that your not wideband. Will Gonzo be tuning it?


I have never really felt the need to switch to wideband. I get my narrowband ECU running perfect AFR curves consistently, my boost control is all mechanical, and timing advance is dialed via adaptation channels with Unisettings. 

Gonzo did all the bells and whistles (stationary rev limiter, raised rev limiter, emissions deletes, removal of fuel cut with brake/throttle overlap, enabled LTFT etc.) and massaged my lambda request a bit, but if there is a need for more tuning, he'll be the only guy touching my ECU... besides me.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

:thumbup: Work on my car is delayed by a blood clot problem that has returned after 12 years.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> :thumbup: Work on my car is delayed by a blood clot problem that has returned after 12 years.


Oh wow, hope for a full and speedy recovery Ted. The toys can wait!


----------



## Wangsta88 (Mar 16, 2009)

None of the pics are working!  and this is amazing man!


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Wangsta88 said:


> None of the pics are working!  and this is amazing man!


Danged Photobucket changed to a " New and Improved " version. Of course that means that all hosted links on the old version don't work :banghead:

*Fella's: If you hosted pictures on the old Photobucket site, can you check your photos, re-host them on the new site and edit your links as necessary?* That would be awesome :beer::beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Danged Photobucket changed to a " New and Improved " version. Of course that means that all hosted links on the old version don't work :banghead:
> 
> *Fella's: If you hosted pictures on the old Photobucket site, can you check your photos, re-host them on the new site and edit your links as necessary?* That would be awesome :beer::beer::beer:


Pics are back up! I had reached my bandwidth limit, more storage/bandwidth space purchased. :thumbup:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

the beast is in the street :bs:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> the beast is in the street :bs:


:laugh:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

and news from that great work


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> and news from that great work


I added some hood pins to secure the ballooning hood and took her out yesterday. I got a clean 4th gear pull with IAT and timing, but the engine temp needle went a tick past the middle mark right after the run. I'm guessing air pocket in the system, since it was drained and just refilled after the turbo install - thermostat stuck closed - or a failing water pump impeller as a worst case scenario. I took her back in to diagnose/fix the engine temp issue, so that's all I was able to collect for now. More to come soon, I'll be running/testing a fat 80mm TIP courtesy of Badger5. Definitely more good stuff on the way and dyno time as soon as I'm done with the shakedown. 

I'm satisfied with the IAT and timing sustained (coming from AWIC backed up with water injection, and now going to a custom FMIC). Below is graphing of IAT (purple) and timing (green)














The security pins allowing me to take it to speed comfortably (although, even in 4th gear, I'm still facing some wheel spin). 












And a proof shot that she was out (just for you :laugh.


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

wheel spin in 4th sounds like lots of fun haha :screwy:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> wheel spin in 4th sounds like lots of fun haha :screwy:


Even more impressive when it's AWD!!


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> wheel spin in 4th sounds like lots of fun haha :screwy:





Chickenman35 said:


> Even more impressive when it's AWD!!


Mad torqz, yo


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

You got wheelspin in 4th gear on all 4 wheels? What kind of power you putting down there? Or was it in the rain?


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

very good results


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

Badger5 80mm tip is a great mod


----------



## [email protected] Motorsports (Sep 24, 2013)

Nice :thumbup:
BTW - I like where you put the SEM sticker


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Even more impressive when it's AWD!!





[email protected] Performance said:


> Mad torqz, yo





Gulfstream said:


> You got wheelspin in 4th gear on all 4 wheels? What kind of power you putting down there? Or was it in the rain?



Not to downplay the massive early TQ characteristics of a small frame hybrid on E85, but I think that most of it has to do with the hard and cold race tires on the car. It's definitely making well upward of 400 AWTQ in the 3-4k region (I made 404 AWTQ on a low reading mustang AWD dyno with jus the stock turbo), but I don't see it realistically overwhelming all 4's on warmed-up grippy tires. 




Miguel_s# said:


> very good results


Thank-you! I'm anxious and waiting to see baseline dyno numbers before I decide how I feel about the results. I'm a bit hard on myself. Lol




Miguel_s# said:


> Badger5 80mm tip is a great mod


Yes it is (from what I've seen achieved on other cars)! I'm happy Bill is sending one my way because I'll be able to run it as a single variable, and record what it does for airflow on a maxed out hybrid for the US community. Thanks Badger5 for contributing to the insanity! :beer:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Result! I bet that's a blast on the road. 400awtq and 400awhp? We have like 23% drivetrain loss on these cars so that equates to ca 400/0.77= 519bhp. Yup, thats a runner. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] Motorsports said:


> Nice :thumbup:
> BTW - I like where you put the SEM sticker


Don, they're all over! Both sides of the car, and even facing forward and rearward of my ongoing custom roll protection project. 






















And your beautiful piece of engineering sitting nicely in my ugly/all-purpose engine bay. I really appreciate the help and support that some greatest company in the industry has provided. The car would not have progressed to where it is without my sponsors and supporters - 42 DD, SEM, GTS tuning, USRT, TyrolSport. MCPi, Verdict Motorsport etc. This community is lucky to have such great groups producing awesome products and also helping when they can. :beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> Result! I bet that's a blast on the road. 400awtq and 400awhp? We have like 23% drivetrain loss on these cars so that equates to ca 400/0.77= 519bhp. Yup, thats a runner. :beer:


The jury is still out on how much WHP the combo will achieve (I'm guessing over 400 whp). I may get a chance to hop on the rollers this weekend for some baseline runs (pre-tuning), so we'll know soon! You're definitely right, it's a blast to drive and a runner. I instructed people, and raced exotics (Ferraris/Lambos etc.) on a closed course just two weeks ago - all I could feel, even after driving the torquier LP 560-4, is damn I wish I could have my car instead. 




























And the real Stig about to take a young customer on a Pro drive around the course!


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Is that your full-time employment? :heart:

Friend of mine has the LP520 4 E-gear and I have to say I'm not at all impressed with the performance nor gearbox in that car.It looks great tho... Much prefer to drive my Cupra R. Specially now with a built haldex system.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> Is that your full-time employment? :heart:
> 
> Friend of mine has the LP520 4 E-gear and I have to say I'm not at all impressed with the performance nor gearbox in that car.It looks great tho... Much prefer to drive my Cupra R. Specially now with a built haldex system.


No, not full time employment, just a gig that's offered to trusted local racers with experience when the program is in the region. I'd hate cars and the track if I did this on a daily basis, being thrown around for extended time by people that have no concept of squeezing a throttle, progressive braking, and smooth transition is not that enjoyable. 

Yeah, they're not that impressive if you come from a car with lots of TQ early in the rev range. There was a tuned LP 560-4 that wasn't that bad, but the rest of them are disappointing to say the least (especially Ferrari's peaky and boring power delivery). Your car would walk all over these things on a circuit now that it has AWD and a set of RSS Clubsports.


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

I really love this... but 400+ awhp? :sly:

With a K03 inlet? :sly:


 Not sure if that is realistic.... school me please if I am wrong.


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Max's car started life as a TT225. So therefor it came factory with the larger K04-02x. 

