# check out this compressor map and tell me what you think



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

its the red one of a Holset HE351CW it has .65AR and can be found off a 5.9l cummings diesel and can be bought for around 300$ 








so for the money im thinking about trying one out, plus i think i can get one of these MYSELF for prolly 100 bux
how do you guys think the spool and power would be?
from my math this turbo flows roughly a max of 57 lb/min so its in between a 3076 and a 35r 
that has really peaked my interest since i figured that out










_Modified by 50trim S at 5:24 PM 8-13-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (50trim S)*

I plugged your map into spreadsheet I developed a while back. As you can see, the Holset won't develop any boost until 4100 RPMs. Efficiency drops off fairly quickly above 6000 RPMs with estimated peak efficiency between 5800 and 6200 RPMs (map does not have efficiency lines). It's a poor choice because it was developed for large diesel with limited top end (<5500 RPMs). See map below with RPMs overlaid.
EDIT: Converted all maps to lbs./min. for easier comparison.

Here is the Holset matched to the original 5.9L assuming twin-turbo setup (actually it's the 5.9L TDI V12 b/c I didn't have cummings diesel on file). Notice the nice powerband from 2500 RPMs to 5000+.

EDIT: Heres the 2871 matched to the 1.8T for comparison (largest Garrett turbo I have on file). Notice peak efficiency at approx. 4600 RPMs. Also the TD05H-16G (from the Mitsu. Evo III) with peak eff. at approx. 5200 RPMs.




_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:10 PM 8-14-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (50trim S)*

The 3071R. Peak efficiency from 3000 RPMs at P2/P1=1.4 to 5200 RPMs at P2/P1 = 2.2. Interestingly, peak efficiency improves above this point to 4200 RPMs at P2/P1 = 4.0 (follow the dotted line up and to the right). Nice turbo capable of 450 to 500 hp with decent powerband for the 1.8T.

EDIT: Added GT3076R for comparison.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 11:36 AM 8-14-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

other opinions please


----------



## -Khaos- (Dec 22, 2003)

thanks for the graph analysis, I haven't seen a map modded with 1.8T spec RPM ranges before.








50trim, that pretty much answered your question didn't it? You can see exactly what it's doing, and how it compares to other turbos...
Personally, if I could get one for cheap I'd rock it, it should make good HP on a stock rod engine (considering higher HP to TQ ratio). Plus non-BB is a plus in that case.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Here's the map for the disco potato in case anyone is interested.

I have other maps with RPMs for the K03 and K04 and others garretts if interested.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

id like to see how a gt35r compares to the holset he351 if thats possible http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## -Khaos- (Dec 22, 2003)

I'd be interested in the K03 (Sport?) and K04 maps! Those are hard enough to find on their own as it is.
These maps should actually go in the FAQ, me thinks.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*

Here's the maps you requested. I am not sure if this is the K03 or K03 Sport.

Here is the K04-20. I will check to see if I have K04-01, since I know there are quite a few people on this forum that use this turbo.

Note: All maps are converted to lbs./min for easy comparison.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

I'll have to grab that map (GT35R) and see what I can do. I will try to post before end of the day.
EDIT: I can also show analysis for stroked or bored out motor. Just give me the numbers (i.e.: 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore etc.).


_Modified by mainstayinc at 5:32 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## -Khaos- (Dec 22, 2003)

*"*Quote, originally posted by Blackfin » 
I believe, but am not sure, that the K03-2075 would be the K03S with its 38mm inducer and the -1870 and -2072 are the "lesser" K03 models with 33mm and 36mm inducers. *"*
that map does look pretty pathetic for the K03. lol
Edit, here's a website, they have a few 3K-B maps...
http://www.not2fast.com/turbo/maps/


_Modified by -Khaos- at 10:06 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*

Yeah. Pretty pathetic compared to the other turbos. It's only capable of about 21 lbs/min or about 200 hp. But... great spool.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

Here's the GT35R. You'd really have to bore or stroke your 1.8T to get the most out of this turbo. Alternatively, you could raise your rev limiter. I will try to overlay both maps and post when I get a chance.

EDIT: Isolated and cleaned up Holset map. Overlay of Holset and GT35R to come...



_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:03 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

Comparison to come.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:30 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_EDIT: Isolated and cleaned up Holset map. Overlay of Holset and GT35R to come...

_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:03 PM 8-15-2008_

i'd really like to see those 2 overlayed 
they look very similar and for 300 bux that holset is a GREAT alternative 
don't you guys think? http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
i think that according to the maps the holset looks better










_Modified by 50trim S at 3:20 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*FV-QR*

Mainstay, could you do this compressor map please? I've been interested in this turbo...it's only 850 bucks new:
GT2860*R* not RS


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Mainstay, could you do this compressor map please? I've been interested in this turbo...it's only 850 bucks new:
GT2860*R* not RS


look at an APR stg3 kit and you'll see how that turbo does on this motor







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*

the GT28R is not a GT2860R... EDIT: GT28R = GT2560R


_Modified by NOLA_VDubber at 5:29 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_
look at an APR stg3 kit and you'll see how that turbo does on this motor







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Haha, it's actually pretty confusing but the GT28r (apr stage 3) is actually a GT2560R. In comparison to this turbo, it can probably flow 10-15lbs per minute more...but it doesn't like the higher pressure ratios like the 2860R. 
The 2860R is a factory replacement/upgrade for Skyline GTRs.


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*FV-QR*

nola beat me to it.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*

my bad 
but the turbo you listed will still be pretty close to the stg3 kit minus about 20 whp from the math i figured http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_nola beat me to it.

muhahahahahaha
_*twirls sinister moustache*_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*

Here is the GT28R (aka GT2560R). This is the same turbo which is currently being delivered to my house from California (Atp turbo). I got it with the T31 turbine housing and external wastegate. I just finished porting and polishing my ATP clone manifold two days ago. I ended up in the emergency room this morning before work because I had a chip of iron in my right eye.

Here is the map for the GT2860R (not the RS Disco Potato) in case this is the one you mean.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:30 PM 12-12-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

I'm still working on this overlay. It's a bit tricky b/c you have to match axes.


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_I ended up in the emergency room this morning before work because I had a freakin chip of iron in my right eye.


Happened to my brother doin the same thing...damn you die grinders! The piece in his eye actually started to rust


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*

Yeah. My eye started to rust too! No kidding. The doctor had to polish my cornia b/c of the rust. So, I gues I ended up getting myself ported and polished!


_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:30 PM 12-12-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*

looks as if the most either of those will flow to redline is 15psi 
not much B in that BT if you ask me


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*

Hey Nola. I forgot to mention that I also gasket matched my ATP clone mani to the T31 turbine housing. Check this out.

I bet you haven't seen such a nice outlet on an ATP mani before. The stock outlet had a weird shape to it, so I had to take the die grinder and some carbide bits to open it up a bit.


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_looks as if the most either of those will flow to redline is 15psi 
not much B in that BT if you ask me









Yeah, they aren't the greatest big turbos, but they are most definitely the cheapest GT ball bearings you can buy. 
The 2560r is 750 bucks, the 2860r is 850. Only reason I'm stuck with the 2860R is that the turbine blade is the appropriate diameter for my atp eliminator housing..otherwise, I would have used the 2560r. 

Mainstay thanks for the mapping buddy, could you do just one more for me please? 
2860R-5...same price, different map:


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*

i think that one looks the best to me BY FAR
im more interested in something bigget hence the holset that flows 63lbs/min and can be had for 300 bux slightly used


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*

Here is the comparison betw. the Holset and the GT35R. Conclusion: the GT35R has a little better spoolup between 12 and 19 psi. Otherwise, the Holset is better than the GT35R in all other categories.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:00 PM 8-18-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Mainstay thanks for the mapping buddy, could you do just one more for me please? 
2860R-5...same price, different map:

Sure. I'm working on your map as we speak.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:27 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

i really want to see how that holset does on a 1.8t 
i may have to find out








so according to this map it should make 12-15psi by 4000rpms?


_Modified by 50trim S at 4:25 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_so according to this map it should make 12-15psi by 4000rpms?

It's hard to tell b/c the surge line (left side of map) is so steep. Since the Holset spools up around 4000 RPMs (at least according to calculations), you are going from no boost to max. boost within a few hundred RPMs. So, you could be making say 6 psi of boost at 3900 RPMs to 30+ by 4200 RPMs. It's hard to predict from the maps exactly how your car will respond to the turbo.


----------



## -Khaos- (Dec 22, 2003)

vewy intewesting.
Someone needs to try this out. What's the hotside bolt pattern?
When I go BT I don't plan on doing rods, so it's either a small t3S60 with broad power, or a big turbo like the holset to make more HP, while keeping rod breaking torque down.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Mainstay thanks for the mapping buddy, could you do just one more for me please? 
2860R-5...same price, different map:


Here's the map for the GT2860R-5.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 7:49 AM 8-18-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*


_Quote, originally posted by *-Khaos-* »_vewy intewesting.
Someone needs to try this out. What's the hotside bolt pattern?
When I go BT I don't plan on doing rods, so it's either a small t3S60 with broad power, or a big turbo like the holset to make more HP, while keeping rod breaking torque down.

i'm almost certain its a .65 ar t3..... its either .55 or .65 but T3 for certain 
its an upgraded version of a hx35 I THINK
heres the dyno with a hy35 which is quite a bit smaller and has a 9cm hotside which equals around .55ar I THINK this is at 22psi and the motor has an aeb head and custom IM and this is on pump gas91-93oct. and is on standalone since its in a corrado








someone ask passat g60 or one of the other turbo sellers on here and see the price and specs on the he351cw







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif










_Modified by 50trim S at 5:19 PM 8-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_yeah im really interested in this after i saw how the hy35 did in one dyno on here as it made like 350 whp at 22psi and looked ALOT like a .63 50 trim

Bore and stroke it out to 2.1L (83mm x 95.5mm) and you'll have a much better setup with the Holset IMHO. Boost comes on at 3400 RPMs and is good to about 8500 RPMs.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:39 PM 8-18-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

oh im sure 
but you can rev a stock head to 7500-8000 rpms without problems if its still making power
just think it would be a great cheap 35r alternative http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

got a request, HX35 with a 2.0







and if possible, hx40 with 2.0 and 8k rpms


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_got a request, HX35 with a 2.0







and if possible, hx40 with 2.0 and 8k rpms

i think the he351 would be better than the hx35 if its newest of the holsets of that size http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*

The reason for the hx35 is that they can be had and rebuilt for cheap, not to mention can be upgraded to a hx35/40 for under $300 (changes compressor wheel and housing) if i choose down the road


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_Here's the map for the GT2860R-5.


Thanks for the map mainstay. So what the hell would happen at 2k rpm if I had the boost controller set to 20psi? Compressor surge? Or just no boost at all?

__
Image uploading. Refresh page to view


----------



## Boostin20v (Mar 22, 2000)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_


Possible to get that redone? If so, with the following motor specs:
82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke
8500 red line


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (Boostin20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Boostin20v* »_Possible to get that redone? If so, with the following motor specs:
82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke
8500 red line

Here is the map you requested with the motor bored out to 82.5mm and stroked to 92.8mm and rev. limiter raised to 9000 RPMs. The GT35R is matched much better to this setup, as you can see boost coming on at around 3000 RPMs and can hold to over 9000 RPMs. Peak efficiency ranges from 5000 RPMs TO 6800 RPMs depending on the boost level. This turbo is a good choice, IMO for 2.0L and larger setups with rev. limiter raised to 7200 RPMs or above.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_got a request, HX35 with a 2.0







and if possible, hx40 with 2.0 and 8k rpms

CincyTT, let me look into that and I'll see what I can do. I will have to find a compressor map first. Anyone have one for the HX35 or HX40?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*


_Quote, originally posted by *-Khaos-* »_Edit, here's a website, they have a few 3K-B maps...
http://www.not2fast.com/turbo/maps/

Thanks for the link. I didn't see your edit on Friday when I posted the K03 and K04-20 maps.
I am still looking for maps for the Holset HX35 and HX40. Anybody? The Holset website has them, but denies access to them(see below).
http://www.holset.co.uk/files/...s.php


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_So what the hell would happen at 2k rpm if I had the boost controller set to 20psi? Compressor surge? Or just no boost at all?

__
Image uploading. Refresh page to view


















Well, accoriding to the map, you would be to the left of the compressor surge line at 2000 RPMs producing little to no boost. The maximum airflow that this turbo can produce at 2000 RPMs is about 8.1 lbs. or about 81 hp. However, the compressor would barely be spinning at that point. Above 2100 RPMs, however, the turbo would begin to spool up rather quickly to a about 19 psi or about 14.5 lbs. of air per minute or about 145 hp. You can comfortably push this turbo well beyond that point all the way up to about 365 hp with a maximum boost level of 31.3 psi.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 8:30 AM 8-18-2008_


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_its the red one of a Holset HE351CW it has .65AR and can be found off a 5.9l cummings diesel and can be bought for around 300$ 








so for the money im thinking about trying one out, plus i think i can get one of these MYSELF for prolly 100 bux
how do you guys think the spool and power would be?
from my math this turbo flows roughly a max of 57 lb/min so its in between a 3076 and a 35r 
that has really peaked my interest since i figured that out









_Modified by 50trim S at 5:24 PM 8-13-2008_

" OK I didn't make this, somebody on a DSM forum did, but this is the info he gave, apparently they're speaking about model years for the dodge cummins engines they came on. 
Blue line is boost pressure at 20 psi (pressure ratio calculated from that), with cfm plotted from 500 to 8000 rpm. Pre-2003 HX-35 in Green. 2003 - 2004.5 HY-35 in Black. 2004.5 - Present HY-35 in Red. This is for 2.0L of displacment. " from homemadeturbo So im looking for the green one vs how it compares to the red plot. If you can compare the 2 with the specs above would be great


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (mainstayinc)*

this link has 3 varients of the hx40 http://www.3si.org/forum/f35/h...97213/


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (cincyTT)*

That's very helpful. Let me see what I can do as far as building a map to your specs (2.0L 8000+ RPMs.)


