# Has anyone built a 400whp 1.8T with a quick spooling turbo?



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

What I mean is, how would the OEM do it if they were to build a 400whp 1.8T? Perhaps a 2.0L or 2.1L stroker, headwork, cams, with a smallish turbo that can breath well at high pressures and whatever else you may need.

Do you guys think it's possible to have 400whp, a spool of 4Krpm or less and full exhaust and on 93oct? Everything else can be modified to the extreme. 

Thoughts? Do you guys think a T3 50trim stage 2 .48 with a ported shroud is capable of such a thing?


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Yeah, it's possible  

2008cc, E85 with billet GT3071R:


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Don't know what gear that dyno was done in but peak torque at over 5000rpm doesn't sound like it spools all that quick.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

GT-ER said:


> Don't know what gear that dyno was done in but peak torque at over 5000rpm doesn't sound like it spools all that quick.


I have 2 bars at 3700rpms on the dyno in 4th on a tdi box. Not sure what you are looking for.. perhaps a hybrid K04 is better for you? Or gtx28 series...


----------



## RodgertheRabit II (Sep 13, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> gtx28 series...


This. I just put a vband GTX2867r on my 20th and LOVE IT, and still at only 16psi (need a better pump). This is coming from a k04-02x hybrid user who's used to instant spool. 

with the supporting pieces it should be able to make more than 400 comfortably with a really nice curve. however, a good Hybrid (-02x) is plenty for most daily cars and a cheaper option.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Gulfstream said:


> I have 2 bars at 3700rpms on the dyno in 4th on a tdi box. Not sure what you are looking for.. perhaps a hybrid K04 is better for you? Or gtx28 series...


According to your dyno you had peak torque ( and peak boost ) at high 4800-5000ish rpm. I'm talking about full power by 4000rpm ( and peak torque ).


----------



## Three3Se7en (Jul 2, 2007)

GT-ER said:


> According to your dyno you had peak torque ( and peak boost ) at high 4800-5000ish rpm. I'm talking about full power by 4000rpm ( and peak torque ).


He made 400whp at less than 4k rpm, no?


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

Three3Se7en said:


> He made 400whp at less than 4k rpm, no?


this


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Three3Se7en said:


> He made 400whp at less than 4k rpm, no?


No, he made 400wtrq and about 280whp. Granted, you bring up a good point, 400wtrq at 4000rpm would be what I need.


----------



## Three3Se7en (Jul 2, 2007)

GT-ER said:


> No, he made 400wtrq and about 280whp. Granted, you bring up a good point, 400wtrq at 4000rpm would be what I need.


Oops wrong line. 

That is a potent powerplant that Gulfstream has. The GT3071R spools fast and is capable of gobs of power as well.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Gulfstream, did you do this on full exhaust? Do you think you can do 400whp on 93oct? Do you think a gt2867 would be a better option?


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Three3Se7en said:


> Oops wrong line.
> 
> That is a potent powerplant that Gulfstream has. The GT3071R spools fast and is capable of gobs of power as well.


We both read it wrong since it's in nm. He put about 300wtrq at 4000rpm.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

No, more like 350+wtq. The recipe for you would be to find a turbo that can make as close to 400whp as you can (GTX2867 would really struggle to get there but can) and maximize your engine output NA without the components that rob low end torque (huge runner'ed int mani's, big cams, tubed manifolds, etc) which would limit you to mild camset, biggish displacement and high comp with large stroke. Still not sure about your goals. A drop in turbo will not even come close as you'll just be running up backpressure and EGT's. If you're not on AWD of some sort, it is a recipe for alot of wasted power though. Gulfstream, according to the graph is doing it at 4500rpm's and the extra 500rpm's is really not bad at all


----------



## formerly silveratljetta (Feb 6, 2007)

Three3Se7en said:


> He made 400whp at less than 4k rpm, no?


looks more like 280whp to me :screwy:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

VR6 turbos dont even make [email protected]


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

lol this guy is looking for the magic that doesn't apply in a 4cyl...

if you want [email protected]


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

Compounds would get it close, I suspect.

But now your really thinking outside the box, and an unconventional setup that would a lot of headaches before that kind of power was realized.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

I guess a GTX2871R on 2.1L with 10:1CR and E85 would get you close to 400hp around 4k. Who knows..


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Vegeta Gti said:


> lol this guy is looking for the magic that doesn't apply in a 4cyl...
> 
> if you want [email protected]


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Pagparts billet 3071 kit. Stroked. Intake cam.meth. gonzo flash/maestro/autronic-sm4. Fx350.sem/80. 1000cc.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Other than that having a 20 valve or any four cylinder for that matter you're not going to see 400hp and peak torque at 4000 rpm. it's just not going to happen. You can go 2.1 liter and try a 2863 GTX with all the other goodies but its just damn near impossible to get what you're asking without massive displacement aka 2.5l 5 cylinder...vr6...

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

RodgertheRabit II said:


> This. I just put a vband GTX2867r on my 20th and LOVE IT, and still at only 16psi (need a better pump). This is coming from a k04-02x hybrid user who's used to instant spool.
> 
> with the supporting pieces it should be able to make more than 400 comfortably with a really nice curve. however, a good Hybrid (-02x) is plenty for most daily cars and a cheaper option.