Add e85, lots of behind the scenes modifications hybrid K04-02x that breathes significantly more airflow than a stock turbo and tuning and 400awhp is fully possible. 

Two main ways to make power = more air + more timing (until MBT)... This is how Max and myself are getting that much power out of these "small" turbos...


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Way to go Max! 

Can't wait to see the baselines! 

So excited! Going to be a good year for those of us working with these units (and flow improvements).

Joe


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

Ahhh ok. I'm running 36+ degrees of timing in my impreza 2.5i on 93 I understand what a few more degrees does, let alone alcohol.


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

gdoggmoney said:


> Ahhh ok. I'm running 36+ degrees of timing in my impreza 2.5i on 93 I understand what a few more degrees does, let alone alcohol.


with only alcohol what should be air/fuel ratio


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> with only alcohol what should be air/fuel ratio


0.85 lambda is the practical air/ratio target for power on alcohol based fuels.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Quick update: I think the lack of airflow through the TT engine bay was the reason the car started to run hot after some hotlapping (known issue that doesn't exist with VW with the same engine and similarly sized radiator). I added an extractor vent to the hood in hope of keeping the coolant temp under control, if that works, I'll have baseline dyno figure over the weekend. Also planning on installing an external oil cooler to alleviate the oil temp taxing the coolant system. 


Vent bolted to the hood


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Did you get high water temp? Fill expansion tank to just above minimum when cold. 

Sent fra min SM-T310 via Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah, water temp on the gauge went to almost 3/4 after 5-6 consecutive 4th gear pulls. It used to do that before, but a 3-row radiator fixed it - Now that I added a FMIC, blocking airflow to the radiator, it's back again. I'll try the overfilled tank, I'm hoping that the vented hood is enough to bring heat-soaked water temp back to normal until I install an external oil cooler (been debating whether or not to separate the oil and coolant, or keep the exchange).


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

Sure you didn't chuck an impeller? My gti did that before it finally stopped gripping the shaft all together


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

gdoggmoney said:


> Sure you didn't chuck an impeller? My gti did that before it finally stopped gripping the shaft all together


Very possible, the pump was changed with a belt change about 25k ago, so there is some hard mileage on it. However, it must be noted that it did it even with a fresh pump, and the problem is well documented with TT owners that track their cars hard with power above stock. I'm really pushing this thing with 30 psi on small frame turbo, so it's understandable that systems designed to handle stock power are getting overwhelmed with extended beating.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

No. Absolutely don't overfill it. Opposite. Fill as little as possible. Just above minimum. 

Sent fra min SM-T310 via Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> No. Absolutely don't overfill it. Opposite. Fill as little as possible. Just above minimum.
> 
> Sent fra min SM-T310 via Tapatalk


Gotcha, that's where it's always been, right above the min line in the reservoir. :beer:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Ok good :beer:

Sent fra min SM-T310 via Tapatalk


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Max. have you tried Redline Water Wetter? It really does work well. I see an drop of 10+ F when compared to ordinary 50/50 antifreeze. Several of my buddies who Hill-climb and Track Days also run it and have reported similar results. I've used it for years on Road Race and Track Day cars with excellent results.

The Tour Bus company that I used to work for had old British Double Decker Buses. Despite numerous upgrades to the cooling system they always over heated in Summer on a particular long hill in Stanley Park. I suggested that the shop add Redline Water Wetter to the coolant mix. They were skeptical at first, but saw an immediate 15 F drop in temperatures and that was enough to cure the overheat problem. 

The other cure, although more expensive, is to run Evans Waterless Coolant. Boiling point of 300F and higher thermal transfer rate than water. The really big improvement of Evans coolant is the elimination of steam pockets. These usually form in cylinder head passages and are detrimental to the cooling of the combustion chamber. Reduction or elimination of steam pockets reduces detonation. A big plus in Turbo cars!!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yep, all the way back from my early road racing days, all I use during racing season is distilled water with Water Wetter. Good stuff! Never heard of the Evans waterless coolant but it's definitely worth trying, if the problem persists after the vented hood and an oil cooler. 

What are your thoughts on keeping vs separating the oil/coolant exchange?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yep, all the way back from my early road racing days, all I use during racing season is distilled water with Water Wetter. Good stuff! Never heard of the Evans waterless coolant but it's definitely worth trying, if the problem persists after the vented hood and an oil cooler.
> 
> What are your thoughts on keeping vs separating the oil/coolant exchange?


You're in a difficult situation with the limited airflow in the engine bay. If you can find someplace to run an air to oil Intercooler with adequate airflow and without further blocking the radiator inlet, then I would definitely say to go with that, and ditch the water to oil cooler. This is all in an effort to reduce the thermal load on the engine cooling system.

The big problem of course is the air flow as you know. Hopefully your hood extractor will allow more airflow through the engine bay. I'm thinking that it will.

Edit: Ironic that you had just filled in the big hole in the hood for the Top Mount Intercooler project. Hmmm.. any limitations on hood vent sizes? I'm thinking if hood is 3 ft x 3 ft square ...what's to prevent you from having a 2'11" x 2'x11" square hood vent?  However, being that it's SCCA , they probably have that covered.... Dang!!


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

BTW...how much space do you have between the Intercooler and Radiator core? Anything less than 1" severely limits air flow. 2" or more is preferred if possible.


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Max. have you tried Redline Water Wetter? It really does work well. I see an drop of 10+ F when compared to ordinary 50/50 antifreeze. Several of my buddies who Hill-climb and Track Days also run it and have reported similar results. I've used it for years on Road Race and Track Day cars with excellent results.
> 
> The Tour Bus company that I used to work for had old British Double Decker Buses. Despite numerous upgrades to the cooling system they always over heated in Summer on a particular long hill in Stanley Park. I suggested that the shop add Redline Water Wetter to the coolant mix. They were skeptical at first, but saw an immediate 15 F drop in temperatures and that was enough to cure the overheat problem.
> 
> The other cure, although more expensive, is to run Evans Waterless Coolant. Boiling point of 300F and higher thermal transfer rate than water. The really big improvement of Evans coolant is the elimination of steam pockets. These usually form in cylinder head passages and are detrimental to the cooling of the combustion chamber. Reduction or elimination of steam pockets reduces detonation. A big plus in Turbo cars!!



the redline water wetter i have heard of it and i might have added into a car at one point but you just mix it in with the normal g12/water mix ?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> the redline water wetter i have heard of it and i might have added into a car at one point but you just mix it in with the normal g12/water mix ?


Yes.


----------



## H100VW (May 10, 2001)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> What are your thoughts on keeping vs separating the oil/coolant exchange?


I am not in the same league as you boys with the racing etc But I fitted a oil cooler to my G60 GTI and deleted the heat exchanger. I used to do track days every couple of months when I lived in the UK.

The oil rad was a bit too big really, it supercooled the oil for road use. 70 degrees C going back into the engine. On the circuit though it would really make a difference. If you spotted the oil temp rising, you only had to back off for a couple of hundred metres and the temp would start to fall. A full lap off the gas and it really made an impression.

Water temps in summer were really good, the problem was winter. It took so much load off the cooling system, that the water hardly made it out of the white at the bottom of the gauge. I would cover the oil rad and part of the radiator with cardboard if it got really cold outside (anything close to 0 centigrade) I had to drive in gloves and with a coat on for weeks through winter. It just wouldn't blow hot air at all. 