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (mainstayinc)*

Thanks a bunch. You basically made this one hell of a useful thread for the forum


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (cincyTT)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Glad to help. Working on your specs as we speak.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_So im looking for the green one vs how it compares to the red plot. If you can compare the 2 with the specs above would be great










Here is the green and red map overlaid with your flow requirements (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke = 1.984cc). Both of these turbos are better suited to the 2.0L displacement. The (green map) turbo would be better with the stock limiter or even raised to 7200 RPMs. The (red map) turbo suits this setup quite nicely with the rev. limiter raised above 7200 RPMs and is good to about 8500 - 9000 RPMs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_this link has 3 varients of the hx40

I will try to do the HX40 variants later today if I have the time. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Modified by mainstayinc at 11:49 AM 8-18-2008_


----------



## hyperformancevw (Mar 15, 2007)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (mainstayinc)*

very interested in hx40 comparison... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

how about a GT3582R on std stroke, 83mm bore.
what would be the projected spool?
thanks
bil


----------



## hyperformancevw (Mar 15, 2007)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (hyperformancevw)*

i can make a video of hx35 on a stock displacement 1.8t if you guys want it. my speedometer doesnt work but you can see the spool lol. it spools way better on pump gas though because i havent messed with the timing in unisettings yet. on pump i get 25psi by around 4700 and i pulls all the way to the limiter at 8200 even with stock cams.


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (hyperformancevw)*

^ please!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (badger5)*


_Quote, originally posted by *badger5* »_how about a GT3582R on std stroke, 83mm bore.
what would be the projected spool?

Here is your custom map for an 83mm bore and 86.4mm (standard) stroke at 1870cc's overlaid to the GT3582R (aka GT35R). Projected spool will be a little later than the previous analysis of the 2.0L coming in around 3100 RPMs.




_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:48 PM 8-18-2008_


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

you guys better start paying this man


----------



## enginerd (Dec 15, 2001)

*Re: (NOLA_VDubber)*

Half these combinations are surge city or super late boost onset. Some are both and will boost really late and still require a programmable boost controller that can help prevent full spool to avoid surge. 
What % VE are you using to plot these RPM lines? It's probably worse than plotted if you are using just the displacement . 

Don't forget diesel turbos don't like high exhaust gas temperatures and the 1.8T will generate some seriously high EGT's.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Thankyou Sir - you are a gent http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
much appreciated


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_What % VE are you using to plot these RPM lines? It's probably worse than plotted if you are using just the displacement . 

I am using a VE of 0.95, which is an accurate estimation for a 5 valve engine. With positive pressure (boost), volumetric efficiency can exceed 1.0.
The spreadsheet calculates the air flow requirements for the specified displacement at different RPMs and P2/P1 values. It's actually very simply math, as you probably know. Then, I convert CFM to lbs./min or whatever you want to see. I can also convert to M^3/sec., which is common in Europe (Germany). The maps are absolutely acurate as to the air flow requirements (RPM lines).

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_Half these combinations are surge city or super late boost onset. Some are both and will boost really late and still require a programmable boost controller that can help prevent full spool to avoid surge.

If you read some of the previous responses, I point that out and recommend increasing displacement or rev. limiter, especially with the Holset and GT35R. This is also why I will be installing nothing larger than a GT28R, since I don't plan on increasing bottom end or rev. limiter.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 2:31 PM 8-18-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (badger5)*


_Quote, originally posted by *badger5* »_Thankyou Sir - you are a gent 
much appreciated

No problem. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:11 PM 8-18-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_Don't forget diesel turbos don't like high exhaust gas temperatures and the 1.8T will generate some seriously high EGT's.

Since diesels produce much higher cylinder pressures (as compared to spark ignition), exhaust gas temps will be similarly high. This shouldn't be a concern. Also, the turbos on diesel engines are designed for much higher boost pressures since there is no practical limit to the amount of boost you can make in a diesel. If anything, putting a diesel turbo on your spark ignition will give you some insurance.
Also, a lot of these guys run water-methane injection (I plan to anyway). This will help keep EGTs down.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (hyperformancevw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *hyperformancevw* »_very interested in hx40 comparison... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Here is the HX40-B8554M. Please note that this map is overlaid with air flow requirements for a 2.0L (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke) for a total of 1984 CCs. Comparison with the HE35 to come.

EDIT: Here are the two Holsets compared and overlaid with the above flow requirements (1984 CCs). Please note that there are two other versions of the HX40 with different compressor maps. I will do these in the future when I get some time.

The HE35 is larger up top as compared to the HX40.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 2:31 PM 10-10-2008_


----------



## enginerd (Dec 15, 2001)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Since diesels produce much higher cylinder pressures (as compared to spark ignition), exhaust gas temps will be similarly high. This shouldn't be a concern. Also, the turbos on diesel engines are designed for much higher boost pressures since there is no practical limit to the amount of boost you can make in a diesel. If anything, putting a diesel turbo on your spark ignition will give you some insurance.
Also, a lot of these guys run water-methane injection (I plan to anyway). This will help keep EGTs down.

Diesel engines run 400F lower EGT's. They don't like the 1700 - 1800F EGT's that the 1.8T can generate. The burn takes place in the cylinder rather than partially in the exhaust. Generous EGR (water cooled on new tier 4 engines), and excessive airflow cool the egt's on a diesel. 
I regularly see 1750 EGT's pre turbo on my stg III+ at the track and even touched over 1800 when running a bit lean. Water / meth does little for exhaust temps (I have an aquamist kit), high concentrations of methanol can actually increase EGT's.
regardless of pressure ratio the bearing sections on the turbos are not designed to run these high temperatures and will suffer a seal or bearing failure prematurely compared to a borg warner or garret turbo designed for 1850 - 1900F temperatures. 
You guys can try to build cheap turbo kits with massively oversized and mis matched turbos but you will end up with mediocre setups hitting boost 1000 rpm later than desired, and top ends limited by the balance of your setup. It's worth the extra money for a better matching turbo. You will enjoy driving it more.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_Diesel engines run 400F lower EGT's. They don't like the 1700 - 1800F EGT's that the 1.8T can generate. The burn takes place in the cylinder rather than partially in the exhaust. Generous EGR (water cooled on new tier 4 engines), and excessive airflow cool the egt's on a diesel.

Turbo diesels can be pushed to very high boost levels and, therefore, can experience very high EGTs. Your statement may be true for non-turbocharged diesels, but does not apply to boosted applications. Also, technology to reduce EGTs in diesel engines has more to do with emmisions control and reducing oxides of nitrogen that form at higher combustion temps. than with efficient operation. The fact is that diesels run more efficiently at higher operating temps. The hotter the better.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_regardless of pressure ratio the bearing sections on the turbos are not designed to run these high temperatures and will suffer a seal or bearing failure prematurely compared to a borg warner or garret turbo designed for 1850 - 1900F temperatures. 

Holset designs their turbos with generously sized bearings, watercooled housing options and a variety of turbine housing materials to suit different temperature demands (see below). The fact is that Holset designs their turbos to run at high temperatures without premature seal or bearing failure. I contacted Holset in the UK and asked them about safe temperature ranges which their turbos may operate. Their response should address the concerns you raised.
http://www.holset.co.uk/files/...0.php

_Quote, originally posted by *Holset HX40* »_Developed for 7 to 10 litre engines operating in the medium/light heavy automotive sector this Holset turbocharger has many of the features found in the Holset heavy-duty range of products. 
Generously sized bearings with watercooled housing options for applications with highly cyclic operations support a recently upgraded set of aerodynamic components. 
STANDARD FEATURES:
Choice of turbine housing materials to cover a wide range of temperatures.
High pressure ratio capability



_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_I regularly see 1750 EGT's pre turbo on my stg III+ at the track and even touched over 1800 when running a bit lean. *Water / meth does little for exhaust temps *(I have an aquamist kit), high concentrations of methanol can actually increase EGT's.

Please provide empirical data on your setup comparing WAI on v. WAI off and correct for differences in boost levels. It is a known fact that WAI can reduce EGTs by upwards of 200 degr. F.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_You guys can try to build cheap turbo kits *with massively oversized and mis matched turbos* but you will end up with mediocre setups hitting boost 1000 rpm later than desired, and top ends limited by the balance of your setup. It's worth the extra money for a better matching turbo. You will enjoy driving it more.

If you look at the compressor maps on page one (1) of this thread, you will see that the HE35 is comparable to the GT35R. Further, the HE35 has been proven (on page 2 of this thread) to be on the larger side of the Holsets. The HX40 would be less than comparable (smaller) than the GT35R. Also, no one intends to run the HE35 without either increasing displacement or rev. limit. The compressor maps with the RPM lines and the discussion thread clearly prove that.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 7:44 AM 8-20-2008_


----------



## jc_bb (Sep 27, 2005)

my god, this man is a legend.
How about a Gt2871 on a 92.8x35mm stroke bore 2008cc engine?
would love to see what it looks like as I guessed at efficiency based on the 1.8 map.
thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (jc_bb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jc_bb* »_How about a Gt2871 on a 92.8x35mm stroke bore 2008cc engine?
would love to see what it looks like as I guessed at efficiency based on the 1.8 map.


Since you didn't specify the trim level, I will post the 48, 52 and 56 trim version of the GT2871, since I already have those on file. Also, I assume that you mean 92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore (2008 CCs). 



At this displacement and with stock rev. limiter, the 52 or 56 trim turbo would be a better choice. The 48 trim peak efficiency at this displacement (at about 4100 RPMs) is too low to comfortably get you into the higher revs.
EDIT: The 52 trim would be the best choice for this setup, since you get good spoolup down low and plenty up top. It also has the highest P2/P1 (boost) potential out of all the GT2871s. Hope this helps.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 9:09 AM 8-19-2008_


----------



## jc_bb (Sep 27, 2005)

yeah, 83mm (doh!)
i have a .56 trim.
that looks great, thanks for that


----------



## jc_bb (Sep 27, 2005)

how does the difference in the height of the graph on the 52 vs 56 trim (taking it higher on the pressure ratio axis) affect the output?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (jc_bb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jc_bb* »_yeah, 83mm (doh!)
i have a .56 trim.
that looks great, thanks for that

Pretty good choice for having to guess at your setup. Although I would have chose the 52 trim, the 56 trim is a little more efficienct up top (notice how the lines to the right of the peak efficiency line **dotted vertical line** are flatter on the 56 as compared to the 52).


_Modified by mainstayinc at 9:23 AM 8-19-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (jc_bb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jc_bb* »_how does the difference in the height of the graph on the 52 vs 56 trim (taking it higher on the pressure ratio axis) affect the output?

It only effects output indirectly. Even though the 56 cannot produce as much maximum boost, it can produce more corrected air flow than the 52. What matters is the amount of corrected air flow (moving to the right of the map) and not the amount of boost (moving upward).
If you look at the vertical red line below, you will notice that it intersects with the x-axis (corrected air flow) at about 34 lbs./min. The horizontal lines depict the speed of the compressor. The 52 is capable of producing 34 lbs./min of corrected air flow (about 340 hp) at each of the compressor speeds. However, it produces this amount most efficiently where it intersects the **dotted vertical line** which is not at the highest speed line (maximum boost).



_Modified by mainstayinc at 10:50 AM 8-19-2008_


----------



## AudiA4_18T (Mar 15, 2006)

hey man your the compressor map king lol. That Holset looks like good stuff


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (AudiA4_18T)*


_Quote, originally posted by *AudiA4_18T* »_That Holset looks like good stuff

That 2.0 stroker on your A4 has got to have an upgraded turbo. Let me know what you have and I can see if I have a map for it. Also, by stroker do you mean 95.5mm stroke x 81mm bore?


----------



## spoolin turbo s (Mar 8, 2002)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

red holset for the win on price and gt35r potential
i really appreciate your help with these maps it means alot
how would frankies setup with bbt3t67 his FS ad says its a 2020 stroker not sure where this map is
also if would please do one with a bullseye s258 it can be found here http://www.bullseyepower.com/S200.asp for a stock bore and stroke

when this thread gets done it needs to be stickied http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (spoolin turbo s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spoolin turbo s* »_how would frankies setup with bbt3t67 his FS ad says its a 2020 stroker not sure where this map is
also if would please do one with a bullseye s258 it can be found here http://www.bullseyepower.com/S200.asp for a stock bore and stroke

I'll check into it tomorrow. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## spoolin turbo s (Mar 8, 2002)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

thanks 
id just like to see how the t3t67 map actually correlates to his setup and super high hp dyno
and i think that s258 would be a sweet turbo http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (spoolin turbo s)*

Below is the T3 Super 60 with standard bore and stroke (81mm x 86.4mm) RPM lines overlaid. Some people claim that the Super 60 is better than the GT28RS. You will also find some comparative maps that can hopefully address this issue.
Here is the T3 Super 60. Notice how there is very little usable area above the 6000 RPM line on the map.

Here is the Super 60 overlaid with the GT28RS (see page one of thread for the GT28RS without overlay). Notice how the GT28RS has a lot more usable area to the lower, right side of the map. This means that the GT28RS can produce more corrected air flow at these pressure ratios. Sure, the Super 60 can just about produce 35 lbs./min of air flow (about 350 hp), but it has to work a lot harder doing it as compared to the GT28RS. Also, the GT28RS can produce about 36.2 lbs./min of air (about 360+hp) and it can do this at lower compressor speeds.