Have you dyno'd this turbo yet? Looking at the compressor map, it should definitely fit my needs. [email protected] is correct in that the engine needs to be modded for low end power and I would need to run high boost which the GTX2867R can handle easily. 

I would love to have a TT that can put down the power on pump gas and feel like it should have come from the factory this way. I had half a dozen turbo's on my 1.8T GTI and some provided fantastic spool with decent power ( such as the T3S60, 300whp on pump with ~3200rpm spool ) and other provided big power with laggy response ( such as the 57trim at 425whp ). Now I want both. :laugh:


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Other than that having a 20 valve or any four cylinder for that matter you're not going to see 400hp and peak torque at 4000 rpm. it's just not going to happen. You can go 2.1 liter and try a 2863 GTX with all the other goodies but its just damn near impossible to get what you're asking without massive displacement aka 2.5l 5 cylinder...vr6...
> 
> Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


Impossible or improbable? I think gulfstreams setup is pretty damn close.


----------



## Three3Se7en (Jul 2, 2007)

How about Rokka's build?


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

GT-ER said:


> Impossible or improbable? I think gulfstreams setup is pretty damn close.


I agree. Ive had his setup minus the stroking, for 5 years lol.. .so my setup? Except im on pump gas also

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GT-ER said:


> Have you dyno'd this turbo yet? Looking at the compressor map, it should definitely fit my needs. [email protected] is correct in that the engine needs to be modded for low end power and I would need to run high boost which the GTX2867R can handle easily.
> 
> I would love to have a TT that can put down the power on pump gas and feel like it should have come from the factory this way. I had half a dozen turbo's on my 1.8T GTI and some provided fantastic spool with decent power (* such as the T3S60, 300whp on pump with ~3200rpm spool *) and other provided big power with laggy response ( such as the 57trim at 425whp ). Now I want both. :laugh:


The T3S60 is very similar to my previous setup (GT28R + stock displacement). My new setup consists of 2.1L bottom end with GTX2867R which spools way better than previous setup and is capable of the kind of power you are looking for. With 0.48 A/R T3 exhaust housing (same as 0.64 A/R T28) I have zero turbo lag. This would be a great setup with your quattro AWD.


----------



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

Dave926 said:


> Compounds would get it close, I suspect.
> 
> But now your really thinking outside the box, and an unconventional setup that would a lot of headaches before that kind of power was realized.


This.

Two ko3s's feeding a single ko3s would get you there.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> The T3S60 is very similar to my previous setup (GT28R + stock displacement). My new setup consists of 2.1L bottom end with GTX2867R which spools way better than previous setup and is capable of the kind of power you are looking for. With 0.48 A/R T3 exhaust housing (same as 0.64 A/R T28) I have zero turbo lag. This would be a great setup with your quattro AWD.


You really need to dyno you're setup at like 30psi to see what it does. :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GT-ER said:


> You really need to dyno you're setup at like 30psi to see what it does. :thumbup:


Yeah, no kidding. Once I install a few things (passenger side SEM, upgraded IC etc.) I will dyno. Shooting for 400 WHP myself.


----------



## RodgertheRabit II (Sep 13, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Yeah, no kidding. Once I install a few things (passenger side SEM, upgraded IC etc.) I will dyno. Shooting for 400 WHP myself.


Interested to see your result as I have a similar build (stock displacement for now:thumbdown

Still gotta get my tune dialed in


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm over 450whp 20+psi @3700/3800.

I personally think the 22863 GTX stroked with cams 80mm/sem, 1000 cc injectors with some meth will get you four hundred 

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## a4e3y5 (Jan 21, 2009)

Are you trying to beat the guy with the matte-blue GTI or the one with the GLI? Perhaps helping the guy with the TT/R8 body kit? Or maybe tired of your wicked-fast MB and want to bring your knowledge back to theVW world? Whatever you do, throw a PagParts kit. You have seen mine n know what it's capable of


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

a4e3y5 said:


> Are you trying to beat the guy with the matte-blue GTI or the one with the GLI? Perhaps helping the guy with the TT/R8 body kit? Or maybe tired of your wicked-fast MB and want to bring your knowledge back to theVW world? Whatever you do, throw a PagParts kit. You have seen mine n know what it's capable of


Hmm...you know me.  I already beat all 3 with the E55. :laugh: I actually just sold the E55 and am waiting to move to Texas. Once there I'll start my new project. :wave:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Texas rules

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Chris164935 (Jan 10, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> The T3S60 is very similar to my previous setup (GT28R + stock displacement). My new setup consists of 2.1L bottom end with GTX2867R which spools way better than previous setup and is capable of the kind of power you are looking for. With 0.48 A/R T3 exhaust housing (same as 0.64 A/R T28) I have zero turbo lag. This would be a great setup with your quattro AWD.


That's a tiny exhaust housing. Any issues with power falling off at higher RPMs or do you shift at like 6500 RPMs?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Chris164935 said:


> That's a tiny exhaust housing. Any issues with power falling off at higher RPMs or do you shift at like 6500 RPMs?