I now live in Queensland Australia and have the same dramas on the road in summer, although you can't directly tell what the oil temp is.

I still do a bit of track work in my Polo and I am seriously considering an oil cooler again. Instead of and not to supplement the heat exchanger. Winter temps sometimes come down as far as 8 degrees C.  Oil pressure is much better on cold days, which I translate to thicker oil.

Gavin


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Very possible, the pump was changed with a belt change about 25k ago, so there is some hard mileage on it. However, it must be noted that it did it even with a fresh pump, and the problem is well documented with TT owners that track their cars hard with power above stock. I'm really pushing this thing with 30 psi on small frame turbo, so it's understandable that systems designed to handle stock power are getting overwhelmed with extended beating.


nice 30 psi.
what is maf value G\S


----------



## Volksdude27 (Nov 25, 2005)

H100VW said:


> .
> 
> 
> . Winter temps sometimes come down as far as 8 degrees C.


Think there are more unlucky ppl lol

Here in northern Canada winter temps are in the -10 celcius average and we get at least a week of -35 over lol ( this winter has been particularly harsh )

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## H100VW (May 10, 2001)

Volksdude27 said:


> Think there are more unlucky ppl lol
> 
> Here in northern Canada winter temps are in the -10 celcius average and we get at least a week of -35 over lol ( this winter has been particularly harsh )
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


In Adelaide we usually got a week, most years, of daytime temps over 40 C. You are definitely welcome to your block heaters and frozen batteries! :laugh:

Gavin


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> You're in a difficult situation with the limited airflow in the engine bay. If you can find someplace to run an air to oil Intercooler with adequate airflow and without further blocking the radiator inlet, then I would definitely say to go with that, and ditch the water to oil cooler. This is all in an effort to reduce the thermal load on the engine cooling system.
> 
> The big problem of course is the air flow as you know. Hopefully your hood extractor will allow more airflow through the engine bay. I'm thinking that it will.
> 
> Edit: Ironic that you had just filled in the big hole in the hood for the Top Mount Intercooler project. Hmmm.. any limitations on hood vent sizes? I'm thinking if hood is 3 ft x 3 ft square ...what's to prevent you from having a 2'11" x 2'x11" square hood vent?  However, being that it's SCCA , they probably have that covered.... Dang!!





Chickenman35 said:


> BTW...how much space do you have between the Intercooler and Radiator core? Anything less than 1" severely limits air flow. 2" or more is preferred if possible.


As you have guessed, the SCCA does have limitations in how much venting you're allowed. After my extractor vent, I have room for maybe two small louvers. I may do it sometime in the future to maximize the bay venting, but for now, I deserve a break from cutting holes in the car -- my garage looks and smells like a damn body shop lately. 

I have about 2.6" gap between the IC and the radiator, so I should be good. What I'm lacking is shrouding to seal the air from escaping around the radiator after passing through the intercooler (especially at the bottom). I have that in my list of things to do tomorrow if the dyno session isn't happening because of the stupid rain in that's in the forecast. 

BTW, I went out with the car for some logging after the vent mod. As I had hoped, the logged coolant temp and needle are holding steady under the middle mark (91* C being the hottest recorded after countless consecutive pulls). I am very happy that the mod cured the problem, but I'm still adding the external oil cooler. I think with everything back in check with coolant temp, I might as well keep the oil/coolant exchange to help with warm up. 

Dwell tuning should be done soon, and tanks everyone for the valued inputs. :beer:


Coming home after some good beating and data collection:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> nice 30 psi.
> what is maf value G\S


Graphing of a random 3rd gear pull from last night:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

How do you get 400awhp with 280g/s Marcus? Do you have a 4" MAF?


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

The 3k-4k onset is ridiculous, about 75g/s to 225g/s :what: Could you throw in a timing and o2 curve with that information?


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

l88m22vette said:


> The 3k-4k onset is ridiculous, about 75g/s to 225g/s :what: Could you throw in a timing and o2 curve with that information?


Torque monster


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> How do you get 400awhp with 280g/s Marcus? Do you have a 4" MAF?


Let's not get ahead of ourself, I haven't dynoed nor fully tuned the new setup, therefore the 400 whp figure is only a round guesstimate really (hopefully it ends up being a conservative one :laugh. 

However, like Steve mentioned in the previous page, power on these small snails are made with a lot timing, all the freeing up possible on the hotside to reduce inherent backpressure, and in my case a lot more air compression than normal (even if that means operating a bit lower compressor efficiency range). I run a 3" ID MAF housing with a stock TT sensor.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

l88m22vette said:


> The 3k-4k onset is ridiculous, about 75g/s to 225g/s :what: Could you throw in a timing and o2 curve with that information?


I'm narrowband, therefore my VCDS-logged o2 data is useless (wot AFR is steady at around 0.85 lambda on the wideband). As far as typical timing curve, you could just look in the previous page for an idea of what I'm holding on the new setup. I'll put together more graphs from the pile of data I've been compiling for past days. 



groggory said:


> Torque monster


What's even more encouraging is that the massive onset is no longer dropping flat on it's face like it used to on the stock hardware. This should really motivate my 2800 lbs brick! :thumbup:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

I have used water wetter for around 15yrs and I have to say that it doesn't compare to Royal Purple's additive called Purple Ice. I had a turbo charged Swift that would always run hot no matter I did including water wetter. I added Purple Ice and it never ran hot again. Worth a shot..:beer:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Would it help at all with the cooling issues if those side grills in the bumper were mesh or removed? It looks like you covered them up?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Twopnt016v said:


> I have used water wetter for around 15yrs and I have to say that it doesn't compare to Royal Purple's additive called Purple Ice. I had a turbo charged Swift that would always run hot no matter I did including water wetter. I added Purple Ice and it never ran hot again. Worth a shot..:beer:


It doesn't hurt to try, I'll drop a bottle in there to see if it lowers the coolant temp. Thanks for the suggestion Matt, it would be an awesome find if it makes a noticeable difference over water/WW.



18T_BT said:


> Would it help at all with the cooling issues if those side grills in the bumper were mesh or removed? It looks like you covered them up?


No Val, these are routed towards the wheel arch (were originally intake vents for the factory dual SMIC). They have no bearing in the center-grill feed efficiency. Even if they were feeding directly in the bay, blocking them actually decreases the amount of pressure buildup that's restricting airflow past the radiator.

Sealing the air after the FMIC to only pass through the radiator could prove to be a nice improvement though. It'll be interesting to see the effect after I'm done doing that.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Got some baseline dyno numbers in, I'm taking bets on what this thing put out....opcorn::laugh:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

About tree fiddy


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

340bhp based on 280g/s


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Ooh, ooh! I know!!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] Performance said:


> About tree fiddy


Lol, someone needs to raise you

PS: check your text messages, I'm hurting for the tweaks we spoke about


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Ooh, ooh! I know!!


Hey, that'll be cheating. Not you Jeff!