The T3 Super 60 is more comparable IMO to the GT28R (see below). But again, you will notice that the GT28R has more usable area to the lower, right hand side of the map. Also, notice that the GT28R has it's peak efficiency line to the right of the Super 60 ranging from about 4000 RPMs to 4800 RPMs. Whereas the Super 60's peak efficiency line ranges from 3400 RPMs to 4400 RPMs.

Although the Super 60 can produce slightly more airflow up top as compared to the GT28R (about **10 hp according to the map), it has to work very hard to do this. It should be clear that the Super 60 is not better than either of these GT turbos.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 7:32 AM 8-20-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (spoolin turbo s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spoolin turbo s* »_also if would please do one with a bullseye s258 it can be found here http://www.bullseyepower.com/S200.asp for a stock bore and stroke

Below is the Bullseye S258 with standard bore and stroke overlaid (81mm x 86.4mm). I also included the Bulleye S256 for comparison. Both of these turbos are not suited to the stock displacement or rev. limiter as you can see from the map. The S258's surge line is at 4100 RPMs. Peak efficiency ranges from 6000 RPMs to 4600 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. With rev. limiter increased at this displacement power band ranges from 4100 RPMs to 9000+ RPMs.









The S258 would be better suited to (minimum) 2.0L of displacement with raised rev. limiter IMO (see below).

The Bullseye S256 is comparable to the Garrett GT3076R (aka GT30R) and maybe slightly better b/c it has a lower surge line and more top end. See comparison below with 2.0L RPMs overlaid (82.5mm x 92.8mm).








EDIT: The Bullseye S258 is comparable to the Garrett GT3582R (aka GT35R) in terms of maximum air flow, but clearly has a better surge line than the GT35R above P2/P1 = 2.3 (about 19 psi) as it does not fall off as fast as the GT35R. See comparison below with 2.0L RPMs overlaid (82.5mm x 92.8mm).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (spoolin turbo s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spoolin turbo s* »_how would frankies setup with bbt3t67 his FS ad says its a 2020 stroker not sure where this map is

I couldn't find a compressor map for the T3/67. Anyone? Also, can you give me a link to frankie's FS page so that I can take a closer look at his setup?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_regardless of pressure ratio the bearing sections on the turbos are not designed to run these high temperatures and will suffer a seal or bearing failure prematurely compared to a borg warner or garret turbo designed for 1850 - 1900F temperatures.

Holset of UK responded to my inquiry about maximum operating temps. See below.

_Quote, originally posted by *James Moorhouse* »_The maximum operating temperature of our turbochargers varies but they should not under any circumstances exceed 760° Celsius. 
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask 
Thank you 
James Moorhouse
Marketing Co-ordinator
Cummins Turbo Technologies Ltd
St Andrew's Road
Huddersfield
HD1 6RA
United Kingdom
Tel +44 1484 832637
Fax +44 1484 440385
cummins.com/turbos 


760 degr. C is 1400 degr. F. So, according to Holset, these would not be suitable for higher temp. applications. Just curious, does anybody see EGTs above 1400 degr. F?
EDIT: I also contacted Limit Engineering and asked them the same question about their Garrett GT series turbos for comparison.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 2:43 PM 9-22-2008_


----------



## spoolin turbo s (Mar 8, 2002)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

here is the link to frankies stuff http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3945155
the map would just be under t67


----------



## enginerd (Dec 15, 2001)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

A stock 1.8T runs way over 1400F. All out race 1.8T's run 1700 - 1800 all the time. 900+ °C
The cummins 6.7L i have running at work on an engine dyno runs 1250 degrees at rated speed and torque. This is without the water cooled EGR. So diesel turbos are not a good choice for a 1.8T. 
An 8Valve rabbit engine may run ok with a diesel turbo because they need lower EGT's to keep the head alive. *V's don't like over 1600F. A 1.8T generates too much heat. 

Your T3 super 60 comparison to a 28R is a little misleading. You need to consider the turbine section as well as the compressor map. I think you will find that a 28R has a more restrictive exhaust housing/wheel. They generally dyno higher numbers than a 28R with a slower spool up time, and more area up top at the 6K range. The 28R / RS is still a better choice as the super 60 is less tolerant of heat (even the water cooled version) also less tolerant of high loading from 20+ PSI. 
The exhaust backpressure hurts the %VE on these engines when you have 40 psi in the exhaust manifold.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_A stock 1.8T runs way over 1400F. All out race 1.8T's run 1700 - 1800 all the time. 900+ °C

I would like to see some EGT logs to verify actual temps and whether they are intermittent or sustained temperatures.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_The cummins 6.7L i have running at work on an engine dyno runs 1250 degrees at rated speed and torque. This is without the water cooled EGR. So diesel turbos are not a good choice for a 1.8T.

Before I draw the same conclusion I would like to hear back from Garrett on this issue and see if they can verify your 1850 to 1900 degr. F range for thier GT turbos. Unfortunately, ATP Turbo was not helpful when I contacted their tech. deptartment.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_Your T3 super 60 comparison to a 28R is a little misleading. You need to consider the turbine section as well as the compressor map. I think you will find that a 28R has a more restrictive exhaust housing/wheel.

It is not misleading. The 0.64 T28 turbine housing on the GT28R is equivalent to the 0.48 T31 option on the Super 60. So, the comparison with the GT28R is accurate. The fact that experience shows a slower spoolup for the Super 60 probably means that people are opting for the larger 0.63 T31 turbine housing. Also, the turbine side should not effect the comparison of the turbo's compressor range and efficiency.
Also, the compressor maps clearly shows a better spoolup for the Super 60 below P2/P1 = 1.7 (about 10.3 psi). Above that point, the GT28R has a lower surge limit and better spoolup all the way up to it's maximum speed. 

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_They generally dyno higher numbers than a 28R with a slower spool up time, and more area up top at the 6K range.

That is the conclusion of the comparison. That the Super 60 has more up top than the GT28R. However, it would really be maxed out at that point.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_The 28R / RS is still a better choice as the super 60 is less tolerant of heat (even the water cooled version) also less tolerant of high loading from 20+ PSI..

I agree. And I would add, as stated in the comparison, that the GT28R/RS has a lot more usable air flow throughout most of the turbo's operating range.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 7:34 AM 8-21-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (spoolin turbo s)*

I'm still looking for the map. 








http://www.full-race.com/catal...id=63


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:21 PM 8-21-2008_


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

I'm still at a loss as to which 2860r to choose.
If I were working with a regular manifold, I'd go with the 5..but I get the feeling that the ko3 manifold and turbine housing will severely limit the topend potential and increase spool times.
At least with the 7...it'll flow within the means of the eliminator housing/ko3 turbine....but I won't have any top end.....
If only there was a turbo right in between the two..
Mainstay, do you think I can put down 280whp with the 2860r-7 on e85/104 octane?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Mainstay, do you think I can put down 280whp with the 2860r-7 on e85/104 octane?

Well, according to the map the 2860R-7 is capable of making about 31.5 lbs./min of airflow (about 315 hp). Discounting for drivetrain friction loss you end up with about 274 whp. I think that you are right about the stock manifold and K03-style turbine housing limiting the top end of this turbo. The stock manifold makes a 90 degr. downward turn, and has a very small outlet by BT standards. I don't think that you will be satified selecting a turbo based around the limits of your manifold.
One solution is to buy a higher-flowing stock replacement manifold and porting out the outlet by several mm's. You can then port/gasket match the turbine flange on your eliminator. This should open up things by 10% to 20% (it doesn't take much). Then, at least you know that you are getting the most out of this setup (make sure there is enough material on either flange). Also, porting is not that difficult if you have the right tools. Personally, I recommend a laminator trimmer/cutter (i.e.: router) and some 1/2 inch to 5/8 inch carbide burs. The trimmer/cutter allows you to keep the carbide bit perpendicular to the cutting surface.
What turbo came with the eliminator housing that warrants replacing? The only **from the factory** turbo that comes with the 28xx series turbine housing that I am aware of is the GT28RS or GT2871. It sounds like you only have the eliminator turbine housing and not the turbo itself.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 2:44 PM 8-20-2008_


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

Yeah, I just bought an eliminator turbine housing off the vortex. I'm restricted to the 53.8mm turbine wheel on the 2860r, 28rs, 2871r....
28rs and 2871r are too expensive and big, so they are out of the picture. That leaves one of the two 2860rs..
For any given number that a car *should* put out, I'll be 20ish whp higher because I only run e85. In other words, I have somewhat of a bandaid for inefficient compressor maps.


_Modified by 20aeman at 2:41 PM 8-20-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*

Well, the restrictive manifold and turbine housing should not increase spool times. If anything, they will help get the turbine moving quicker at lower RPMs. As stated before, however, I think that these will limit your top end. I would definitely go with the GT2860R-5 since you get "RS" like performance. You can always port your existing manifold (or buy a used on off ebay cheap) in the short-term if top end is a concern. Down the road, you have the option of upgrading to a T28 or T31 manifold and turbine housing while keeping your GT2860R-5 CHRA.


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_Well, the restrictive manifold and turbine housing should not increase spool times. If anything, they will help get the turbine moving quicker at lower RPMs. As stated before, however, I think that these will limit your top end. I would definitely go with the GT2860R-5 since you get "RS" like performance. You can always port your existing manifold (or buy a used on off ebay cheap) in the short-term if top end is a concern. Down the road, you have the option of upgrading to a T28 or T31 manifold and turbine housing while keeping your GT2860R-5 CHRA.

When you put it that way, it certainly makes more sense to go with the 5. Cool beans...I'll try that one out the http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## hyperformancevw (Mar 15, 2007)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

the one you are looking for is the t3/67 not straight t67 and im pretty sure frank is running the HO model.


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_
28rs and 2871r are too expensive and big, so they are out of the picture. That leaves one of the two 2860rs..


Dont you mean a gt2560r aka gt28r? The 2860r is the gt28rs


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (hyperformancevw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *hyperformancevw* »_the one you are looking for is the t3/67 not straight t67 and im pretty sure frank is running the HO model.

Thanks for the info. I am having a hard time finding a map for this turbo.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:23 PM 8-21-2008_


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Dont even humor him, he will never leave you alone. Plus its not like he would even think about running it


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (cincyTT)*

Thanks for the heads up. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_
Dont you mean a gt2560r aka gt28r? The 2860r is the gt28rs 

There is the 2560r aka 28r, there is the 2860rs aka disco potato, there are the 2860r s, one is the r34 gtr n-1 turbo, the other is a bolt on upgrade for the gtr. I want one of the gtr turbos.


----------



## spoolin turbo s (Mar 8, 2002)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_Dont even humor him, he will never leave you alone. Plus its not like he would even think about running it

i want to compare how his calculations with the info he has correlates to frankie's real world performance


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_regardless of pressure ratio the bearing sections on the turbos are not designed to run these high temperatures and will suffer a seal or bearing failure prematurely *compared to a borg warner or garret turbo designed for 1850 - 1900F temperatures*. 
You guys can try to build cheap turbo kits with massively oversized and mis matched turbos but you will end up with mediocre setups hitting boost 1000 rpm later than desired, and top ends limited by the balance of your setup. It's worth the extra money for a better matching turbo. You will enjoy driving it more.

UPDATE: Limit Engineering, a Garrett performance distributer, returned my inquiry about the maximum operating temperature of Garrett ball bearing turbos. He states:

_Quote, originally posted by *John C. Craig* »_There is not a pat answer to your question. There are many variables. The material that the turbine wheel and turbine housing are made, is it water cooled, the application. As a rule of thumb, for continuous operation with a GMR235 turbine wheel, we do not recommend that you exceed 1400 F.

Regards,

John C. Craig
Limit Engineering, Inc. 
Performance Turbochargers
928-453-7321
928-453-0789 (FAX)
Garrett Performance Distributor

So, accoring to John at Limit Engineering, you should not exceed 1400 degr. F while using a Garrett turbo. This happens to be the same maximum operating temp. advised by Holset for their diesel turbos:

_Quote, originally posted by *James Moorhouse* »_The maximum operating temperature of our turbochargers varies but they should not under any circumstances exceed 760° Celsius. 
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask 
Thank you 
James Moorhouse
Marketing Co-ordinator
Cummins Turbo Technologies Ltd
St Andrew's Road
Huddersfield
HD1 6RA
United Kingdom
Tel +44 1484 832637
Fax +44 1484 440385
cummins.com/turbos 


760 degr. C is 1400 degr. F. So, based on the above statements, there is no difference in the recommended maximum operating temperature between the Holset and Garrett turbos. Therefore, the concerns you raised about using a diesel turbo on the 1.8T are a non-issue as far as bearing failure, etc. due to the high temps. that the 1.8T generates. Also, it is not true that Garrett turbos are designed for 1850 - 1900F temperatures, as the above statement makes clear.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_Diesel engines run 400F lower EGT's. They don't like the 1700 - 1800F EGT's that the 1.8T can generate. The burn takes place in the cylinder rather than partially in the exhaust. Generous EGR (water cooled on new tier 4 engines), and excessive airflow cool the egt's on a diesel. 
I regularly see 1750 EGT's pre turbo on my stg III+ at the track and even touched over 1800 when running a bit lean. Water / meth does little for exhaust temps (I have an aquamist kit), high concentrations of methanol can actually increase EGT's.


EGT logs, please. Would like to verify.


----------



## TooLFan46n2 (Oct 18, 1999)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Would it be possible to post up a plot of a T3/T4 50 trim configuration. Preferably one with a smaller AR like .48 if you have the map. I'm looking for a T series with more a lil more top end than a super 60.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (TooLFan46n2)*

Not a problem. I will search around for a compressor map later this afternoon and post.