The power continues to build past 6500 RPM redline, which is where efficiency on this setup is suppose to drop off. I've taken it past 7200 to 7500 RPMs on a few occasions without issue. I'm thinking of swapping to larger 0.63 T31 exhaust housing just to compare with 0.48. This actually might be a way to tame the torque below 3000 RPMs and save drivetrain components.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> I have zero turbo lag


IMO, this doesn't exist with turbos that can keep up to 5k+ rpm !!! Unless, you're fully spooled under 2K, you'll experience lag under various real life or track conditions (try coming out of a 2nd gear decreasing radius airpin, and see how quickly you reevaluate your perception of turbo lag... while getting passed by that otherwise slow Porsche that you just schooled in infield). 



mainstayinc said:


> The power continues to build past 6500 RPM redline, which is where efficiency on this setup is suppose to drop off. I've taken it past 7200 to 7500 RPMs on a few occasions without issue. *I'm thinking of swapping to larger 0.63 T31 exhaust housing just to compare with 0.48*. This actually might be a way to tame the torque below 3000 RPMs and save drivetrain components.


Don't do it! The 0.48 hotside is the ideal match for the combo unless you live at the strip. If I were to go big, I'd do exactly what what you did (except that I'd maybe try the 2863 first). More often than not, chasing that elusive bit of extra power up top isn't worth killing the down-low grunt or soul of the combo. Say you sustain 40 more whp after 6500 with the 0.63 exhaust housing, do you think it's worth the lost response at 3k? Log your driving habits for a month, and see how much more time you spend around 3k vs over 6.5k, that'll give you a true perspective on how good your setup is right now. I lurk more than I post here nowadays, but I'm a fan of your combo and would hate to see you kill it for some extra top end power that you'll barely get to realistically use in practice.

BTW, kudos to you for your thorough posts on compressor maps and recently stroker kit comparisons. People may take stuff like that for granted, but formulating posts of that sort take time and dedication to the community (especially when you have no thing to gain from it). Posters like you make this section still worth frequenting , and I thank you on the behalf of those that have given up due the overwhelming pile of garbage that make up for 90% of our so-called technical section. :beer::beer:


----------



## T-Boy (Jul 16, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> IMO, this doesn't exist with turbos that can keep up to 5k+ rpm !!! Unless, you're fully spooled under 2K, you'll experience lag under various real life or track conditions (try coming out of a 2nd gear decreasing radius airpin, and see how quickly you reevaluate your perception of turbo lag... while getting passed by that otherwise slow Porsche that you just schooled in infield).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


True :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> IMO, this doesn't exist with turbos that can keep up to 5k+ rpm !!! Unless, you're fully spooled under 2K, you'll experience lag under various real life or track conditions (try coming out of a 2nd gear decreasing radius airpin, and see how quickly you reevaluate your perception of turbo lag... while getting passed by that otherwise slow Porsche that you just schooled in infield).
> 
> Don't do it! The 0.48 hotside is the ideal match for the combo unless you live at the strip. If I were to go big, I'd do exactly what what you did (except that I'd maybe try the 2863 first). More often than not, chasing that elusive bit of extra power up top isn't worth killing the down-low grunt or soul of the combo. Say you sustain 40 more whp after 6500 with the 0.63 exhaust housing, do you think it's worth the lost response at 3k? Log your driving habits for a month, and see how much more time you spend around 3k vs over 6.5k, that'll give you a true perspective on how good your setup is right now. I lurk more than I post here nowadays, but I'm a fan of your combo and would hate to see you kill it for some extra top end power that you'll barely get to realistically use in practice.
> 
> BTW, kudos to you for your thorough posts on compressor maps and recently stroker kit comparisons. People may take stuff like that for granted, but formulating posts like of that sort take time and dedication to the community (especially when you have no thing to gain from it). Posters like you make this section still worth frequenting , and I thank you on the behalf of those that have given up due the overwhelming pile of garbage that make up for 90% of our so-called technical section. :beer::beer:


Thanks for the advise. As far as turbo lag, I can't say for sure because I don't have a boost gauge installed yet. On my previous setup (GT28R + 1.8L), there was definately a difference in boost above 3000 RPMs when the GT28R suddenly got real crazy. On new setup, I am getting significant boost by 2000 RPMs and the power builds progressively all the way to redline+. There is no sense of turbo being either on or off or any delay in turbo response. Also, I chose to stick with my compact GT28R-style inlet which does not have the anti-surge housing. This probably helps with transient response.

A couple of people on here have suggested that the 0.48 A/R T31 exhaust housing is too small for my setup and recommended going larger. I thought it might be interesting to compare how the larger 0.63 housing reacts to my setup. However, as you point out, 95% of my driving style is in the 2500 to 3000 RPM range. I rarely exceed that engine speed because I love the feel of engine torque from the 2.1L bottom end with good transient response from turbo. Once or twice per week, I will take car out on back roads and do some second and third gear pulls but that's about it.