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

out of the gate 370 :laugh::wave:


----------



## Budsdubbin (Jul 14, 2008)

[email protected] Performance said:


> About tree fiddy


Oh no it's that damn lock Ness monster again. I told you I'm not giving you no tree fiddy.

My guess is about tree eighty.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

I subscribe to the Ken Herring school... tree eighty juan :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Enough messing around with you guys. Let me first say that these are baseline numbers. The car isn't tuned for the turbo and need lots of work. 


1) I developed a nasty leak (turbo/manifold) due to the bolts backing out, thing sounded like diesel on the way home. 


2) Fuel is totally out of whack. When I got on the rollers, it was holding 14:1 under boost and running super lean. I added a bunch of fuel to keep it safe for the dyno runs, but it was way rich for best power (didn't schedule much dyno time and was only there for raw baseline figures). 


3) I'm also getting a consistent breakup at TQ onset despite the plugs gapped at .025". My guess is the untouched factory dwells not cutting it for my GM coils. 


Besides that, I'm happy with the raw results. 388 AWHP uncorrected (383 with correction factor), that was before I added timing I had removed for safety. 403 AWHP (398 corrected) with the timing advance back. When you can push 425 AWTQ untuned on an AWD Mustang dyno that reads way lower than the usual dynojets, you've got some serious potential. Can't wait to get all the quirks worked out, stay tuned! (I'm not posting full graph of the power curve because they're not clean with a ignition breakup at TQ onset). 


*On the rollers*












*Before I added the timing that was taken out for safety
*












*With the timing back*












*On paper (this might be a record)*


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

That's awesome! 400awhp is completely insane from a hybrid k04....


----------



## Volksdude27 (Nov 25, 2005)

Man this is making me regret the BT way I chose being too impatient about hybrids ( and some lack of knowledge back in the days ). OK your set up is pushing the limits that 99% of ppl won't even flirt with but man that shows the potential of turbocharging breakouts of the last 3 years....

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Erm, uh, damn Max, and all on stupid bolts, a rough tune, and a Mustang dyno to boot :thumbup::what:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Just go wideband Max and be done with it


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> *On paper (this might be a record)*


Does Eng power indicate this is @fly figure on this type of dyno?

What boost are you asking of it on onset and the rest of the rpm range? (or fixed boost you use? I dont remember)

good progress max

:thumbup:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

Great result

Do you know the EGT


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

400awhp is close to 520bhp with 23% drivetrain loss... I was about half of that with my old BAM 225hk motor. Amazing.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

:thumbup: :beer: still running dual MMDVs on there?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> That's awesome! 400awhp is completely insane from a hybrid k04....





Volksdude27 said:


> Man this is making me regret the BT way I chose being too impatient about hybrids ( and some lack of knowledge back in the days ). OK your set up is pushing the limits that 99% of ppl won't even flirt with but man that shows the potential of turbocharging breakouts of the last 3 years....
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk





l88m22vette said:


> Erm, uh, damn Max, and all on stupid bolts, a rough tune, and a Mustang dyno to boot :thumbup::what:





Gulfstream said:


> 400awhp is close to 520bhp with 23% drivetrain loss... I was about half of that with my old BAM 225hk motor. Amazing.


Thanks guys, it took a lot of work and dedication to get there, and the setup will only be stronger when sorted. :beer:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Haha! Excellent results Max! King sh_t!!!:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> Great result
> 
> Do you know the EGT





badger5 said:


> Does Eng power indicate this is @fly figure on this type of dyno?
> 
> What boost are you asking of it on onset and the rest of the rpm range? (or fixed boost you use? I dont remember)
> 
> ...





suffocatemymind said:


> :thumbup: :beer: still running dual MMDVs on there?


To answer some of the questions, dyno is a load bearing Mustang dyno showing power at the wheels. Boost is set via MBC at 30 psi dropping a few psi at redline. EGT is in the high 700's after I added some fuel to keep it safe (784*c peak after about a dozen pulls with no cool down). 

In this video of my first run (running very lean) you can see EGT getting in 800's 
http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vjOPlGjkvOo

After adding my timing back and dumping fuel, you can see EGT staying in the 700's (fully heat soaked)
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c3fXgMqgRFE&feature=youtu.be

The car is still running the dual Madmax DV to facilitate holding the boost and venting a lot of volume when needed. My DV and wastegate choices are unconventional, and even controversial sometimes when not understood, but they are a great part of what makes the setup what it is.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ and here is a freeze shot of maximum EGT recorded on the final run (gauge on the left, peaking at 784* C shortly after throttle lift off).


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

your egt is in the turbos hotside like std yea?

those are quite short power runs.. Is that the norm for the dyno?

30psi.. lol.. you nutter - hehe

rocks tho.. fair play


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Just go wideband Max and be done with it


:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> your egt is in the turbos hotside like std yea?
> 
> those are quite short power runs.. Is that the norm for the dyno?
> 
> ...


Yes, EGT probe is now in the turbo hotside (factory location used in this setup vs manifold merge previously). I have to do 3rd gear pulls because the slicks start walking on the rollers at higher speed. At FFE once, they had to use human ballast on the car at each front wheels just to get a 2wd reading in low gear. :laugh: It also keep things consistent for comparison purposes since all my dyno figures have always been in 3rd gear.

Yeah, we're keeping it conservative on this one and putting a cap on the insanity at 30 psi. Although more is tempting... I must overcome any greed for power and keep it on the conservative side to maximize longevity. :beer:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

you are the man

can you tell all your engine spec


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Wow!! Just Wow. Very impressive Max. You always impress me with your work and attention to detail. :thumbup:


----------



## Budsdubbin (Jul 14, 2008)

Those are some serious jams how is the spool?

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk


----------



## OrangeDUB (Sep 18, 2006)

Can someone point me to where in this thread are details on what was done with the wastegate Actuator?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> you are the man
> 
> can you tell all your engine spec


Stock motor with drop-in rods (totally untouched small port head). massaged GTT-x turbo, JBS knockoff exhaust manifold with custom external wastegate port, 38 mm wastegate, 4" expansion chambered DP, dual Madmax DV, SEM intake, 630cc injectors, Gonzo-tweaked stock turbo tune, LS2 coils, powered by E85. 

More details on the car's continuous evolvement here:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5788526-Chronicles-of-a-track-TT




Chickenman35 said:


> Wow!! Just Wow. Very impressive Max. You always impress me with your work and attention to detail. :thumbup:


Thanks Richard! :beer:



Budsdubbin said:


> Those are some serious jams how is the spool?
> 
> Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk


Spool is instant at 3,000 rpm (you can see it shoot out in the second video I posted, watching the tach needle). I'm running a 20 psi linear spring in the wastegate, and I can make it spool faster by shimming or adding a soft helper spring. I'll play and optimize that later as it's pretty fast spooling as it is. 



OrangeDUB said:


> Can someone point me to where in this thread are details on what was done with the wastegate Actuator?


The factory internal gate was closed shut in the turbine housing, the manifold was drilled, and an external port welded. I chose to not recirculate to keep it as efficient as possible in the hotside. Simple and straightforward, just parting ways with internal gate setup. All explained throughout this thread.