----------



## Rippinralf (Jun 21, 2002)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Before I draw the same conclusion I would like to hear back from Garrett on this issue and see if they can verify your 1850 to 1900 degr. F range for thier GT turbos. Unfortunately, ATP Turbo was not helpful when I contacted their tech. deptartment.

Apparently you havent dealt with ATP much if you're suprised about that


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (Rippinralf)*

No, I haven't dealt with them a lot in the past. When I tried to contact them about the max. op. temps., they were totally useless. Also, when I purchased my GT28R with T31 turbine housing last month, they sent me the wrong turbine housing. I had to send back and exchange for the correct housing. My project was, consequently, pushed back for three weeks because of their mistake.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (TooLFan46n2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TooLFan46n2* »_Would it be possible to post up a plot of a T3/T4 50 trim configuration. Preferably one with a smaller AR like .48 if you have the map. I'm looking for a T series with more a lil more top end than a super 60.

Here is the map you requested with standard displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke).

Peak efficiency ranges from 3800 RPMs to 5500 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. Surge line varies from 2000 RPM at P2/P1=1.6 (about 8.8 psi) to above 4000 RPMs. This turbo would not be an appropriate fit IMO at standard displacement or rev. limiter. Increase the rev. limiter and this turbo is good to about 8500 RPMs.

Increase displacement to 2.0L (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke) and you improve the surge limit by about 460 RPMs. Rev. limiter lowers to about 7500 RPMs.

The T04E-50 is most closely related to the GT2876, which is not a very popular GT series turbo.

Below is the T04E-40 AND T04E-46 for comparison.


At standard displacement and rev. limiter, you may want to go with the T04E-40 or T04E-46 since it will give you a little more top end than the T3 Super 60 (see page 3 of discussion thread for map of the Super 60).


_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:06 PM 9-9-2008_


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

bookmarked http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## middiesman (Jan 3, 2006)

I run an EGT gauge on my stock turbo 1.8t. I'm running 18 PSI with a manual boost controller and all the bolt ons except an after market intercooler. The EGT's never get above 1200F, and that is running wide open throttle. Cruising, It is usually around 1100. Fully warmed up idle it rests around 850-900F.
Also, I have a water/meth injection and it absolutely makes a difference in EGT's. If I'm spraying the meth, EGT's won't go over 1100 even after repeated abuse. 
I have VAG COM as well, so I can log EGT on that, but the sensor is no where near the exhaust manifold. My EGT probe is in the exhaust manifold, so I know I'm getting a good signal.



_Modified by middiesman at 4:44 PM 9-9-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (middiesman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *middiesman* »_Also, I have a water/meth injection and it absolutely makes a difference in EGT's. If I'm spraying the meth, EGT's won't go over 1100 even after repeated abuse.

That would confirm what I have read about water methanol. Enginerd claims that water/meth injection can actually increase EGTs in certain situations, but I have never heard this before.

_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_I regularly see 1750 EGT's pre turbo on my stg III+ at the track and even touched over 1800 when running a bit lean. Water / meth does little for exhaust temps (I have an aquamist kit), high concentrations of methanol can actually increase EGT's.


_Quote, originally posted by *middiesman* »_I run an EGT gauge on my stock turbo 1.8t. I'm running 18 PSI with a manual boost controller and all the bolt ons except an after market intercooler. The EGT's never get above 1200F, and that is running wide open throttle. Cruising, It is usually around 1100. Fully warmed up idle it rests around 850-900F.

That makes me think that even with Stage III+ running at, say 25 psi, 1750 to 1800 degr. F is highly unlikely. Perhaps someone with Stage III+ can verify enginerd's temps.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (stevemannn)*

Below are some comparisons of the T04E-40 and the T04E-46 with standard displacement. The T04E-40 is most closely compared to the 48 trim GT2871R.

The T04E-46 is most closely compared to the 52 trim GT2871R.

Notice, however, that in both cases the GT turbos are better in all categories, such as lower surge line and higher top end (see page 3 of discussion thread for maps of GT2871R 48 and 52 trim without overlay. Please note, however, that the maps on page 3 are for 2.0L displacement.)


_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:59 PM 12-12-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Below is a comparison between the T04E-40 and GT28RS with standard displacement.

Notice how both turbos have similar top ends (36 lbs/min for the RS and 37.2 bls/min for the 40). However, the surge line for the RS is 1100 RPMs lower at P2/P1=2.5 (about 22 psi) as compared to the 40.
Despite the lower surge line, the RS still has a higher peak efficiency line (blue dotted line running upward to the right). This means that as the 40 passes its peak efficiency line (from about 3200 to 4200 RPMs), the RS can handle another 900 to 1000 RPMs before it reaches it's peak efficiency (from about 3500 to 5000 RPMs. 
It should be clear that the RS has a wider range of usable power as compared to the 40. Although the 40 is capable of producing higher boost levels (and nominally higher top end), it has a narrower band of usable power as compared to the RS.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:54 PM 10-29-2008_


----------



## AudiA4_18T (Mar 15, 2006)

did anyone ever run this turbo?


----------



## RASALIBRE (Jul 9, 2004)

*Re: (AudiA4_18T)*

bookmarked http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (RASALIBRE)*

Still taking requests. Please specify turbo and displacement (i.e.: standard displacement, 82.5mm x 92.8mm etc.). I can overlay different maps for comparison. Will check this thread periodically.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

looking for compressor map of a holset hx35/40 hybrid not sure where to find the map but i would like to see it plotted with stock bore and stroke motor revving to no more than 8000 rpms


_Modified by 50trim S at 7:01 PM 10-9-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_looking for compressor map of a holset hx35/40 hybrid not sure where to find the map but i would like to see it plotted with stock bore and stroke motor revving to no more than 8000 rpms

I did some research on the Holset HX35/40 hybrid and came up with the following information:








Want to make your dodge into a fire breathing monster, try our Dodgezilla Hybrid the best of both worlds. The Dodgezilla Hybrid Turbo features the largest HX-40 compressor side avaliable allowing your turbo to flow more air. The Dodgezilla uses an upgraded HX-35 turbine housing, allowing you flow more air while avoiding the cost of a expensive downpipe and the weaker shaft of the HX40. You will notice the dodgezilla turbo spools up quicker and stays in its effective range much longer. The increased air flow will increase your low end throttle response, reduce your EGT and reduce the amount of smoke at low throttle. Dyno results are avaliable. 
http://www.citydiesel.net/dodg...32_34
Is this the turbo you are referring to?


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:30 PM 10-10-2008_


----------



## -Khaos- (Dec 22, 2003)

these maps need to be in the FAQ


----------



## IAmTheNacho (Oct 26, 2003)

*Re: (-Khaos-)*

How about mapping a t3 60-1 .63A/R


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (IAmTheNacho)*


_Quote, originally posted by *IAmTheNacho* »_How about mapping a t3 60-1 .63A/R









and one with a 2008cc engine


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_looking for compressor map of a holset hx35/40 hybrid not sure where to find the map but i would like to see it plotted with stock bore and stroke motor revving to no more than 8000 rpms

Below I have listed all of the HX40 compressor maps with standard displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). There are three of them. The smallest is an 8-blade design. There is also a 7 and 6 blade design. The hybrid HX35/40 turbo referring to the "largest HX-40 compressor side" mentioned above is either referring to the 7 blade (HX40-B8574M) or 6 blade (HX40-B8584M) design. See below.





_Modified by mainstayinc at 5:09 PM 12-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (IAmTheNacho)*


_Quote, originally posted by *IAmTheNacho* »_How about mapping a t3 60-1 .63A/R

I'll check into that on Monday and post with standard displacement and 2008 CCs (CincyTT). I think that I already have that one on file. I'm about to leave the office.http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:06 PM 10-10-2008_


----------



## IAmTheNacho (Oct 26, 2003)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
I'll check into that on Monday and post with standard displacement and 2008 CCs (CincyTT). I think that I already have that one on file. I'm about to leave the office.http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:06 PM 10-10-2008_
 http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (IAmTheNacho)*


_Quote, originally posted by *IAmTheNacho* »_How about mapping a t3 60-1 .63A/R <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> 

Below is the map you requested with standard displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke) and rev. limiter raised to 11,000 RPMs. Please note that valvehead upgrades are needed for this RPM range. I have also listed 4 other Garrett turbos with similar flow rates for comparison.



















Below are the same compressor maps with 2008CC displacement (83mm bore x 92.8mm stroke)-Cincy TT. The T61 fits this combination well, considering its excellent surge line and high end capability. It's maximum efficiency line (not depicted on the map but right around 6000 RPMs) is 500 to 2000 RPMs lower compared to the T3 60-1 and it still produces more airflow than the T3 60-1. In the 600 to 700 HP range, the T61 is the better choice according to the maps.


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

I can see why the honda guys love those things so much...


----------



## rodney_dubs (Mar 2, 2008)

None of those turbos are going to make power to 11k lololol. Also, even on a 2.1L, a 35r isn't going to spool up anywhere near 3100 rpm. I used to run that compressor wheel in a journal bearing setup and made full boost around 48-4900k (on a 2L). The guys running ball bearing full 35r's make boost around 4600 or so. 
You can't read the spoolup off the compressor map- plain and simple. You can tell if the turbo is going to surge or not if it WAS forced to spool then, but the spoolup is going to be constained by the turbine wheel, turbine housing, and amount of gas flow from the engine (displacement & ve)
Hell, the difference between a .63 and a .82 T3 housing is a good chunk of spool- 3-400 rpm easily depending on the wheel- how is that reflected in the compressor map? Or that there are 4-5 different turbine wheels available for some of these turbos. 
Also, the statement about the eliminator housing not hurting spoolup is just plain wrong. The eliminator 2871r spool about 500rpm later then a standard full t25 gt2871r. You need to deliver the pressure TO the turbine wheel, not choke it all upstream. 

I don't want to hate, but compressor maps should be used for nothing more then picking a compressor that will shine in your intended powerband on your engine- and they are sketchy even at that as we are guessing the VE. There is just no physical way to tell when a turbo is going to spool up based on the compressor map with any kind of accuracy. 


_Modified by rodney_dubs at 10:46 AM 10-13-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (rodney_dubs)*

do you know of any cars running holsets?
if so give me some info on them


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (rodney_dubs)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_You can't read the spoolup off the compressor map- plain and simple. You can tell if the turbo is going to surge or not if it WAS forced to spool then, but the spoolup is going to be constained by the turbine wheel, turbine housing, and amount of gas flow from the engine (displacement & ve)
Hell, the difference between a .63 and a .82 T3 housing is a good chunk of spool- 3-400 rpm easily depending on the wheel- how is that reflected in the compressor map? Or that there are 4-5 different turbine wheels available for some of these turbos. 

This issue was already discussed previously in this thread. Yes. The turbine housing, wheel etc. will effect when the turbo spools up.

_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_None of those turbos are going to make power to 11k lololol.

That's not true. The T3 60-1, T3 62-1, T61, T64 and T66 are rated from 65 to 80 lbs. of air per minute. If you calculate air flow for a 2.0L engine at different pressure ratios and engine speeds, you will see that these turbos can easily produce that much air flow (see chart below for 2008CCs of displacement. Notice that even at P2/P1=2 (14.7 psi) and 11,000 RPMs, this engine is only producing about 63 lbs. per minute of air.)


_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_Also, even on a 2.1L, a 35r isn't going to spool up anywhere near 3100 rpm. I used to run that compressor wheel in a journal bearing setup and made full boost around 48-4900k (on a 2L). The guys running ball bearing full 35r's make boost around 4600 or so. 

That's not what the GT35R compressor map is showing. If you look at the GT35R compressor map on page 2 of this thread, you will see that between P2/P1 = 1.4 to 2.2, the surge line is at 3000 RPMs. Above that point, the surge line steadily increases to 5200 RPMs at P2/P1 = 3. So, the surge line for the GT35R changes depending on the pressure ratio and can exceed the 48 to 4900k range at higher pressure ratios.


_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_Also, the statement about the eliminator housing not hurting spoolup is just plain wrong. The eliminator 2871r spool about 500rpm later then a standard full t25 gt2871r. You need to deliver the pressure TO the turbine wheel, not choke it all upstream.

Please provide dynos comparing the two setups.

_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_I don't want to hate, but compressor maps should be used for nothing more then picking a compressor that will shine in your intended powerband on your engine- and they are sketchy even at that as we are guessing the VE.

I chose a volumetric efficiency of 0.95 which is an accurate estimation for the 5V per cylinder 1.8T. All of the compressor maps in this thread are based on that number. So, accurate comparisons can be made between different compressor maps and relevant conclusions can be drawn.

_Quote, originally posted by *rodney_dubs* »_There is just no physical way to tell when a turbo is going to spool up based on the compressor map with any kind of accuracy.

These maps will give you an accurate idea of when the turbo will spool up if you use the same turbine housing, wheel etc. as the manufacturer used to produce these maps. Although I don’t get into this information in this thread, one can always contact the manufacturer and inquire about these parameters.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:31 PM 12-30-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_do you know of any cars running holsets?
if so give me some info on them

Here are some related threads on the Holset:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3875593
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4067040
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3894960
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3524058
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3426316


----------



## toledor (Jan 5, 2005)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

John,
I looked at the specs of the HE300 series and maximum horsepower is listed as 310, but the map you compared with the GT35 looks like that it would be capable of making 600hp. Is this because of the difference in rpm?
Could you post a map for a 2.2 liter (100x83) and up to 8500rpm. What do you think the maximum power potential would be?
From the Holset website:

Holset HE300 

For Engine Capacity (litres) Up to 7 

Output Range (hp) 100-310 

Airflow (kg/s) 0.46 

DIMENSIONS: 

Length (mm) 250 

Width (mm) 240 

Height (mm) 220 

Smallest Mass (kg) 16 

Largest Mass (kg) 17 

OPTIONS: 

VGTTM Y	

Wastegate Y

Watercooled B/H or T/H B/H 

Ti Impeller Y

MFS Impellor Y
Thanks.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

So out of all those maps and theoretical stuff, which turbo is best matched to stock engine?