It's good to know that some people appreciate the information I post up. And, yeah, it takes a lot of time researching not to mention checking and double-checking everything before I post on this forum. I have to be prepared to defend my position even if it goes against the general opinion of this forum. For example, most people on this forum would never question the benefit of longer rod ratios. However, my research indicates that there are distinct advantages to going with a shorter ratio as I will explain in more detail in the next few days.

I agree. There is a lot of garbage posted on this "techinical" forum. I try to stick with the facts and avoid putting too much weight into people's opinions or, even worse, the common myths that float around ID27. Such as ALH crank being more prone to bending or not being able to rev past 8000 RPMs as if it will suddenly explode into dust at any moment!


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Very true

Btw road course ftw. I miss it dearly..fuk this trash barge

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Very true
> 
> Btw road course ftw. I miss it dearly..fuk *this trash barge*
> Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


I couldn't stop laughing at that comment.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> IMO, this doesn't exist with turbos that can keep up to 5k+ rpm !!! Unless, you're fully spooled under 2K, you'll experience lag under various real life or track conditions (try coming out of a 2nd gear decreasing radius airpin, and see how quickly you reevaluate your perception of turbo lag... while getting passed by that otherwise slow Porsche that you just schooled in infield).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree with this big time. 

This time around I want to do everything possible to make as much low end grunt as possible but still get good top end power. I don't care if it takes 60psi to make 400whp.

One thing I love about the E55 is the hugh low end power it makes. I know the 1.8T will never compare to a 5.4L supercharged V8 but I can try. :laugh:


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

You could probably get pretty close to your goal with a Borg Warner EFR 6758.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Prof315 said:


> You could probably get pretty close to your goal with a Borg Warner EFR 6758.


Fantastic looking turbo, never looked into them before. The map is slightly inferior to the GTX2867R's map though.

This brought me to look at the EFR7064 though. The compressor map is simply insane...pure nasty insanity. Look at the map:

http://www.full-race.com/store/turbos/borgwarner-efr/borgwarner-efr-7064-turbo.html

4.6 pressure ratio, great surge line, and still flows about 55lbs with good efficiency all around. I wonder though about the apparently large T3 .83 A/R as the only T3 option available. The turbine wheel is also larger that the GTX2867R's. 

Anyone knows how that EFR T3 housing compares to your average Garrett T3 housing? That map left me drooling.


----------



## hyperformancevw (Mar 15, 2007)

Big enough turbo, good high end flow, nice cams/springs, rev it to 8500... who cares if it spools at 4500 when you have an 8500 rev limit. That's 4000 rpm power band. I don't get why people worry about lag. Get a turbo for your power range and build around it. Only way to make power with a 4cyl is rev it higher. If you have lag, downshift...


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

hyperformancevw said:


> Big enough turbo, good high end flow, nice cams/springs, rev it to 8500... who cares if it spools at 4500 when you have an 8500 rev limit. That's 4000 rpm power band. I don't get why people worry about lag. Get a turbo for your power range and build around it. Only way to make power with a 4cyl is rev it higher. If you have lag, downshift...


That would make more sense if I could put a very short final drive, but on a Haldex car I don't think I can so all I'll have is a car with tons of lag and a very long powerband.

I've had top end builds before and the lag always bothered me. Most 4cyl cars with large turbos will be slower than their numbers suggest due to the lag monster. I've raced a ton of 4cyl turbo cars in my E55, most of them putting almost the same amount of power to the wheels I am but with a good 500-700lbs less of weight and I usually pull on them comfortably. 

If I wanted a drag car then yes, I totally agree with you. But I want a fun and peppy car that can respond with decent power from 1000rpm to 8000rpm. Since that's pretty much impossible, I'll take what I can and a 3800-7200rpm powerband is plenty fun for me.

FWIW, I had a LOT more fun on my 1.8T GTI with a T3S60 with 300whp ( pump gas ) than I did with the T3/T4 57trim at 370whp ( pump gas ). It even FELT faster ( but wasn't ).


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

bw 7064 will lag.
whilst its amazing how well that 70mm wheel flows. its 64mm turbine wheel is huge, thats gt35 size, and a comparable turbo.

i understand the OP requirements, i want the same, nice midrange response, whilst still a respectable top end. I chose the gtx2867. it fits the bill so well.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

hyperformancevw said:


> Big enough turbo, good high end flow, nice cams/springs, rev it to 8500... who cares if it spools at 4500 when you have an 8500 rev limit. That's 4000 rpm power band. I don't get why people worry about lag. Get a turbo for your power range and build around it. Only way to make power with a 4cyl is rev it higher. If you have lag, downshift...