----------



## OrangeDUB (Sep 18, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The factory internal gate was closed shut in the turbine housing, the manifold was drilled, and an external port welded. I chose to not recirculate to keep it as efficient as possible in the hotside. Simple and straightforward, just parting ways with internal gate setup. All explained throughout this thread.


Ok thank you. Just discovered this thread the other day and I've been obsessed with reading up on your progress. I was debating whether to go gt28 or gt30 but now after reading this I am thinking a ported/modified frankenturbo may be my best bet for a powerful daily for my B6 A4.


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Just simply awesome Max! Can't wait to see what this does tuned!

Hopefully, not too far behind ya!

Joe


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Do they have a hubdyno around your area? Would be interesting to see if there is as big difference as I experienced.


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

So I guess another record broken on stock turbo frame? lol

GTTx FTW


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

that engine deserve a large port head

what is the dual Madmax DV??


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Miguel_s# said:


> that engine deserve a large port head
> 
> what is the dual Madmax DV??


Small port head is where its at. Loose too much low end torque on a BIGPORT(been there done that). Max can speak for himself but he autoX his car and needs gobs of torque on demand. 

Madmax is his old name here on Vortex. Max takes Evo diverter valves and modifies(crushes and drills) them and it has been dubbed the Madmax DV by the rest of us. I run on and it is awesome:thumbup:. He runs two on his set-up...


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Shameless plug:

Go GTS!


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Shameless plug:
> 
> Go GTS!


:facepalm:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> So I guess another record broken on stock turbo frame? lol
> 
> GTTx FTW


Getting close.. and reference.. pump fuel one below









E85... I wish we had it here.. 

Go Max!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Miguel_s# said:


> that engine deserve a large port head
> 
> what is the dual Madmax DV??


nope
not for this frame turbo

loose port velocity and torque

smallport ideally suited to these


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

badger5 said:


> nope
> not for this frame turbo
> 
> loose port velocity and torque
> ...


thanks,
always learning


----------



## Sycoticmynd29 (Jan 17, 2011)

badger5 said:


> Getting close.. and reference.. pump fuel one below
> E85... I wish we had it here..
> 
> Go Max!


Badger5, Where could I take a look at that build? Curious as to what it takes to push those numbers on a turbo this size.


Max, 

What numbers do you think you would be making on 93?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Sycoticmynd29 said:


> Badger5, Where could I take a look at that build? Curious as to what it takes to push those numbers on a turbo this size.
> 
> 
> Max,
> ...


message me.. I dont want to clutter max's thread


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

badger5 said:


> Getting close.. and reference.. pump fuel one below
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Max is AWD...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

OrangeDUB said:


> Ok thank you. Just discovered this thread the other day and I've been obsessed with reading up on your progress. I was debating whether to go gt28 or gt30 but now after reading this I am thinking a ported/modified frankenturbo may be my best bet for a powerful daily for my B6 A4.


Just different animals, I wouldn't compare them for the same use. Each have their strength and weaknesses, a hybrid will always suffer a bit up top, just as anything above a gt28 will struggle down low. You just have to find out what you want out of the car, instant spool and gratification right off the line but giving up a bit up top - or nothing down low so you could have supercar power in the 4k+ range. To me, waiting for power is never an option, street or track, but different people, different strokes. 



RabbitGTDguy said:


> Just simply awesome Max! Can't wait to see what this does tuned!
> 
> Hopefully, not too far behind ya!
> 
> Joe


 Thanks Joe! I'm anxious to see what yours put out since we're clones of each other (using the same turbo), but you're doing it on pump+water injection.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> Do they have a hubdyno around your area? Would be interesting to see if there is as big difference as I experienced.


I can positively say that there is none around me. 

The dyno I use (AWD mustang) is feared by tuners and "dyno queen" because it is a heartbreaker that reads considerably lower than the dynojet number that are the industry standard here in the US. I choose it because I'm not all about peak numbers and I also tune and care about my part-throttle characteristics (I spend hours of dyno time just dialing onset, part throttle, and modulation). Being able to apply different loads to simulate real life is what is valuable to me, and why I use that kind of dyno. I could easily pull my haldex fuse, and go to a 2wd dynojet like everybody se and pickup another guaranteed 40 whp... but that's not what this is about. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] Performance said:


> So I guess another record broken on stock turbo frame? lol
> 
> GTTx FTW


That 403 AWHP uncorrected run is definitely a stock frame turbo record (as far as I know). I also posted the average of 3 consecutive runs on paper to make sure the 403 whp run wasn't an outlier, and was properly backed up. I think 414 AWTQ and 392 AWHP average for 3 consecutive runs seals it. 



badger5 said:


> Getting close.. and reference.. pump fuel one below
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Bill! 391 whp on pump gas is a feat and impressive, no matter how you look at it. Wasn't that the one with a 2L stroke you posted about before? Details on the setup will definitely be welcomed and beneficial to our discussion - this is not just about me and my car, a lot of people are watching as this is like a blueprint thread for what the possibilities are. :beer:



Sycoticmynd29 said:


> Badger5, Where could I take a look at that build? Curious as to what it takes to push those numbers on a turbo this size.
> 
> 
> Max,
> ...


On 93 alone, probably around 330 WHP. However, if I was forced to run 93 pump gas, it would be with the aid of water injection. Water injection can make as much power as E85 on any given day and sometime more. This has been done and proven time and time again, it's just that the 1.8t community is always about 1.5 decade behind. With a good elaborate water injection system (direct port+ multiple pre-TB nozzles), MBT can be reached, and these hybrids can be maxed out in boost. If you can max out timing and boost on a combo, you can max out the power potential. Some will say that E85 still have an advantage due to EGT that will always be marginally lower with all else equal when compared to a water meth setup -- but if you take full advantage of water injection (like I did in the previous setup) with the addition of pre-compressor injection, I can guarantee slightly higher power potential than an identical E85 one. I ran both on several cars, and this is just my take on it from my experiences, not gospel!


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

*Sv: Hybrid Turbo (the Madmax way) >>>>>>*



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I can positively say that there is none around me.
> 
> The dyno I use (AWD mustang) is feared by tuners and "dyno queen" because it is a heartbreaker that reads considerably lower than the dynojet number that are the industry standard here in the US. I choose it because I'm not all about peak numbers and I also tune and care about my part-throttle characteristics (I spend hours of dyno time just dialing onset, part throttle, and modulation). Being able to apply different loads to simulate real life is what is valuable to me, and why I use that kind of dyno. I could easily pull my haldex fuse, and go to a 2wd dynojet like everybody se and pickup another guaranteed 40 whp... but that's not what this is about. :beer:


Awesome :beer: Can we see the graph?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Max is AWD...


yea I know.
and power is power
:thumbup:

Folks consider my dyno a heart breaker too... especially torque.. Most other vw tuners dynos here would make the 399lbft torque read more like 462lbft


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks Bill! 391 whp on pump gas is a feat and impressive, no matter how you look at it. Wasn't that the one with a 2L stroke you posted about before? Details on the setup will definitely be welcomed and beneficial to our discussion - this is not just about me and my car, a lot of people are watching as this is like a blueprint thread for what the possibilities are. :beer:


The motor was a stroker 20v yes in a leon cupra r.
Beach Buggy K16 clipped turbined hybrid, 2283 compressor I think.. Might have been dans 7+7 2283 version.. memory fades
Ported turbine outlet
largeport cyl head
relentless v3, 3" downpipe..
wmi with 80% mix from memory, single nozzle, D03 I think.
28psi boost from onset to 7krpm
pump fuel, that being uk 99 octane

egts were nutts.... relentless not a manifold to support that level without disassembling itself in short manner..