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: (mescaline)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_So out of all those maps and theoretical stuff, which turbo is best matched to stock engine?

Hmmmm lets see...
Broad powerband:
28rs @ 1 bar
Top End:
3076R @ 1.9 bar


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (toledor)*


_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_
John,
I looked at the specs of the HE300 series and maximum horsepower is listed as 310, but the map you compared with the GT35 looks like that it would be capable of making 600hp. Is this because of the difference in rpm?

The HE300 series appears to be a smaller turbo than the HE351CW since it is only capably of 310 HP. Or, the original map posted on page 1 of this thread could have been mis-labeled as the HE351CW. I suspect that the maps posted on page 1 by 50trim S (green, red and black maps) might be the HY series turbos.

_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_Could you post a map for a 2.2 liter (100x83) and up to 8500rpm. What do you think the maximum power potential would be?

For 2.2 Liters, you can go with a bigger turbo and still maintain excellent drivability. If this is a primary concern for you, then you should shoot for the 350 to 400 HP range. The Holset HX40-B8554M will definitely get you there.
Below, I have overlaid your setup (83mm bore x 100mm stroke = 2164 liters) with the Holset HX40-B8554M. This gives you a nice surge line around 2400 RPMs and power to about 7200 RPMs.


_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_What do you think the maximum power potential would be?

Maximum power for the HX40-B8554M is about 45.8 lbs./min of air or about 460 HP.


_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_Could you post a map for a 2.2 liter (100x83) and up to 8500rpm.

If you want an 8500 RPM redline while sacrificing some drivability, then you would have to upgrade to the HX40-B8574M (see below). Maximum power for this setup is 55.4 lbs./min of air or about 550 HP.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:23 PM 12-12-2008_


----------



## toledor (Jan 5, 2005)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Dear John,
Thank you for your time. Holset has an HE range as well, and I am not exctly sure what is the difference, but if you wanted to recommend an HE turbo for 550Hp and 8000+ rpm for a 2.2L, which one would it be? Would you have a map for it?
I am not sure I can read the map properly, what is the boost that maximum power will be available at?
Thanks again. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Modified by toledor at 1:02 PM 10-14-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (toledor)*


_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_Dear John,
Thank you for your time. Holset has an HE range as well, and I am not exctly sure what is the difference, but if you wanted to recommend an HE turbo for 550Hp and 8000+ rpm for a 2.2L, which one would it be? Would you have a map for it?

I recommend the "green" compressor map turbo for this power level and RPM range. I have the map, but I am not sure which turbo it is, or if it is even an HE Series turbo. Below I have overlaid your specifications (83mm bore x 100mm stroke) over the "green" compressor map.


_Quote, originally posted by *toledor* »_I am not sure I can read the map properly, what is the boost that maximum power will be available at?

At P2/P1=2.4 (about 21 psi) this turbo will get you to 45 lbs. per minute of air (second horizontal speed line from the bottom). That's about 450 HP. At P2/P1=3.5 (about 36 psi) this turbo will get you to 54 lbs. per minute of air (fourth horiz. speed line from the bottom) or about 540 HP. If you push this turbo even harder, you can get up to 56.3 lbs. per minute of air or about 565 HP.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:18 PM 12-12-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Hmmmm lets see...
Broad powerband:
28rs @ 1 bar
Top End:
3076R @ 1.9 bar


http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:46 PM 10-14-2008_


----------



## not SoQuick (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

marked thanks http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (not SoQuick)*


_Quote, originally posted by *not SoQuick* »_I did 423whp 382 wtq on a aba 16v @ 28 psi with a holset probably had some more in it too but I ran out of fueling

Great numbers. Do you happen to recall which Holset that was (HE35, HX40 etc.)


----------



## not SoQuick (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

he351 on a ported and cammed aba 16v


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (not SoQuick)*


_Quote, originally posted by *not SoQuick* »_he351 on a ported and cammed aba 16v

man that turbo is looking more and more promising


----------



## not SoQuick (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (50trim S)*

eh if I had it to do over I might not have used it.
the thing is massive and took quite a bit of work to make fit,dp fab was a pita among some other issues


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_but back to the point show me another turbo that can do 500whp on 24psi on pump gas 31.7 psi by 4500 rpms and make 608 on a chip tune all with a turbo capable of 700whp maximum output

The answer is: T61
Here is the BW S362 with standard displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). 

Here is the BW S362 with 2.0Ls of displacement (92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore).

Here is a comparison of the BW S362 and T61 overlaid with 2.0Ls of displacement (92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore). With the exception of a slight advantage is spool up between P2/P1 = 1.7 and 1.9 (about 10.3 to 13.2 psi), the T61 is much better in all other categories. This includes a better surge line by up to 600 RPMs at higher pressure ratios. Even with a better surge line, the T61 still has a higher maximum efficiency line as comared to the BW (not shown on the map but ranging from 5400 to 6000 RPMs).
It also includes a higher top end potential of 67.7 lbs. of air for the T61 v. 64.5 lbs. of air for the S362. The T61 is also $620.00 cheaper than the BW S362 ($879.00 v. 1499.00)


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_im talking powerbad pretty much take that dyno i showed you and and 1500 rpms to it and that is 5500 rpm powerband and that is one of the sickest longest powerbands ive ever seen on any car

According to the maps published by the manufacturers, the Garrett T61 has a wider powerband than the BW S362.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:37 PM 11-3-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Another reason I like the T61: it beats out the GT35R hands down (See comparison below overlaid with 2.0L displacement). Not only does it have a lower surge line, but it has a higher top-end potential.

It's also a lot cheaper than the GT35R. Does anyone run this turbo as an alternative to the GT35R? If so, what kind of results are you getting in terms of HP, boost level etc.?


_Modified by mainstayinc at 9:03 AM 11-5-2008_


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_Another reason I like the T61: it beats out the GT35R hands down (See comparison below overlaid with 2.0L displacement). Not only does it have a lower surge line, but it has a higher top-end potential.

It's also a lot cheaper than the GT35R. Does anyone run this turbo as an alternative to the GT35R? If so, what kind of results are you getting in terms of HP, boost level etc.?

_Modified by mainstayinc at 9:03 AM 11-5-2008_

I think there are few that have run or have been running the DBB T61 (BlowZilla) with good results.
It'd be nice to see a comparo map with a FP's HTA82R


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_I think there are few that have run or have been running the DBB T61 (BlowZilla) with good results.

Yeah. I heard a lot of good things too about this turbo. When I called around looking for a compressor map for the T67, I spoke with a guy (Precision Turbo?) who was really big on the T61.

_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_It'd be nice to see a comparo map with a FP's HTA82R









If only Forced Performance had a map for this turbo. I checked out FP's website and it appears that they don't publish compressor maps. Come to think of it, I called Forced Performance a while ago and asked for several maps. The guy said they don't have them.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 7:05 AM 12-17-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

you have any idea when the t61 would spool on a stock bore and stroke motor? could you just do the stock bore and stroke plotted on the t61 and thats it nothing else on it
and where can you buy a DBB t3t61?
i didn't realize that the t61 map looked so good 


_Modified by 50trim S at 12:29 PM 12-17-2008_


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (50trim S)*

I think Paul from Boostfactory sells DBB T61's.
http://boostfactory.net/produc...id=84
ATP also offers it:
http://www.atpturbo.com/Mercha...e=GTB


_Modified by [email protected] at 1:22 PM 12-15-2008_


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
I think there are few that have run or have been running the DBB T61 (BlowZilla) with good results.


Don i think they called the t3gt40 the blowzilla, have you seen any dyno's from DBB t3t61's Don? whats a rough estimate of how it would spool on a stock bore and stroke motor?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (50trim S)*

...no idea.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Yeah. I heard a lot of good things too about this turbo. When I called around looking for a compressor map for the T67, I spoke with a guy (Turbonetics?) who was really big on the T61.
If only Forced Performance had a map for this turbo. I checked out FP's website and it appears that they don't publish compressor maps. Come to think of it, I called them a while ago and asked for several maps. The guy said they don't have them.

_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:13 PM 12-15-2008_

Here's a comp map of the DBB T04Z:








Mind if you plot this one out?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_you have any idea when the t61 would spool on a stock bore and stroke motor? could you just do the stock bore and stroke plotted on the t61 and thats it nothing else on it

I posted the T61 map a while ago in response to your comments on the S362 in order to show how the T61 compared to that turbo. Below, I have provided a map of the T61 with stock displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke) as per your request.








Despite the fact that this turbo can easily handle 11,000+ RPM's at stock displacement, the surge line actually looks pretty good according to the map. I would definitely like to see how this map compares to actual setups. Maximum efficiency line at this displacement is right around 6500 RPM's - stock rev. limiter.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Mind if you plot this one out?









No problem. What displacement? 2.0 (92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore)?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
No problem. What displacement? 2.0 (92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore)?

Sure, if you have a chance do a stock config as well








Thanks,


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Here's the T04Z with stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke) as per request. Although this turbo has a nice 6000+ RPM range, this range is relatively high on stock displacement (5,000 to 11,000+ RPM range). The maximum effeciency line at stock displacement is right around the 8,000 RPM line.

At 2.0L (92.8mm stroke x 83mm bore), the surge line improves by about 800 RPM's, and the maximum efficiency line is right around 7,200 RPM's. Overall, this turbo/engine combination favors higher RPM's as compared to other setups.



_Modified by mainstayinc at 2:27 PM 12-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_and where can you buy a DBB t3t61?
i didn't realize that the t61 map looked so good 

50Trim S - try Precision Turbo. I think they were the guys who had the T3T61 with custom turbine.
http://www.precisionturbo.net/contact.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACT PRECISION TURBO & ENGINE 
SHIPPING ADDRESS:
*This address if for all items being sent via FEDEX or UPS ONLY. DO NOT send U.S. mail or packages to this address.
Precision Turbo
616A South Main Street
Hebron, IN 46341
MAILING ADDRESS:
*All letters and packages sent via the U.S. Mail MUST be sent to this P.O. box address. The U.S. Postal Service will not deliver to any other address other than this one.
Precision Turbo
PO Box 425
Hebron, IN 46341

Phone: 219.996.7832
Fax: 219.996.7749
E-mail: Send an Email to Sales 
SALES/TECH SUPPORT
Send an Email to Jeremy Tebbens 
Send an Email to Alex Demkovich
--------------------------------------------------------------------


_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:30 PM 12-15-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_It'd be nice to see a comparo map with a FP's HTA82R









Although I don't have that map, below I provided a quick comparison of the T04Z with the T61. As you can see, the T04Z produces about 7.4 lbs./min (about 75HP) more than the T61 (75.2 lbs./min v. 67.8 lbs./min). However, notice that at P2/P1 = 3 (about 30 psi), the surge line on the T61 is 1,600 RPMs lower. So, if you are willing to trade off 1,600 RPMs later spool for 75HP higher top end than this is your choice. However, I think that the T61 is still the better choice for broad power and big top end.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_...in your opinion would the HY 35 be a good match to 1.8

As far as the HY35, I would like to obtain a new map for this turbo. The reason is because there is some speculation about which compressor map this is. If you look on page two of the thread, CincyTT says that the “red” map that was originally submitted by 50trimS (as the HE351CW) is the HY35 from 2004.5 to present. This is according to someone on the DSM forum. I have no way of verifying which compressor map this is. If it is indeed the red map, then I would say, no, it is not a good match to the 1.8T unless you plan to increase displacement or rev. limiter (see map below with standard displacement overlaid). If you can find a good map for the HY35, then I will post it in the thread.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

map is at the botto of the page http://www.mygen.com/users/dbr...s.htm


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_map is at the botto of the page http://www.mygen.com/users/dbr...s.htm

Thanks for the link. I'll take a look at this and post later this week.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

it looks to be a different map? but i am by no means an authority on compressor maps. i do know the red map looks a lil funky especially as the honda guys have claimed so much success with the hy-35 on 1.6 and 1.8 L platforms


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

also excuse my ignorence but how to i read all those diagonal lines? i know how to read other maps where the line gose up then flattens out but this ones got me scratching my head a bit lol


----------



## VWtuner-nl (Jan 29, 2007)

Hello,
This is great, can you make a plot of a GT40R with stock bore and stroke?
And a plot of a GT40R vs T04Z stock bore and stroke.
Thanks in advance


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_I was wondering if you could do me a huge one and overlay the GT3071R, GT3076R, and GT3582R with a 95.5mm stroke and 83.5mm bore. I would greatly appreciate it! Thanks, pat

Below is the custom map you requested with 2.1L of displacement (95.5mm stroke x 83.5mm bore). The GT3071R is in blue, GT3076R in purple and GT3582R is in red. Notice how there isn't much difference between the GT3071R and the GT3076R in terms of total corrected air flow. However, there is a notable difference between these two turbos in terms of their maximum efficiency line and surge line. Of these two, I would choose the GT3071 based on how the maps line up, due to the lower surge line.
As you can see, the GT3582R is in a completely different league, producing well over 60 lbs. of air per minute. Suprisingly, at P2/P1=2.2 (about 18psi), the surge line isn't much higher than the GT3076R. However, above this pressure ratio, the GT3582R falls off rapidly as compared to the other two turbos.