Ever used a turbo car on anything but a drag strip have you? Anyone who say "downshift if you have lag" obviously doesn't use their car for anything that really requires a downshift. The simple "downshift" also comes with the whole process of matching engine/transmission speed, and totally upsets the car's balance and handling (especially if you're at the limit of adhesion). Why do you thing racers spend tons of money to tailor their gearing to the speed they usually come out of turns, because they haven't realized that they could simply downshift? :screwy:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Everyone has different takes on what they find acceptable. But looking at the technical aspects of putting these components together and you have major technical flaws with running big boost on a small turbo with added VE's. Big displacment, small turbine wheel, housing and exit (exducer) size on the upper rpm's, aside from taking on a major efficiency hit is prone to sustained and dangerous EGT levels that will concentrate in the collector and make its way very quickly back into the combustion chamber in the form of exhaust reversion due to backpressure/flow issues. This will eleveate cylinder temps, pressures and lower detonation thresholds. You engine runs hotter, works harder. Its essentially like capping off your exhaust system. As your rpm's climb, a progressively increasing element in your combustion mixture becomes hot exhaust and that isnt good for anything, especially your ringlands and piston corners. This seems to have become fashionable around these parts and I see the aftermath here in the shop in the form of warped and cracked housings after very little use and accelerated engine wear. Keep it at its intended level and you'll not have issues. 400whp with v8 powerband on a 1.8/2.0L = lots of low end torque, struggling upstairs and eventual succumbing to the forces that be...


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

superkarl said:


> bw 7064 will lag.
> whilst its amazing how well that 70mm wheel flows. its 64mm turbine wheel is huge, thats gt35 size, and a comparable turbo.
> 
> i understand the OP requirements, i want the same, nice midrange response, whilst still a respectable top end. I chose the gtx2867. it fits the bill so well.


Yeah, figured as much. I really like the GTX2867 and that EFR6758 is really nice too. Love the internal gate design and the bypass. I'm drooling here...lol.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> Everyone has different takes on what they find acceptable. But looking at the technical aspects of putting these components together and you have major technical flaws with running big boost on a small turbo with added VE's. Big displacment, small turbine wheel, housing and exit (exducer) size on the upper rpm's, aside from taking on a major efficiency hit is prone to sustained and dangerous EGT levels that will concentrate in the collector and make its way very quickly back into the combustion chamber in the form of exhaust reversion due to backpressure/flow issues. This will eleveate cylinder temps, pressures and lower detonation thresholds. You engine runs hotter, works harder. Its essentially like capping off your exhaust system. As your rpm's climb, a progressively increasing element in your combustion mixture becomes hot exhaust and that isnt good for anything, especially your ringlands and piston corners. This seems to have become fashionable around these parts and I see the aftermath here in the shop in the form of warped and cracked housings after very little use and accelerated engine wear. Keep it at its intended level and you'll not have issues. 400whp with v8 powerband on a 1.8/2.0L = lots of low end torque, struggling upstairs and eventual succumbing to the forces that be...


I agree, and I can definitely come to terms with what is possible/reliable and what is not. I don't mean to push a GT25 to 40psi and watch EGT's go to 2000*'s...but I do wish to push as far as I can reliably even if it means putting together a sick engine to do it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Everyone has different takes on what they find acceptable. But looking at the technical aspects of putting these components together and you have major technical flaws with running big boost on a small turbo with added VE's. Big displacment, small turbine wheel, housing and exit (exducer) size on the upper rpm's, aside from taking on a major efficiency hit is prone to sustained and dangerous EGT levels that will concentrate in the collector and make its way very quickly back into the combustion chamber in the form of exhaust reversion due to backpressure/flow issues. This will eleveate cylinder temps, pressures and lower detonation thresholds. You engine runs hotter, works harder. Its essentially like capping off your exhaust system. As your rpm's climb, a progressively increasing element in your combustion mixture becomes hot exhaust and that isnt good for anything, especially your ringlands and piston corners. This seems to have become fashionable around these parts and I see the aftermath here in the shop in the form of warped and cracked housings after very little use and accelerated engine wear. Keep it at its intended level and you'll not have issues. 400whp with v8 powerband on a 1.8/2.0L = lots of low end torque, struggling upstairs and eventual succumbing to the forces that be...


Very true and applicable to the kid slapping parts together on his dub. 

However, there are always ways around thing if you know what you're doing! The good ol "keep as it's intended" doesn't get us anywhere and part of the reason making power in a 1.8t is so far behind the Jap imports. Everything you just said was feed to me when I came here in 09 asking for inputs on how to make the most out of the baby OEM turbo (I'm restricted by SCCA and can't upgrade the turbo without moving to a non-competitive class). And if at that time, I followed the status quo, I'd still be making status quo power just like everyone else. People would plain laugh if you told them that a 12 years old stock K04 would make 400 AWTQ and 300 AWHP reliably after several hard racing seasons. I push my setup up to 37 psi spike in the low end when competing, yet my EGTs are lower than a stock car that is pushed. How? Because there are ways around it! 