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> The motor was a stroker 20v yes in a leon cupra r.
> Beach Buggy K16 clipped turbined hybrid, 2283 compressor I think.. Might have been dans 7+7 2283 version.. memory fades
> Ported turbine outlet
> largeport cyl head
> ...



Ahh OK, that's the one I thought these numbers were from. Being on a stroked bottom, big port head, and having EGT through the roof definitely shows the potential, but makes the numbers a one hit wonder since that could never be sustained with any sort of reliability.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

Twopnt016v said:


> Small port head is where its at. Loose too much low end torque on a BIGPORT(been there done that). Max can speak for himself but he autoX his car and needs gobs of torque on demand.
> 
> Madmax is his old name here on Vortex. Max takes Evo diverter valves and modifies(crushes and drills) them and it has been dubbed the Madmax DV by the rest of us. I run on and it is awesome:thumbup:. He runs two on his set-up...


Love my MMDV :thumbup: :thumbup:

Max - better injectors are in the cards, no? These and wideband...ahh!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

suffocatemymind said:


> Love my MMDV :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> Max - better injectors are in the cards, no? These and wideband...ahh!


Yeah, I plan on upgrading to newer 1000's at some point. With that said, my IDC have not gone past 85% at 3bar. This was not something I expected and thought they would get maxed out, but they didn't. :what:

The NB ECU is already out of the car and a wideband one on the way from Gonzo. I never had a problem with tuning the NB, and as you can tell made power with it. With a Maf to monitor airflow, I always got perfect consistent AFR curves. The only reason I'm switching is because I'm getting tired of fixing broken Innovate components (mainly gauges) and wanted to integrate lambda monitoring to my VCDS logging.
*
Injector period graphed in red with a 3 bar FPR = 16ms @ 6440 which is 85% IDC (Not great, but something that could worked with still) 
*


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

greatest hybrid engine in the street, no doubts.....
can show maf and timing from the dyno


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Ahh OK, that's the one I thought these numbers were from. Being on a stroked bottom, big port head, and having EGT through the roof definitely shows the potential, but makes the numbers a one hit wonder since that could never be sustained with any sort of reliability.


pump fuel.

egts were high becuase of relentless.
chinafold very different... and significantly lower


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Nice numbers Max :thumbup:


----------



## OrangeDUB (Sep 18, 2006)

So will the gttx be avail for longitudinal?


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

OrangeDUB said:


> So will the gttx be avail for longitudinal?


Get me 5 people that want it together and I'll make it happen :thumbup:


----------



## OrangeDUB (Sep 18, 2006)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Get me 5 people that want it together and I'll make it happen :thumbup:


Well then I will see what I can stir up!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

OrangeDUB said:


> So will the gttx be avail for longitudinal?


suitable high flowing (Reliable) exhaust manifolds usually the sticking point on them... as well as std hotsides being smaller than their transverse cousins which does'nt help matters


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

whats the best wmi configuration in your experience max?

our lupos simple post FMIC single D03 nozzle spraying at 12psi full on basic pressure switch stylee


----------



## [email protected] Motorsports (Sep 24, 2013)

Hey guys, would it be possible to see a curve...or did I miss it?


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> (I'm not posting full graph of the power curve because they're not clean with a ignition breakup at TQ onset).



Here you go Don :thumbup:


----------



## jetta_2.slow (Feb 18, 2008)

badger5 said:


> as well as std hotsides being smaller than their transverse cousins which does'nt help matters


It's not very hard to make it work, I've been running a k04-2x in my A4 for a while using the 2x hot side.


----------



## OrangeDUB (Sep 18, 2006)

badger5 said:


> suitable high flowing (Reliable) exhaust manifolds usually the sticking point on them... as well as std hotsides being smaller than their transverse cousins which does'nt help matters


Is the exh mani included with Frankenturbo setups any good? Pardon my lack of better identification. It's the best k03/k04 exh mani that I am aware of.


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

OrangeDUB said:


> Is the exh mani included with Frankenturbo setups any good? Pardon my lack of better identification. It's the best k03/k04 exh mani that I am aware of.


They are just fine...


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

any news from "the beast"


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Turbo/manifold were pulled to fix a broken stud in the head, and come up with a long term solution to make the very long turbine to manifold bolts come in/out easily. Will be back this week for round two of testing/tuning and have some new goodies to install.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I think I should post this as a warning for others. 

I had mentioned using a copper gasket for the turbo to manifold location. Well, mine was intact when the turbo came off, but a friend that did one as well, had this (pic below) happen to the gasket in short order. I think the EGT management is a factor and will determine if copper is a suitable material for this gasket location. It also need to be noted that mine was annealed, but I'm not sure if that would help if the heat is reaching/exceeding the copper melting point. 

I know Bill mentioned having the relentless copper gaskets melting on hybrids, his findings and concerns are consistent with what happened with my buddy's hybrid (RabbitGTDguy is his screen name). I would suggest, contrary to my previous statements, that copper may not be able to survive the heat generated by these KKK hybrids on regular fuel. Stainless steel is a better gasket material for the inferno that these things become without the superb EGT management of E85. 











PS: my turbo is fitted back on the car with the broken manifold/head stud fixed and my exhaust leak situation under control. I'm waiting for a Badger5 TIP to arrive (Bill was kind enough to donate one of his upgraded 80mm silicone inlets to the project) and testing/tuning will resume. I should have everything done by next weekend and possibly get tuned dyno figures and head out for my first event.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

So if I understand right you will go back with the copper since on e85? I still need to make a gasket so I may still try annealed copper. Do you know of a easily available source for thin stainless?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Matt, I actually did not go back to my copper one just to be on the safe side. I made a stainless steel gasket and rocking that instead. The thin SS gasket material I used was found at the Home Depot in the door accessory section. It is a lower bolt-on outside door kick panel that they sell in stainless steel, bronze, regular chrome-plated carbon steel etc. I'm sure other home improvement chains will carry them too :beer:


----------



## max13b2 (Jul 24, 2007)

what about using copper w/ the factory turbo and an aggressive tune? Will the EGTs be enough to melt/blow out the gasket, or were you referring to strictly the hybrids?


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Matt, I actually did not go back to my copper one just to be on the safe side. I made a stainless steel gasket and rocking that instead. The thin SS gasket material I used was found at the Home Depot in the door accessory section. It is a lower bolt-on outside door kick panel that they sell in stainless steel, bronze, regular chrome-plated carbon steel etc. I'm sure other home improvement chains will carry them too :beer:


Thank you sir!:beer:




max13b2 said:


> what about using copper w/ the factory turbo and an aggressive tune? Will the EGTs be enough to melt/blow out the gasket, or were you referring to strictly the hybrids?


If the turbo isn't ported/opened up any the factory metal gasket works very well IMO.