_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_with a 16v head, so ve should be ~.92?

Sorry, I just used the same VE for the 20V (0.95) for this map.
EDIT: At this displacement, both the GT3071R and GT3076R will comfortably rev. to 7000 RPMs. The GT3582R, on the other hand, will easily give you 9000+ RPMs even at this displacement.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:05 PM 12-30-2008_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (VWtuner-nl)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VWtuner-nl* »_Hello,
This is great, can you make a plot of a GT40R with stock bore and stroke?
And a plot of a GT40R vs T04Z stock bore and stroke.
Thanks in advance

Below is the GT40R overlaid with stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). The GT40R has a fairly broad powerband, with a surge limit at this displacement of about 3500 RPMs at P2/P1=1.5 (about 7psi) to 4500 RPMs at P2/P1 = 3 (about 30psi). The powerband extends to well over 12,000 RPMs at stock displacement. Peak efficiency for this turbo ranges from 8500 to 7500 RPMs, well above the stock rev. limit. I wouldn't run this turbo unless you invest in the valve head or increase displacement - in order to get the most out of this turbo. This turbo is well capable of over 700 HP.








Below I overlaid the GT40R and the T04Z with stock displacement. As you can see, these two turbos are nearly identical in terms of efficiency range, with the T04Z having a slight edge up top and the GT40R having a little better surge limit, especially above P2/P1=2.4 (about 21psi). Although the T04Z has a better top end, its maximum efficiency is nearly identical to the GT40R and even falls below the GT40R in several regions of the map. At lower pressure ratios, the GT40R has the edge, as you can clearly see more corrected air flow at the lower, right side of the map. However, at stock displacement, you could never take advantage of this area of the map.








Below I have overlaid the GT40R and T04Z with 2.2L of displacement (83mm bore x 100mm stroke) for comparison. This displacement is much better suited to get the most out of these turbos. Even at this displacement, the GT40R is still capable of reving past 11,000 RPMs. The surge limit for both of these turbos improves by about 1000 RPMs at this displacement.









_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_(2:40 PM 7-22-2009) [email protected]: Hi John, when you have a chance can you publish a comp map of the GT40R for a displ. of 2.0L 92.8mm Stroke x 82.5mm bore?
Thanks,
Don

Below I have overlaid the GT40R with your displacement requirements (92.8mm stroke x 82.5mm bore = 2.0L). At this displacment, you can expect a surge line between 4000 to 4100 RPMs. This is 400 to 500 RPMs better as compared to stock displacement. Even at this displacement, however, you will have a power band extending past 11,000 RPMs with a maximum efficiency ranging between 7000 and 7800 RPMs. To take advantage of the GT40Rs broad powerband, I would definitely recommend upgrading your valve head.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_map is at the botto of the page http://www.mygen.com/users/dbr...s.htm

I will post this one probably tomorrow.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_also excuse my ignorence but how to i read all those diagonal lines? i know how to read other maps where the line gose up then flattens out but this ones got me scratching my head a bit lol

The diagonal lines that run from the lower, left side of the map to the upper, right side of the map depict the amount of air your engine uses (measured in lbs. of air per minute) at a particular engine speed (RPMs) and pressure ratio (P2/P1) at a given engine displacement.
For example, at RPM = 3000 and P2/P1 = 3.4 (about 35psi) and stock displacement, your engine will be breathing in 25.9 lbs. of air per minute (see below). This is important to know because it allows you to determine a particular turbo's efficiency range within your engine's operating parameters (i.e.: engine displacement, speed etc.) A turbo's efficiency range is given by the compressor map provided by the manufacturer. You supply the engine parameters based on your engine setup and goals.
EDIT: In other words, the diagonal lines help you understand how the turbo will perform on your particular engine setup. Looking at a compressor map without these lines will tell you how much corrected air flow the turbo will produce (i.e. "power"). but it will not tell you exactly where this power will be produced within your engine's RPM range. This is important to know before buying a turbo.
In the example below, this turbo will not produce any appreciable air flow at this engine speed and pressure on stock displacement. You would have to push your engine past 4000 RPMs for the turbo to begin to spool up. Or, you could get a larger engine (i.e.: increase displacement).
Hope this helps.










_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:13 PM 12-30-2008_


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

helps ALOT! thank you, side note, what are the lil numbers that you circled? what do they stand for?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_helps ALOT! thank you, side note, what are the lil numbers that you circled? what do they stand for?

Well, as explained in the previous response, that is the amount of air your engine breathes at that engine speed/pressure on stock displacement. If you re-read the previous response and follow the compressor map, it should make more sense.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

sorry buddy im at work and had to speed read through your post


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_sorry buddy im at work and had to speed read through your post









http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

love this thread. Hmmm...in hindsight, I should have gotten a 3076R or a 60 trim.....instead of my 50 trim....it would be nice to have peak efficiency around redline.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_Hmmm...in hindsight, I should have gotten a 3076R or a 60 trim.....instead of my 50 trim....it would be nice to have peak efficiency around redline.

Or you could have peak turbo efficiency around peak engine torque (not peak HP), which is where your engine is at its highest volumetric efficiency. For BT 1.8T cars, this is usually between 4500 and 5500 RPMs (can be higher, though). This setup would give you maximum power and efficiency throughout your RPM range. Just a thought.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:37 PM 12-31-2008_


----------



## carbide01 (Jul 12, 2003)

Still wasting time, FTW


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (carbide01)*

the t61 you keep posting is really old you can only get it from turbonetics still..............everyone else has changed to using the 35r compressor with the t3t61 combo which actually makes it a t3gt40
thats what i've found out from talking around to several turbo distributers but maybe arnold from pag could confirm this for sure


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_the t61 you keep posting is really old you can only get it from turbonetics still..............everyone else has changed to using the 35r compressor with the t3t61 combo which actually makes it a t3gt40
thats what i've found out from talking around to several turbo distributers but maybe arnold from pag could confirm this for sure 

Just curious. Did you get through to Precision Turbo? If so, what did they have to say about the T3T61?

_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_and where can you buy a DBB t3t61?
i didn't realize that the t61 map looked so good 



_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_50Trim S - try Precision Turbo. I think they were the guys who had the T3T61 with custom turbine.
http://www.precisionturbo.net/contact.php


----------



## VWtuner-nl (Jan 29, 2007)

Thanks for the GT40R and T04Z maps.
They don`t look that bad on stock bore and stroke if you have a modified valve train.
Could you overlay the GT40R with the GT3076R?
Thanks in advance.
Martijn.

_Modified by VWtuner-nl at 2:08 AM 1-2-2009_


_Modified by VWtuner-nl at 3:24 AM 1-2-2009_


----------



## coreyj (Aug 18, 2006)

wonder if any one has ran 70 psi out of the bigger turbos? lol
also im very interested in the k04-001 or e05


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (VWtuner-nl)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VWtuner-nl* »_Thanks for the GT40R and T04Z maps.
They don`t look that bad on stock bore and stroke if you have a modified valve train.

If I had to choose between the two, I would go with the GT40R due to the fact that is has a better surge line at higher boost levels.

_Quote, originally posted by *VWtuner-nl* »_
Could you overlay the GT40R with the GT3076R?
Thanks in advance.
Martijn.

Looking at these two maps together, you can really appreciate how broad the GT40R map is compared to the GT3076R and other turbos. Although the surge limit for the GT3076R is about 800 to 900 RPMs lower than the GT40R, the GT40R has more than 4000+ RPMs up top. In fact, the GT3076R runs out of breath just when the GT40R hits its maximum efficiency line at about 8,500 RPMs.
Below, I have overlaid these two maps with stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke).








For comparison, I have overlaid these two maps with 2.2L of displacement (83mm bore x 100mm stroke).








I hope this is helpful.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 8:11 AM 1-2-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (coreyj)*


_Quote, originally posted by *coreyj* »_wonder if any one has ran 70 psi out of the bigger turbos? lol
also im very interested in the k04-001 or e05

I doubt it. You would have to seriously lower your compression ratio to run at that boost level. Also, I haven't seen any turbos than can produce that much boost (although some of the Holsets and the GT3071 come close).
Also, as stated previously in this thread, it isn't the amount of boost that determines power, it's the amount of corrected air flow as measured along the x-axis.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (VWtuner-nl)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VWtuner-nl* »_Thanks for the GT40R and T04Z maps.
They don`t look that bad on stock bore and stroke if you have a modified valve train.

I would advise a MINIMUM of 10,000 RPMs at stock displacement in order to utilize this turbo. This would bring you 1500 RPMs past the maximum efficiency line, where the GT40R is still producing very good air flow.
To my knowlege, no one on this forum has exceeded the 9,500 RPM mark on the 1.8T with stock displacement even with a modified valve head. However, with 5 valves per cylinder, the potential is definitely there since each valve is proportionately smaller as compared to other configurations. This allows each valve to be opened/closed faster due to lower mass/inertia.
I would advise a MINIMUM of 9,000 RPMs at 2.2L of displacement (~83mm bore x 100mm stroke) in ordr to get the best usage out of the GT40R.
For comparison, I have overlaid the MK5 rabbit with 2.5L of displacement (82.5mm x 92.5mm) 5 cylinder engine. At this displacement, I would advise a MINIMUM OF 8,000 RPMs (not sure if this is possible with 5 cylinder motor).








EDIT: For the 2.8L VR6 (81mm bore x 90mm stroke) 6 cylinder engine, I would advise a MINIMUM of 7000 RPM redline. That's probably right around stock rev. limit. See below.
EDIT: Notice how the GT40R's maximum efficiency line on this setup is right at 5500 RPMs, which is right around where this setup should be producing maximum engine torque. This would be a super-efficienct turbo/engine combination (no disrespect, of course, to the 1.8T! Posted for comparison purposes only.)


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

any luck on that hy35 map?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_any luck on that hy35 map?

Still checking into that one. I will try to post it by the end of today along with some other Holset stuff.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 10:17 AM 1-2-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_any luck on that hy35 map?


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_map is at the botto of the page http://www.mygen.com/users/dbr...s.htm

Below I have isolated and cleanup up the compressor map you provided of the Holset HY35-2003 and overlaid stock displacement (81mm x 86.4mm). As you can see, the surge line comes on between 3000 and 4000 RPMs depending on the boost pressure. At stock displacement, this turbo is good to 10,000+ RPMs. Maximum efficiency line varies from 5000 to 6000 RPMs.








Below I have overlaid the same turbo with 2.2L of displacement (83mm bore x 100mm stroke). The surge line improves by about 700 to 800 RPMs. Maximum efficiency line varies from 4000 to 5000 RPMs. This turbo is better suited to this displacement, with a rev. limit of 8500 RPMs.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

yay! thanks man, so this wouldnt be a bad lil turbo for a stock displacement engine with a higher rev limit.. hell worse case is i throw in my 93 mm crank and take it to 2L , gonna need some new pistons


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

pressure ratio on the side is measured in bars correct?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_pressure ratio on the side is measured in bars correct?

Pressure ratio on the side is measured in P2/P1 where P1 is atmospheric pressure and P2 is boost pressure + atmospheric pressure. So, at P2/P1 = 2, boost pressure = 14.7 psi.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 11:01 AM 1-10-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_yay! thanks man, so this wouldnt be a bad lil turbo for a stock displacement engine with a higher rev limit.. hell worse case is i throw in my 93 mm crank and take it to 2L , gonna need some new pistons

I would definitely recommend that since you can better utilize this turbo with increased displacement.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

for the time being would it be that horrible on a stock setup? oly ask because i JUST rebuilt my entire doner 1.8t engine, and really would like to not have to order new pistons, im assuming i can keep using 144 rods and the 2L azg crank with just smaller deck height


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_for the time being would it be that horrible on a stock setup? oly ask because i JUST rebuilt my entire doner 1.8t engine, and really would like to not have to order new pistons, im assuming i can keep using 144 rods and the 2L azg crank with just smaller deck height

Well, you would gain about 700 to 800 RPMs in spool up with 2.2L of displacement as mentioned above. With your setup I assume you would gain about 400 RPMs with 2.0L of displacement.
At stock displacement, you are just about using enough of the map if you were to rev. to 7200 RPMs. I advise a MINIMUM of 7200 RPMs at stock displacement. To get the most out of this turbo, you would have to rev. to 8500 RPMs at stock displacement.
Also, depending on what turbine you have, this will also effect spool up.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 4:14 PM 1-2-2009_


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

gotcha, not looking to rock the turbo out for max hp number yet, just would like to get the engine back on the road for some fun


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Just curious. Did you get through to Precision Turbo? If so, what did they have to say about the T3T61?


no i didn't but everyone that i know that has A TON of turbo sales and experience said other than turbonetics it had been replaced with the compressor from the gt35/40r including one person that is the distrubuter to precision 
so.........i figured he knew as much as anyone at precision ya know?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_gotcha, not looking to rock the turbo out for max hp number yet, just would like to get the engine back on the road for some fun 

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scrampa1.8T* »_Could you do me a huge favor and map this turbo for me. It's the dodgezilla by city performance. Basically it's an holset HX40pro compressor wheel (largest hx40 wheel) with an hx35 turbine and housing. 
My engine specs (engine is currently at machine shop) are as follows: 2.0l stroker 82.5mm bore 9.1:1 c/r, AEB cylinder head minor-moderate porting with cat 3658 cams revving to 8500rpm. If you could do this for me I'd really appreciate it! Link to map, it's currently listed in CFM
http://www.citydiesel.net/images/dodgezilla.gif


Here is the map you requested with 2.0L of displacement (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke). The original map you provided was rotated slightly when it was scanned but it should be very close. I converted the map to lbs. per minute for easy comparison.
As you can see, the surge line comes in right around 4000 RPMs at this displacement with a rev. limit of 11,000+ RPMs. Maximum efficiency is between 6500 and 7200 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. This turbo is very similar to the GT40R.