For example, I'm at the point where my turbine housing is at the limit of what it can naturally push. What do I do? I have my sponsor at 42 DD rig me a custom downpipe with a nice 4" expansion chamber (starting at the flange). This will effectively extands the volume flowed through the hot side before reaching the backpressure threshold that triggers reversion. Next in line is a 3.5 inch cat back. IMO, limits are where we set them in this community... because as far as I can tell, nobody has been innovative, or outside the box, enough to reach the true potentials.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Very true and applicable to the kid slapping parts together on his dub.
> 
> However, there are always ways around thing if you know what you're doing! The good ol "keep as it's intended" doesn't get us anywhere and part of the reason making power in a 1.8t is so far behind the Jap imports. Everything you just said was feed to me when I came here in 09 asking for inputs on how to make the most out of the baby OEM turbo (I'm restricted by SCCA and can't upgrade the turbo without moving to a non-competitive class). And if at that time, I followed the status quo, I'd still be making status quo power just like everyone else. People would plain laugh if you told them that a 12 years old stock K04 would make 400 AWTQ and 300 AWHP reliably after several hard racing seasons. I push my setup up to 37 psi spike in the low end when competing, yet my EGTs are lower than a stock car that is pushed. How? Because there are ways around it!
> 
> For example, I'm at the point where my turbine housing is at the limit of what it can naturally push. What do I do? I have my sponsor at 42 DD rig me a custom downpipe with a nice 4" expansion chamber (starting at the flange). This will effectively extands the volume flowed through the hot side before reaching the backpressure threshold that triggers reversion. Next in line is a 3.5 inch cat back. IMO, limits are where we set them in this community... because as far as I can tell, nobody has been innovative, or outside the box, enough to reach the true potentials.


The housing becomes a restriction long before a 3" downpipe does. Yes, you can ramp up initial efficiency before the housing becomes filled up but there is nothing you can do when the exducer limit and scroll limit is reached. With the increased displacement, it becomes worse. Reversion happens whenever you cannot get it out and the engine pushes more then the exhaust can evacuate. There is not a time that this can be offset. It'll happen on small turbos, it'll happen on larger turbos. You slow flow and you'll experience it and there's nothing you can do post turbo to offset this once this limit is breached. You will just get to the point where anyone with any kind of sense will tell you to step it up with your turbo choice.

Also, i see the 300whp mark is thrown around constantly w/ these tiny turbos. While I'm sure they can get close or reach that mark with the right mods and combination, my point is, its usually not very stable where you're running on that boil all the time so it can be a bit on the troublesome side in the long run. I've seen it on much lesser setups then yours and you're not running that kind of power at the auto-x


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> *The housing becomes a restriction long before a 3" downpipe does*. Yes, you can ramp up initial efficiency before the housing becomes filled up but there is nothing you can do when the exducer limit and scroll limit is reached. With the increased displacement, it becomes worse. Reversion happens whenever you cannot get it out and the engine pushes more then the exhaust can evacuate. There is not a time that this can be offset. It'll happen on small turbos, it'll happen on larger turbos. You slow flow and you'll experience it and there's nothing you can do post turbo to offset this once this limit is breached. You will just get to the point where anyone with any kind of sense will tell you to step it up with your turbo choice.
> 
> Also, i see the 300whp mark is thrown around constantly w/ these tiny turbos. While I'm sure they can get close or reach that mark with the right mods and combination, my point is, its usually not very stable where you're running on that boil all the time so it can be a bit on the troublesome side in the long run. I've seen it on much lesser setups then yours and you're not running that kind of power at the auto-x


Well, that's the whole point of the expansion camber, it extends the housing capacity (do not think downpipe, but turbine housing extension). A perfect example of the concept is illustrated in the CT9 generation Evos, at first they came with a 9.8 O2 housing (bolt-in turbine housing extension that houses the O2 sensor). Mitsubishi later upgraded to a 10.5 O2 housing to remove some of the housing flow restriction. This subtle increase improved things from 4.5k-up that was the backpressure-prone range. In my evo, at 40 psi, I picked up 40 AWHP from the slightly larger extension. This is also what I'm doing by adding an expansion chamber to the upstream portion of the downpipe. 

As far as making that kind of number reliably or with "stability" on a tiny stock turbo, I don't seem to have any problem doing it, racing season after racing season... and if a car is really pushed hard, it's this one.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

cm^2 ratings refer to the housing's A/R. It doesnt describe the 02 housing. 9.8cm^2 is around a .70ar. 10.5cm^2 is around a .78a/r. chambers in the 02 housings and their elongation on these housings were solely to merge and extend the wastegate port to offset creep. This can also be found on porsche KKK turbos and even to an extent the K series vag unit.s

As for your type of racing, you're not utilizing all of the power you're making on the dyno or even close I would think so that point should not apply to this particular thread. His goals would generally mean that he wants to be running your peak or higher everyday with similar power delivery on a displacement that will much more easily fill up spaces. On a compromised system, the pressure differentials between exhaust and combustion chambers come on much more easily which does bring on its own challenges in the long run.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Max - by no means do I mean to pick on you, but you don't drive your car in the winter, I doubt you drive it every day to work spiking 40psi and pushing that turbo well beyond it's efficiency range isn't thinking outside the box, it's just abusing what you have until you need to replace it regardless of your cooling components :thumbup: flow is flow and the exhaust ports are only so large and only so much volume can be pushed before you increase VE beyond necessity. It doesn't mean that it's not cool that you have 300awhp and 400awtq


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> cm^2 ratings refer to the housing's A/R. It doesnt describe the 02 housing. 9.8cm^2 is around a .70ar. 10.5cm^2 is around a .78a/r. chambers in the 02 housings and their elongation on these housings were solely to merge and extend the wastegate port to offset creep. This can also be found on porsche KKK turbos and even to an extent the K series vag unit.s


Being on Mitsu's payroll for more than half a decade, you don't need to remind me why the turbine housing was upgraded from the original creeping twin flapper, to a larger single flapper. What I'm referring to is the byproduct of having a slightly larger hotside as a result, the O2 housing that bolts to it had to be slightly bigger in volume (which reduced the backpressure-prone area of the curve quite a bit). 