----------



## hunTTsvegas (Aug 27, 2012)

I'm definitely late to the party and finally trying to catch up now but did you ditch your Water to Air intercooler set up? Any particular reason?

Either way, definitely have me sold on Hybrid. Already saving deployment money for a future parts buying binge. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah bud, the AWIC and water injection were taken out due to a racing class change where only atmospheric intercooling is legal (no use of any other cooling media except for natural airflow over an exchanger). :beer:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Matt, I actually did not go back to my copper one just to be on the safe side. I made a stainless steel gasket and rocking that instead. The thin SS gasket material I used was found at the Home Depot in the door accessory section. It is a lower bolt-on outside door kick panel that they sell in stainless steel, bronze, regular chrome-plated carbon steel etc. I'm sure other home improvement chains will carry them too :beer:


I need some stainless scrap for gaskets and other projects as well, I'll have to check that out.


----------



## hunTTsvegas (Aug 27, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah bud, the AWIC and water injection were taken out due to a racing class change where only atmospheric intercooling is legal (no use of any other cooling media except for natural airflow over an exchanger). :beer:


I gotcha. Interesting. Thanks! Also, loving the results so far. Don't know that I'll ever be edu-ma-cated (see _Southern Dictionary:_ a person who went to tha fancy school house.) enough to switch to E85 but starting to collect parts for a hybrid snail setup when I get back from the 'Stan. 

:beer:


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

Any news from the "beast"


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not much in the engine department except for a installing a Badger5 80mm TIP (thanks Bill!), and then having my MAF die on me. I've been working on some suspension stuff and other projects around the car. I have an event next weekend and want to have the car in good race form all around. 

80mm Badger5 TIP









Roll bar project that is still ongoing


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Not much in the engine department except for a installing a Badger5 80mm TIP (thanks Bill!), and then having my MAF die on me. I've been working on some suspension stuff and other projects around the car. I have an event next weekend and want to have the car in good race form all around.
> 
> 80mm Badger5 TIP


maybe shock of all that extra airflow.. hehe

:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> maybe shock of all that extra airflow.. hehe
> 
> :thumbup:


Yeah, must've not been ready for the extra British airflow thrown at it! :beer:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I can positively say that there is none around me.
> 
> The dyno I use (AWD mustang) is feared by tuners and "dyno queen" because it is a heartbreaker that reads considerably lower than the dynojet number that are the industry standard here in the US. I choose it because I'm not all about peak numbers and I also tune and care about my part-throttle characteristics (I spend hours of dyno time just dialing onset, part throttle, and modulation). Being able to apply different loads to simulate real life is what is valuable to me, and why I use that kind of dyno. I could easily pull my haldex fuse, and go to a 2wd dynojet like everybody se and pickup another guaranteed 40 whp... but that's not what this is about. :beer:


:beer: i have only dyno'd on mustang AWD dynos.... i dunno what all the fuss is about honestly lol. most of the time excuses are made. You make power either way :laugh:opcorn:


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

LOL I'm pretty good at picking apart bull**** numbers


----------



## Miguel_s# (Mar 28, 2014)

did you have tested with badger5 tip?


----------



## Speed-Freak (Jan 9, 2001)

Simply Amazing! 
You have achieved exactly what I have been hoping is possible. K04 spool rate making 400+ hp. Thank you for your hard work in pushing the envelope. 
I impatiently await your updates! :laugh: Bookmarked and Subscribed.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Miguel_s# said:


> did you have tested with badger5 tip?


I did, the Badger5 TIP got me in the 300 G/s raw (best logged so far is 302 G/s uncorrected), while 285 G/s was the max I'd see before in higher gears. IMO, that is a very healthy mod and recommend it to anyone pushing a stock K04 or hybrid. Now on a side note, the 302 G/s is uncorrected -- this is roughly 400 G/s if scaled properly for the larger 81mm ID Maf housing that I run on a stock TT sensor (stock 225 TT 70mm housing to 81mm ID S4 housing is roughly 34% larger).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I've been doing a bit of tweaking because my IDC were through the roof with 630cc injectors with a 3bar FPR. Jumped to a 4.5 bar and I'm now staying under 85% duty cycles. I am still running the outdated Deka Siemens and have settled, after some searching, to probably go for the G2 630's from USRT. I know there is also the 630 double foggers with even better atomization for the same flow rate. However, I'm on E85, cold start and warm ups are always sketchy (especially when cold), anything to help these conditions is highly desirable. 

IMO, the long tips/noses of the regular G2s are better designed for cold start and warm up characteristics (they're stock-like, spraying much closer to the valve port, and reducing wall wetting and stream disruption). I spoke to Scott, and he believes that I'd still get the same cold start and warm up with the foggers, but better WOT because of their improved atomization over the G2s -- I agree that WOT characteristics and tuning will be better, but think there is a cold start/idle advantage to the long tip design. Scott agreed to send me both set to test, that way I know for sure what design is the ticket for my high ethanol application. What would we do without Scott and USRT! :beer::beer:

Once both set of injectors are in my possession, I'll return to the rollers to see what the car does with the fueling optimized. In the mean time, even with the old school Deka 630's, I'm getting a hard time keeping this thing straight. It's spinning all 4 fat race tires, in relatively warm weather... in that's in straight line. Talk about TQ monster!!! :heart:

*Video of the car spinning 1st, most of 2nd, and even a bit at peak TQ in 3rd on warm dry pavement :*
http://youtu.be/0XwpffeUCQs


----------



## Sim (Jun 27, 2002)

:beer:
What is your target lambda at wot & high rpm?
Im also on E85 with ev14 630s @ 3 bar, 0.82 lambda and my injectors max out (90% idc) at around 230g/s 6000 rpm.
That is only ~1.1 bar boost @ 6000.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Sim said:


> :beer:
> What is your target lambda at wot & high rpm?
> Im also on E85 with ev14 630s @ 3 bar, 0.82 lambda and my injectors max out (90% idc) at around 230g/s 6000 rpm.
> That is only ~1.1 bar boost @ 6000.


Target lambda is 0.83-0.82 all the way through the boost curve. With a 30 psi boost spike, I was seeing 131 IDC at 3 bar on my Deka 630s, so pretty much maxed out. With a 4.5bar FPR though, things are well within safe acceptable range. The newer injectors are well capable of handling, and even perform better at higher pressure. Therefore, I'll capitalize on that instead of going bigger just for the sake of going bigger.

Shameless plug: how do I put my claws on one of these PnP ECUs that you're working on? I don't mind being the lab rat, and will do all kind of testing. I read you're in beta testing stage, you need a control tester across the pond to make sure everything is working properly... Hands Raised!!!


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

Max I think you will be better off with the foggers. I have run both and the foggers get my vote hands down. 

It would be a pricey conversion, but have you considered changing the gearing on the 02m? I know the TT's were geared very short in 1st and 2nd compared to the gli/20th. I feel that going to a taller gearing would help with the traction and auto-x. No more need to ride the limiter in 2nd gear anymore.


----------



## Sim (Jun 27, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I was seeing 131 IDC at 3 bar on my Deka 630s, so pretty much maxed out. With a 4.5bar FPR though, things are well within safe acceptable range. The newer injectors are well capable of handling, and even perform better at higher pressure. Therefore, I'll capitalize on that instead of going bigger just for the sake of going bigger.


 weren't you running lean?