For comparison, I have overlaid 2.2L of displacement with this turbo. Surge line improves by 400 RPMs.








EDIT: Below I have overlaid the HX40 PRO with the GT40R along with your displacement requirements (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke). As you can see, these turbos are identical in terms of efficiency range. However, as you can see, the HX40 PRO has a lower maximum efficiency line as compared to the GT40R. This makes the HX40 PRO slighly better IMO than the GT40R.
The HX40 PRO is a good alternative to the GT40R based on how the maps line up.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scrampa1.8T* »_This is another "speculative" hx35 map from a dodge cummins forum. It looks as if it has a broader range than the one you did for cincytt. I may be wrong...I'm still VERY new at reading these maps. Could you take a look at it and see. If it's different would you mind doing a 2.0l stroker motor with 82.5mm pistons MAP. Thanks 

Mind sending me that HX35 map again? My vortex notepad didn't seem to save the link.

_Quote, originally posted by *Scrampa1.8T* »_not a problem, I've found a better page that seems to be more reputable. The guy posting claims the first map was sent from a holset engineer directly to him. And the other maps definitely look like they're genuine. This thread has to be the best all-inclusive holset specific thread I've found. It's straight to the point informative http://www.dsmtuners.com/forum....html

Thanks. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I'll check into it next Monday.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 10:54 AM 1-3-2009_


----------



## Scrampa1.8T (Feb 10, 2003)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

Thanks for the plots, this thread is awesome!


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (Scrampa1.8T)*

i've got some new maps i'd like to be plotted if you wouldn't mind doing them mainstayinc?







... with a stock bore and stroke and if you seee that they closely resemble a gt series turbo but are a little better overlay them, im just looking for your opionion on these turbo's to see ho
they are some smaller bullseyepower borg warner turbo's that be gotten but they aren't listed on the website, i had to call BEP to get these compressor maps and thanks to nola vdubber for converting them to lbs/min so that they could be used for comparison sake these are the smallest of the s200 extented tip series of turbos that BW makes and i think they would be good alternative to alot of the smaller garrett BT's that most people choose to use from the gt28r on up to about gt3071r's or so........ here they are


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (Scrampa1.8T)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scrampa1.8T* »_Thanks for the plots, this thread is awesome!

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif No problem. I checked into the link you provided. It should help clarify some holset naming issues and provide some additional information about these turbos. I will go back and revise this thread accordingly once I have a chance to review the information.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i've got some new maps i'd like to be plotted if you wouldn't mind doing them mainstayinc?







... with a stock bore and stroke and if you seee that they closely resemble a gt series turbo but are a little better overlay them, im just looking for your opionion on these turbo's to see ho
they are some smaller bullseyepower borg warner turbo's that be gotten but they aren't listed on the website

Thanks for the maps. The larger Bullseye Power turbos that are posted in this thread are very competetive to the GT series turbos if not better. As you can see on page three, the S256 is clearly better than the GT3076R (see link below).
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...age=3
I will post these up as per your specifications with similar GT series overlaid for comparison. If these smaller Bulleyes are similar to the larger ones posted in this thread, they should be pretty competitive.
I assume that these are the S247, S250 and S252 (in that order) that you posted in another thread. PLEASE VERIFY THAT THIS IS CORRECT so as to avoid any naming issues.

_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i had to call BEP to get these compressor maps and thanks to nola vdubber for converting them to lbs/min so that they could be used for comparison sake these are the smallest of the s200 extented tip series of turbos that BW makes and i think they would be good alternative to alot of the smaller garrett BT's that most people choose to use from the gt28r on up to about gt3071r's or so........ here they are

EDIT: Send the original excel file to my email (see IM). The jpeg files you provided are a more difficult to work with. It is ok if they are not in lbs./min.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 9:48 AM 1-10-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i've got some new maps i'd like to be plotted if you wouldn't mind doing them mainstayinc?

Please note. I added a comparison of the S258 and the GT3582R on page three of this thread that you may want to check out (see link below). Still waiting on your email with the original S247, S250, S252 excel files.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...age=3


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Im pretty sure i emailed you the excel files 
if not let me know because i thought i did


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_Im pretty sure i emailed you the excel files 
if not let me know because i thought i did

The excel files look good. Below is the BW S247 with stock displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, the surge line ranges from 2000 to 2800 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. This turbo can rev. to 7200 RPMs at stock displacement with a maximum corrected airflow of 37.5 lbs./minute. Maximum efficiency line ranges from 4000 to 3200 RPMs.








The S247 is most closely related to the GT2860R (707160-5) in terms of surge line and maximum corrected airflow. However, above P2/P1 = 2.3 (about 19 psi), the S247 has a much better surge line compared to the GT2860R.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i've got some new maps i'd like to be plotted if you wouldn't mind doing them mainstayinc?

Below is the BW S250 with stock displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, the surge line ranges from 1900 to 3300 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. This turbo is capable of reving past 9000 RPMs at this displacement with a maximum corrected airflow of 43 lbs./minutes. Maximum efficiency line ranges from 5000 to 5200 RPMs.








The BW S250 is identical to the 52 trim GT2871R in terms of surge line and efficiency range, with the 52 trim producing slightly more maximum corrected airflow (43 lbs./minute v. 44.5 lbs./minute). The S250 would be a good alternative IMO to the 52 trim GT2871R based on how the maps line up.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i've got some new maps i'd like to be plotted if you wouldn't mind doing them mainstayinc?

Below is the BW S252 with stock displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, the surge line ranges from 2000 to 3200 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. This turbo is capable of reving to 9000 RPMs at stock displacement with a maximum corrected airflow of about 48 lbs./minutes or about 480 HP. Maximum efficiency ranges from 4500 to 4700 RPMs.








The S252 is most closely related to the GT3071R. Below I have overlaid these two turbos with stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, the S252 has a better surge line throughout the entire range, not falling off as the GT3071R does above P2/P1 = 2.7 (about 25 psi). If you are willing to give up 20 HP up top for similar performance to the GT3071R, then the S252 is a better choice.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*FV-QR*

thanks for the maps 
i just wanted to let people know that bullseye and Borg Warner offer some smaller turbo's that a lot of people who are concerned about lag and daily drivability and want something in the gt28ish sizes would not know about unless you called them up and asked them since they are not listed on there website and i have not seen these units being advertised for sale with any of there dealers
Until some people buy some of these and try them out no one will never know how they perform on our motors, but if they are not advertised no one will never buy them so........they aren't my cup of tea i'd rather have something in the s258 or 35r range because i think lag is overrated, cause once youget going and are out of first gear full boost is only a downshift away with almost any t3 turbo smaller than 63mm's or so.
mainstay or whatever your real name is, I bet other forums can only dream that they would have someone who would do all these maps, comparisons and knowledge you've shared on their forum 







thumbs up to you my friend


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

those BW turbos look like good alternatives to the gt series T2 stuff that is commonplace around here.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_thanks for the maps 
i just wanted to let people know that bullseye and Borg Warner offer some smaller turbo's that a lot of people who are concerned about lag and daily drivability and want something in the gt28ish sizes would not know about unless you called them up and asked them since they are not listed on there website and i have not seen these units being advertised for sale with any of there dealers

Yes. The analysis shows, at least based on how the maps line up, that the BEP and BW are very competetive if not better in certain cases than the GT series turbos. However, in other cases, the GT series turbos are better. See comparison below between the BW S247 and the GT28RS with standard displacement overlaid.








Although the S247 can produce some very high boost levels (upwards of 49 psi), the GT28RS is clearly the better choice between the two because of the better surge line above P2/P1 = 1.9 (about 13 psi) while still being able to produce good airflow beyond 7000 RPMs.

_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_Until some people buy some of these and try them out no one will never know how they perform on our motors, but if they are not advertised no one will never buy them so........they aren't my cup of tea i'd rather have something in the s258 or 35r range because i think lag is overrated, cause once youget going and are out of first gear full boost is only a downshift away with almost any t3 turbo smaller than 63mm's or so.

Personally, I chose the GT28R to maintain some drivability consistent with a Grand Touring (GTI) vehicle. Although it will be a little more laggy than stock, especially since I ported out the turbine housing, it should produce some nice mid-range power.

_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_mainstay or whatever your real name is, I bet other forums can only dream that they would have someone who would do all these maps, comparisons and knowledge you've shared on their forum 







thumbs up to you my friend

Glad this info. is helpful. If you check my profile you see my first name listed.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_those BW turbos look like good alternatives to the gt series T2 stuff that is commonplace around here.

Some of them definitely are. I think that it comes down to price in those cases. I thnk the BEP/BW's are expensive though?


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*FV-QR*

the smaller ones are cheaper or right at the same price as there garrett equivalent.
you just have to call bullseye because thats the only way i know to get them since they aren't advertising them for some reason...........i guess because most of there sales are on the s256's and larger, but you can't sell the smaller ones if no one knows they are available ya know
i think they need some help in the advertising department.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_i think they need some help in the advertising department.









Here's some free advertising:
Below I overlaid the BEP/BW S256 and the Holset HY35-2003 with standard displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, both turbos have similar maximum corrected airflow, with the S256 having a slight advantage. However, the S256 has a better surge line than the HY35-2003 throughout the entire efficiency range, having as much as an 800 RPM advantage at P2/P1=3.1 (about 31 psi).
If you're willing to give up some spool up for similar performance to the S256, then get the Holset. Otherwise, the S256 is the better choice, as it outperforms in all categories.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

Below is the BW S366 with 2.7L of displacement overlaid (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke) 6 cylinder engine as referenced in the following thread:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4199577
The compressor map is for a single turbo setup. As you can see, surge line is from 2500 to 3400 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. At this displacement, this turbo is good to 9000+ RPMs with a maximum corrected airlfow of 78 lbs./minute or about 780 HP (680 WHP)









_Quote, originally posted by *euroroccoT* »_that turbo makes power no dought we ran the s366 with over 600WHP
on a dynapack would of been around 660whp 35psi

That's right around how much this turbo should be making. It will be interesting to see how actual spool up compares to that predicted on the compressor map.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 5:10 PM 1-14-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scrampa1.8T* »_Just an FYI I linked the compressor map thread to a moderator and they added it to the 1.8t forum faq. Not sure if they capture the images and store them in their own server or not. Just wanting to let you know, I'd hate to see the thread go to waste with broken pic links!

Hey, thanks for that. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I will fix the broken picture links when I get a chance. I will also be posting some other stuff shortly.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

I stopped off at Schimmel Performance yesterday to talk with Bill about the status of my 1.8T BT build. He was on the phone doing an interview with European Car magazine when I arrived. Apparently, they will be doing a feature on his 911 GT30R twin-turbo in the near future (see pictures below).










The car is an air-cooled 3.3L producing about 544 whp (about 625 hp). I thought that this setup might be laggy, with only 1650 CCs of displacement going into each of the GT30Rs’ turbines.
To test this theory, I decided to do a compressor map with his displacement overlaid (1650 CCs - not sure of bore/stroke dimensions). See below:
As you can see, this setup doesn’t look too bad on paper, with the surge line ranging from 3000 to 4000 RPMs. Maximum turbo efficiency ranges from 5000 to 6200 RPMs. At this displacement, this setup is good for 9000 RPMs.








Below is the same setup with the GT3071R overlaid. As you can see, the surge line ranges from 2000 to 3100 RPMs below P2/P1 = 2.7 (about 25 psi); tapering off to 4300 above that point. Maximum turbo efficiency ranges from 5000 to 5600 RPMs, around where this setup should be producing maximum torque. At this displacement, this setup is good for 9000+ RPMs.








If I had the choice between the two turbos, it would be the GT3071R due to better spool up below 25psi. With either turbo, however, it is apparent that 625 hp is very conservative. Both of these turbos **doubled** can put over 1000 hp. That's like one 1.8T + GT30R to each rear wheel.
EDIT: I forgot to mention the weight of the car - 2500 lbs.


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

mother of god, that thing is sick. Nice analysis http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*

Thanks Nola http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Thought you guys would appreciate this.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 1:39 PM 1-16-2009_


----------



## amitesh (Dec 25, 2008)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (50trim S)*

Can anybody tell me what is the difference between different Sanden Compressor models
1J0820803A/ 1J0820803B/ 1J0820803E/ 1J0820803G/ 1J0820803L?







The reason I am asking is that I have a 2001 VW jetta 1.8T GLS AWD and I am looking for a compressor for it. 1J0820803E compressor is available which I can buy for cheap but mjmautohaus is trying to sell 1J0820803B while worldimpex says that I should use 1J0820803L? I am confused!!!







Your help will be really appreciated.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

man that 256 vs the hy35 may have me trying an hy since i can get on for free sometimes and no more than 200$ damn 
i think illl try a holset before i drop a grand on any other turbo


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_man that 256 vs the hy35 may have me trying an hy since i can get on for free sometimes and no more than 200$ damn 
i think illl try a holset before i drop a grand on any other turbo

For that price, you really have nothing to lose. Be carefull, however, when you purchase the turbo b/c there are different model numbers floating around the internet for certain holset turbos.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (amitesh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *amitesh* »_Can anybody tell me what is the difference between different Sanden Compressor models
1J0820803A/ 1J0820803B/ 1J0820803E/ 1J0820803G/ 1J0820803L?