I totally understand that there are limitations, and at some point you will eventually hit that wall. What needs to be understood as well is that we're nowhere near that wall at girly pressure ratios common in the community (not even in my car that saw much more power on the dyno from the numbers I posted, simply by going from 30 to 37 psi spikes), and there is quite a bit of power improvements to be made before getting there.


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

I have to agree with what marcus is trying to say. About 6 or 7 years ago I wanted to use larger than K03 turbo's on my GTI but did not want to keep spending the big bucks that BT software cost at the time, especially since a lot of people had problems with BT software anyways. So I started messing with BT setups using Giac's K03 X+ software and everyone started to criticize how stupid I was for doing it and how my engine was going to fail and bla bla bla. I was criticized to the point where I almost didn't do it. 

Well, my engine never failed, I made 425whp on giac's K03 X+ software and the ran pretty darn good. I also did the same thing on a friend of mine's Audi TT and we got 550whp out of the K04 software he had. All of this by just messing around with Lemmiwinks and maf housings. 

I understand that the laws of physics cannot be changed just because I want them to but a lot of people ( the grand majority ) stick to the same recipes just because they feel safe doing do. But that doesn't mean you can't push the envelope trying to make something that isn't supposed to work well, work well.


----------



## Blackfin (Mar 10, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I'm over 450whp 20+psi @3700/3800.


Am I not understanding something in your post or is this a typo? 450*whp* at 3750RPM implies ~630ft-lbs at that point. That can't be right...


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

What I mean is I am over 450 wheel and I'm seeing 20 plus psi at that rpm. 

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

:beer:


18T_BT said:


> Max - by no means do I mean to pick on you, but you don't drive your car in the winter, I doubt you drive it every day to work spiking 40psi and pushing that turbo well beyond it's efficiency range isn't thinking outside the box, it's just abusing what you have until you need to replace it regardless of your cooling components :thumbup: flow is flow and the exhaust ports are only so large and only so much volume can be pushed before you increase VE beyond necessity. It doesn't mean that it's not cool that you have 300awhp and 400awtq


Val, let me fill you in a little bit:
The car was the wife's daily for years, then shortly after I started messing with it, she couldn't drive it anymore so I took over ownership. Up until last year, my commute was 64 miles daily in it plus the couple hundreds miles every other weekend going to the track during racing seasons. I also usually have multiple drivers beating on it to increase the chance of a trophy spot and getting Hoosier contingency tire money. The car is not a trailer queen that's dropped on a track and then trailered back. After racing it hard, it needs to make it's way home from wherever there is an SCCA event in the northeast. 

Again, I totally understand that there are limits, but when they are only set by keyboards, that's when I can't help but laugh and go past them. :beer:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

The t3s60 I had was laggy in my opinion...


----------



## GT-ER (Feb 23, 2005)

Twopnt016v said:


> The t3s60 I had was laggy in my opinion...


What turbine housing did it have? Mine was .48 and by 3000rpm it already had very decent power and by 3500ish it was at peak torque.


----------



## Blackfin (Mar 10, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> What I mean is I am over 450 wheel and I'm seeing 20 plus psi at that rpm.


:beer: Awesome power dude. Thing must be a hoot.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

GT-ER said:


> What turbine housing did it have? Mine was .48 and by 3000rpm it already had very decent power and by 3500ish it was at peak torque.


Same->.48 I didn't seem have peak torque until around 4k. This was in 03 so there wasn't a lot of BT tunes so I was also running on a modified GIAC tune...When it came on it would hit hard but almost anything could get a decent jump on me.


----------



## VW indahouse (Feb 25, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :beer:
> 
> Val, let me fill you in a little bit:
> The car was the wife's daily for years, then shortly after I started messing with it, she couldn't drive it anymore so I took over ownership. Up until last year, my commute was 64 miles daily in it plus the couple hundreds miles every other weekend going to the track during racing seasons. I also usually have multiple drivers beating on it to increas the chance of a trophy spot and getting Hoosier contingency tire money. The car is not a trailer queen that's dropped on a track and then trailered back. After racing it hard, it needs to make it's way home from wherever there is an SCCA even in the northeast.
> ...


Can I please get some more details on your set up :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

VW indahouse said:


> Can I please get some more details on your set up :beer:


Stock turbo, stock manifolds (for now), and stock internals with the exception of IE drop in rods. Car runs on E85, AWIC helped with a direct port water injection and two pre-TB nozzles (one pre-turbo and one post cooler). 630 cc injectors, an inline fuel pump, and Unisettings tweaks take care of the fueling. Timing is optimized flirting with MBT, but I'm on still on a generic tune with a few implementations from our buddy Gonzo (stationary launch control, emission deletes, and removal of fuel cut with throttle/brake overlap). On an AWD mustang dyno the car makes 400/300 at the wheels at 30 psi, at 37 psi it makes a lot more but I don't have clean runs to prove it yet (the 37 psi runs were not clean). 