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Shameless plug: how do I put my claws on one of these PnP ECUs that you're working on? I don't mind being the lab rat, and will do all kind of testing. I read you're in beta testing stage, you need a control tester across the pond to make sure everything is working properly... Hands Raised!!!


Would happily donate a piece for (extreme) testing (and debugging)! The only problem is that all of my beta ecus (8 pcs) are alredy in use, more will be available 2015 Q1!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

spartiati said:


> Max I think you will be better off with the foggers. I have run both and the foggers get my vote hands down.
> 
> It would be a pricey conversion, but have you considered changing the gearing on the 02m? I know the TT's were geared very short in 1st and 2nd compared to the gli/20th. I feel that going to a taller gearing would help with the traction and auto-x. No more need to ride the limiter in 2nd gear anymore.



Steve, I have no doubt the foggers are great and better, more advanced, injectors overall. My thing, being on E85, is that cold start/warm-up is always problematic and I'm looking to improve this area if possible. All the studies I've seen suggests that nozzle placement is optimized, for cold start and warm-up, if placed closer to the valve's port to limit stream disruption. I'ts actually a big thing in emission and could be said to be one the reasons that lead manufacturers to make a push for direct port injection. Do you think there is no merit to my trying the G2s for an improvement in cold start? Or it's just a waste of time and just skip straight to the foggers? The Dekas are archaic and there is no doubt the G2 would be a substantial improvement over them anyway. 

As for the gearing, the plan is to source a Euro TDi 02M and swap at least the 1st final drive. When I did the calculations, both the taller gli or R32 1st-2nd gears are not enough to warrant the trouble. I'm also running out of 3rd gear way too early for road racing conditions, at my power level this 6-speed 02m is simply a mess, and the wrong tool for the job.:banghead:


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

I think the foggers have a spacer in front of them. If you remove that then the nozzle will sit closer to the intake. I'm fairly certain that was with the foggers. It's been a while since I've swapped around the fueling hardware. That would give you the best of both worlds and be a dramatic improvement from where you are at now.


With the gearing swap I think you need to swap 1-4 together as they are together. If you want to potentially work out something for splitting the tdi 02m maybe we can talk via pm. I'd potentially be interested in the final drives out of it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Sim said:


> weren't you running lean?
> 
> Would happily donate a piece for (extreme) testing (and debugging)! The only problem is that all of my beta ecus (8 pcs) are alredy in use, more will be available 2015 Q1!



Yeah, it had a flat lean spot in past the mid-range (after peak TQ where the hybrid is finally flowing some air). No problem with the ECU, just keep me in mind if something pops-up, I'm always in scavenger mode. 

Before increasing the fuel pressure, I was at 112% at 6,000 rpm -- after the bump in pressure, it's now at 78% at 6,000 rpm... E85 took it like a champ without a hint of knock. 

*

Before
*









*After*


----------



## 2.GOlf (Aug 3, 2010)

Hey Max, i've been following your research with these hybrids quite closely. Gotta say, keep up the good work! I'm intrigued by your deliberate grinding of the turbine housing around the turbine wheel, increasing its clearance. How has this worked out for you? I plan to do the same porting treatment with my F23 and would like to tickle the hotside of a k03s that i'm rebuilding for a buddy similarly. My goal is to smooth out boost onset so the turbo is less of an "on-off switch" at low load driving situations, below wastegate pressure when the n75 has no say in the matter as well as slightly increasing the flow area to help it breathe in the upper rpms. I'm assuming this is the effect you have seen by increasing the turbine wheel to housing clearance?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

You got it right, the extra clearance was to allow some exhaust to bypass the bite of the turbine wheel to facilitate flow and help the natural choke point inherent to these small frame hotsides. How has it worked for me? I would say very well (although it's hard to quantify)-- spool and the amount of lag is not significantly worse than on the factory K04, EGT is lower at the same operating psi, and mass air flow curve does not plumet up top like it used to be the norm on the stock turbo. 

How much is this massaging improving on a standard untouched hybrid? I don't know since I have no concrete point of reference and it's all uncharted water. Another thing is that I also divorced the wastegate and bypassed air is not recirculated, so that might have some bearing on the results I'm getting on the hot side of things. I say go for it and document/report your results back. It would be a nice set of data for us all hybrid users to contemplate and discuss. Keep us posted! :beer:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

2.GOlf said:


> My goal is to smooth out boost onset so the turbo is less of an "on-off switch" at low load driving situations, below wastegate pressure when the n75 has no say in the matter


Use a lower crack pressure spring if you want a smooth boost onset on a small turbo.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

2.GOlf said:


> My goal is to smooth out boost onset so the turbo is less of an "on-off switch" at low load driving situations, below wastegate pressure when the n75 has no say in the matter as well as slightly increasing the flow area to help it breathe in the upper rpms. I'm assuming this is the effect you have seen by increasing the turbine wheel to housing clearance?



what psi is actuator pressure for you now and how is this controlled? n75, mbc, external ebc etc?


----------



## 2.GOlf (Aug 3, 2010)

Great! To clarify, all my experience thus far has been with tweaking stock k03s and k04-015's on canned tunes. I have a buddy that wants to rebuild his k03s, so we'd like to take a grinder to the hotside while its apart and add a little clearance around the turbine wheel and open up the wastegate port. Hopefully that will take some of the jumpiness out of the little bugger at low boost and help it hold the top end. This car is running an APR tune at 18psi and has basic bolt-ons with the n75 running a 5psi wastegate actuator. Primary interest with this car is improving the top end and helping keep it out of that twitchy first bit of boost (0-5psi) until its wanted.

Onto my situation, I am looking to max out a hybrid with some tips and tricks that you guys on the hybrid scene have been so gracious as to share with the community. I happened upon a used F23 for cheap, so that's my base. Plan is to port the living crap out of the hotside like max has done here, though I will stay internally wastegated. It'll be managed with the n75 and the lowest pressure wastegate actuator I can get away with. For now it will be on stock tt225 exh manifold, although heavily ported. I'll be doing all tuning and logging with Maestro. I would like to monitor turbine housing EGT, A/F, and air temp at the turbo outlet to get a real good idea of what's going on. As a final frontier, once I get the boost turned up to the point where the compressor wheel is escaping its efficiency range, I'll douse the fire with some pre turbo meth injection. 

Of course, these are all wet dreams at this point. But when they do materialize there will be a proper build thread and ample data supporting decisions! I plan to only have this F23 apart once, so I am calling upon the shamans now to shed a little light on what kind of porting is proven to work.


----------



## jabjab (Jun 7, 2015)

Does anyone know if you can buy an already ported hybrid turbo from gonzo and how much extra would it cost?


----------



## FRANK_N (Jan 15, 2016)

jabjab said:


> Does anyone know if you can buy an already ported hybrid turbo from gonzo and how much extra would it cost?


My guess is: Gonzo.


----------



## G-zo (Oct 16, 2016)

FRANK_N said:


> My guess is: Gonzo.


Thanks for the plug, Doug :thumbup:


----------