Some details on the air charge cooling 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...Charge-Cooling-quot-a-different-approach-quot

More on the rest of the setup overall
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5788526-Chronicles-of-a-track-TT


----------



## VW indahouse (Feb 25, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Stock turbo, stock manifolds (for now), and stock internals with the exception of IE drop in rods. Car runs on E85, AWIC helped with a direct port water injection and two pre-TB nozzles (one pre-turbo and one post cooler). 630 cc injectors, an inline fuel pump, and Unisettings tweaks take care of the fueling. Timing is optimized flirting with MBT, but I'm on still on a generic tune with a few implementations from our buddy Gonzo (stationary launch control, emission deletes, and removal of fuel cut with throttle/brake overlap).
> 
> Some details on the air charge cooling
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...Charge-Cooling-quot-a-different-approach-quot
> ...


Brilliant thanks :beer::beer:


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)

just do quad ko3's and a 250 shot direct port nitrous !! you will see 400 wheel tq by 16 rpm and wont run out of gas till after 9573 rpm and just make over 523 hp !!


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

T-Boy said:


> True :thumbup:





GT-ER said:


> Yeah, figured as much. I really like the GTX2867 and that EFR6758 is really nice too. Love the internal gate design and the bypass. I'm drooling here...lol.


I've ridden in a car equipped with a 6758, 2.3L 8V and standalone.... utterly insane, the boost built as quickly as you pushed the gas pedal, smooth as silk and yet hit 18psi by 2800 rpm. It could have easily hit 25 psi at 3200 but 18 is where the boost control was set. Best of all the cold side integrated DV eliminated any lag between shifts.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Last night, finished the top end fuel map on a Jetta GLI equipped w/ the 2867 int wg vbanded setup on a 1.8L. Still need to lean up spool onset to maximize response but tires breaking loose at 50+mph is pretty fun. Definitely a good choice



Prof315 said:


> I've ridden in a car equipped with a 6758, 2.3L 8V and standalone.... utterly insane, the boost built as quickly as you pushed the gas pedal, smooth as silk and yet hit 18psi by 2800 rpm. It could have easily hit 25 psi at 3200 but 18 is where the boost control was set. Best of all the cold side integrated DV eliminated any lag between shifts.


I have one here converted to vband sitting on my shelf for almost 2yrs... Intrigued about the rear turbine more then the compressor wheel. On paper, looks great and I do like the larger exducer on these. If done right, doesnt hurt spool in this range and should be less peaky


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Prof315 said:


> Best of all the *cold side integrated DV eliminated any lag between shifts*.


Not challenging that it must have been a car with insane transient response (big displacement alone will do that).

However, being integrated on the cold side is not what determines the DV recovery speed i.e., how quick it can evacuate positive pressure from the top chamber and get back into vacuum/negative pressure. This is more a factor of the canister size, piping length, and *most importantly* DV design. A valve without an external relief hole (like the one on the good MBCs and certain internal wastegate actuator canisters) will always lag big time in terms of recovery speed. If in fact there was virtually zero DV recovery lag, chances are it had a valve with a relief hole designed in it. :beer:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Keep it up guys  opcorn:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Last night, finished the top end fuel map on a Jetta GLI equipped w/ the 2867 int wg vbanded setup on a 1.8L. Still need to lean up spool onset to maximize response *but tires breaking loose at 50+mph is pretty fun*. Definitely a good choice


What gear break loose? I may have to drive up to NY to get my setup fine-tuned by you.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

2nd gear ripping through the rpm's


----------



## Prof315 (Jan 5, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> 2nd gear ripping through the rpm's


Nice! :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Prof315 said:


> Nice! :thumbup:


3rd breaks loose too but not as violently as it starts pulling a few degrees of timing up top @24psi / 93oct. Need to either put this on the corn or chemically up the octane at this point.

We like simple and clean around here too... Although a ton of stuff has been changed since this pic:










As far as thinking a little outside of the box, here's a dual pass core that retains the PS TB and shortish piping. According to our logs, cools very well and very little in terms of pressure drop. We'll be modifying to traditional horizontal core to aid in flow however as we swith over to DS TB


----------



## RodgertheRabit II (Sep 13, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> 2nd gear ripping through the rpm's


Same on my set up. still only @16psi too!



[email protected] said:


> 3rd breaks loose too but not as violently as it starts pulling a few degrees of timing up top @24psi / 93oct. Need to either put this on the corn or chemically up the octane at this point.
> 
> We like simple and clean around here too... Although a ton of stuff has been changed since this pic:
> 
> ...


The Dual pass IC has always interested me, but I just went with the DS intake to simplify things. REALLY happy with my pipe routing. Do you notice any benefits of the DV location similar to APRs placement? Any specific reason you and/or customer wanted it there?


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

I usually use a bov. But everything about this car has been with the premise of leaving things OEM'ish. The R1 DV was there and in that position so we just left it there and integrated it.


----------