The reason I am asking is that I have a 2001 VW jetta 1.8T GLS AWD and I am looking for a compressor for it. 1J0820803E compressor is available which I can buy for cheap but mjmautohaus is trying to sell 1J0820803B while worldimpex says that I should use 1J0820803L? I am confused!!!







Your help will be really appreciated.

Not on this thread. Sanden is a brand of a/c compressor.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 10:10 AM 1-17-2009_


----------



## Speed-Wiz (Jan 17, 2009)

*Re: (50trim S)*

Hi mainstayinc, I have been thinking about adding an RPM-based plot to our Speed-Wiz compressor map feature. I am interested in the spreadsheet you said you developed to show compressor map plots along RPM ranges. Would you have any thoughts on why you get straight lines but we are getting curves? Note that this screen shot is just a development image and is not from our retail product. It does not show all of the inputs such as the testing conditions which are entered on another window. Thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (Speed-Wiz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Speed-Wiz* »_Hi mainstayinc, I have been thinking about adding an RPM-based plot to our Speed-Wiz compressor map feature. I am interested in the spreadsheet you said you developed to show compressor map plots along RPM ranges. Would you have any thoughts on why you get straight lines but we are getting curves? Note that this screen shot is just a development image and is not from our retail product. It does not show all of the inputs such as the testing conditions which are entered on another window. Thanks!

That's a good question. I have only seen RPM lines that are straight and not curved like the ones in your Speed-Wiz compressor map feature.
Without knowing the details of how you plot the RPM lines, I cannot say for sure. However, it is clear that some other variable is taken into account other than changes in pressure that are determining how your RPM lines are being drawn over the compressor map. 
As is clear from your screen shot, this variable is increasing the amount of corrected airflow required by the engine as pressure increases across the RPM range in a non-linear fashion. That is why the lines tend to curve more and more to the right as engine speed increases.
Even if you were to take into consideration changes in temperature, the Ideal Gas Law states that changes in temperature are directly proportional to changes in pressure. Therefore, there is a linear relationship between temperature and pressure. Curved lines suggest a non-linear relationship.
As an aside, remember that the compressor map shows corrected airflow. That means that the compressor map is adjusted to standard (ambient) temperature. Therefore, when you plot airflow information information (such as engine flow requirements - i.e. "speed lines")over the compressor map, it must also be adjusted to standard temperature.
Also note that even if you were to take into consideration changes in temperature, these changes would tend to move your RPM lines to the left as pressure increases and not to the right as they appear in your screen shot.
The other possibility is that your software is taking into consideration changes in volumetric efficiency throughout the RPM range. However, these changes would not result in curved lines nicely arrayed across the RPM range. Instead, this would result in straight lines that are less densely arrayed around the engine speed where maximum volumetric efficiency occurs. This is usually where maximum engine torque occurs. 
I hope this feedback is helpful. By the way, I am also a computer programmer in addition to being a car/engine enthusiast. You can IM me with your email address if you want to talk about this matter further.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Below I have isolated and cleanup up the compressor map you provided of the Holset HY35-2003 and overlaid stock displacement (81mm x 86.4mm). As you can see, the surge line comes on between 3000 and 4000 RPMs depending on the boost pressure. At stock displacement, this turbo is good to 10,000+ RPMs. Maximum efficiency line varies from 5000 to 6000 RPMs.








Below I have overlaid the same turbo with 2.2L of displacement (83mm bore x 100mm stroke). The surge line improves by about 700 to 800 RPMs. Maximum efficiency line varies from 4000 to 5000 RPMs. This turbo is better suited to this displacement, with a rev. limit of 8500 RPMs.









_Modified by mainstayinc at 11:44 AM 1-13-2009_


ok so i always thought that being on the left of the surge line was bad, but for like 3000 rpms you are... anyone wanna explain? also i bought the turbo, has a 9cm^2 exhaust housing gonna run like 1.75 bar, would this suck on this turbo/? id like full spool by 3000 ish-3500


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_ok so i always thought that being on the left of the surge line was bad, but for like 3000 rpms you are... anyone wanna explain?

All turbos are going to have some amount of lag due to the limited amount of usable area on the compressor map. Assuming you have a 1.8L engine, this turbo will not begin to produce boost until 3000 to 4000 RPMs depending on your boost level.
At 1.75 bar (or P2/P1=2.73 or about 25.4 psi), you can expect to spool up no later than 3800 RPMs assuming that you have the same turbine housing, etc. as the turbo used to create the map (see map below).









_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_also i bought the turbo, has a 9cm^2 exhaust housing gonna run like 1.75 bar, would this suck on this turbo/? id like full spool by 3000 ish-3500

If this turbine housing is smaller than the one used to create the map, then you can expect a better surge line. This will effectively shift the entire compressor map to the left by several hundred RPMs depending on the size of the turbine housing. Please note that other factors effect the performance of the turbo, such as intercooler efficiency, pressure loss at the turbo inlet due to filter/length of inlet, etc. The closer these relate to the test conditions, the closer you will get to the map. 
You could contact Holset and inquire about the test conditions used to create the HY35-2003 map, such as the size of the turbine housing. You could then determine whether your turbine housing is larger/smaller and then interpolate what improvement, if any, you will have in your surge line.
The other way to improve the surge line is to increase displacement. If you were to increase displacement to 2.2L, then at P2/P1=2.73, you can expect to spool up no later than 3100 RPMs (see map above with 2.2L overlaid).
Please note also that this map only applies to the 2003 HY35. You may have a different model year which might be completely different.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:19 PM 1-21-2009_


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

unfortunately i ve the 2003 model turbo, so this would be a bad turbo at 1.8Ls running 20+ psi


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_unfortunately i ve the 2003 model turbo, so this would be a bad turbo at 1.8Ls running 20+ psi

I agree. 1.8L is too small to get the kind of surge line your want.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

ah poopy, what is the best possible spool i could/ get ? 4000-5000? will it make any boost prior to that 
/?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (mainstayinc)*

I just got my GTI 1.8T back this afternoon. Bill did a nice job with the GT28R build with ATP manifold/passenger side inlet. Many people discouraged me to go this route (passenger side inlet) for various reasons. However, there were no fitment issues whatsoever as far as the inlet, compressor outlet and exhaust. I will post some pictures of the completed build in this thread or perhaps in another thread.
It turns out that Bill's 911 has twin GT3071R's and not twin GT3076s (aka GT30Rs) as cited in the previous comment. As stated before, this setup is much better suited to 3.3L of displacement. Also, the car is currently putting out about 650 whp (about 750 hp). The previous figure of 544 whp was put down on twin T3S60's.
Bill confirmed that the car will be featured in the April, 2009 edition of European Car magazine. Here is another picture of the car in case you're interested:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_ah poopy, what is the best possible spool i could/ get ? 4000-5000? will it make any boost prior to that 
/?

Well, according to the map, you should start making spool at lower boost pressures around 3000 RPMs. However, as you increase boost, this will fall off to 4100 RPMs. The absolute latest spool for this turbo at stock displacement is 4100 RPMs according to the map. Please note also that the previous analysis I did was for 1.8L and not 2.0L.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
Well, according to the map, you should start making spool at lower boost pressures around 3000 RPMs. However, as you increase boost, this will fall off to 4100 RPMs. The absolute latest spool for this turbo at stock displacement is 4100 RPMs according to the map. Please note also that the previous analysis I did was for 1.8L and not 2.0L. 
 what would be considered a lower boost pressure on this turbo... so your saying the turbo will start making low psi around 3000 then hit full boost by 4100? i just want it streetable with 20-23 psi


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_ what would be considered a lower boost pressure on this turbo... so your saying the turbo will start making low psi around 3000 then hit full boost by 4100? i just want it streetable with 20-23 psi

Lower boost pressure in this example is between 4.4 and 14.7 psi. Below P2/P1 = 2 (or about 14.7 psi), this turbo will begin to spool up around 3000 RPMs. However, you will notice on the map that above that point, the turbo becomes less efficient and the surge line begins to increase as you increase boost pressure. If your maximum operating pressure is no more than 20 to 23 psi, then you will hit this pressure right around 3800 RPMs.
So, to summarize, all things beging equal, at stock displacement your turbo should spool up between 3000 and 3800 RPMs. If, however, you were to push it past 25.4 psi, you could reach full boost as late as 4100 RPMs. Remember that this assumes that you have the same turbo, same turbo housing, etc. as the turbo used to create the map. Other factors may effect the spool up by as much as a few hundred RPMs as stated previously.
In my opinion, this turbo will be laggy on stock displacement. However, remember that this is a fairly large turbo capable of 58 lbs. of air per minute (500+ hp). A lot of guys on this forum don't mind turbo lag and consider larger turbos very streetable. However, I prefer smaller turbos in order to avoid exessive turbo lag. In my opinion, the HY35-2003 is much better suited to 2.0L to 2.2L of displacement.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 12:52 PM 1-21-2009_


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

damn you mainstay... now i need new pistons to run my shiny new tdi crank







although i only wanna run 20 psi and 3000-3500 for a fully spooled turbo isnt terrible.. AHH!!! decisions decisions


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_damn you mainstay... now i need new pistons to run my shiny new tdi crank







although i only wanna run 20 psi and 3000-3500 for a fully spooled turbo isnt terrible.. AHH!!! decisions decisions 

The TDI crank will definitely help with this turbo. New pistons suggest that you are also considering increasing bore. I think that's the way to go.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

i need new pistons as the deck height on the 1.8t with the TDI crank is too high right? id like to keep same diameter as i have nice chromolly rings


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_i need new pistons as the deck height on the 1.8t with the TDI crank is too high right? id like to keep same diameter as i have nice chromolly rings









I think your right about the deck height. I am sure someone else who is knowlegable about 2.0L strokers could say for sure. With 2.0L + HY35-2003, you can expect to hit 25.4 psi between 3200 and 3300 RPMs. At least that's what the Holset compressor map indicates.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

oh mainstay... you are killing my wallet


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_oh mainstay... you are killing my wallet

Well, it's probably your passion for cars or your desire for power/speed that’s killing your wallet – not me! The HY35-2003 + TDI crank is a nice combo (and comparably affordable) IMO even without boring out the block.


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

haha yeah but the 95.5 with stock only nets me 1987cc...







only 1.99 Ls


----------



## 2LTurbo (Aug 26, 2008)

ok i guess im going 83mm with 95.5 stroker







!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (2LTurbo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2LTurbo* »_ok i guess im going 83mm with 95.5 stroker







!!

Well, if you got to get new pistons for the TDI crank, now's the time to do it! That'll bring you up to 2067 CCs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

To vwvortex/1.8T Engine forum members - I will not be able to take any more requests at this time for compressor maps and/or analysis. Now that I have completed my turbo build, I have to turn my attention to other matters. Consider this thread my contribution to vwvortex in return for all of the information I was able to gather from this forum. I would not have been able to piece together my own kit and complete this project without your help. Thank you.


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_To vwvortex/1.8T Engine forum members - I will not be able to take any more requests at this time for compressor maps and/or analysis. Now that I have completed my turbo build, I have to turn my attention to other matters. Consider this thread my contribution to vwvortex in return for all of the information I was able to gather from this forum. I would not have been able to piece together my own kit and complete this project without your help. Thank you.

thank you for all the hard work you put into this thread........there is tons of knowledge to be learned from this thread to help everyone properly size the turbo for there power goals and give a good estimate of how much lag you will have to deal with to get said power
so a big http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif and thank you to mainstayinc http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## audis3gr (Feb 23, 2009)

hello guys !!i m new hear!!








i have an audi motor with a lot of specs like scatt rods,je pistons-stock size--,dahlback intake,port polished head,double springs,titanium retainers and cat cams---257*intake,267*exhaust and the limitr set at 8000rpm!!!huge fmic,76mm full exhaust,balanced crank and flywheel-oem- etc,turbonetics exhaust manifold,etc!!
I NEED YOUR HELP about the turbo!!i want to use a s258 borgwarner turbo .055ar turbine!!according to your maps at the start of the thread at wich rpm the car start to have boost?i want to hit 35psi!!thanks and i m waiting for your answers and opinions!!


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (audis3gr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *audis3gr* »_hello guys !!i m new hear!!








i have an audi motor with a lot of specs like scatt rods,je pistons-stock size--,dahlback intake,port polished head,double springs,titanium retainers and cat cams---257*intake,267*exhaust and the limitr set at 8000rpm!!!huge fmic,76mm full exhaust,balanced crank and flywheel-oem- etc,turbonetics exhaust manifold,etc!!
I NEED YOUR HELP about the turbo!!i want to use a s258 borgwarner turbo .055ar turbine!!according to your maps at the start of the thread at wich rpm the car start to have boost?i want to hit 35psi!!thanks and i m waiting for your answers and opinions!!























what displacement is your motor1.8,1.9,or 2.0
here is a stock displacement dyno of a s258 with a .55 hotside they make 2 different combination's of the s258 i would recommend consulting user passatg60 about what would fit your needs best
this dyno is at 28-29psi on a stock motor only thing changed was the rods, and it made 417whp on c16 race gas








its hard to tell on the dyno but the user says full boost between 4100-4300 rpms since you have cams and a worked head i would guess you could knock about 4-500 rpm's off of that
with your mods you could probably get away with revving higher in race situations id say you would be good to 8600-8800rpm's if you held power that long into the powerband
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif good choice on that turbo its one of my favorites they make a s259 as well it may be better suited for you but like i said ask passatg60 i wouldn't trust anyone over his opinion on turbo choices or turbo's in general he's the man http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif and he can set you up with probably the best deal available for any turbo he sells

_Modified by 50trim S at 2:18 PM 2-23-2009_


_Modified by 50trim S at 2:25 PM 2-23-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_
thank you for all the hard work you put into this thread........there is tons of knowledge to be learned from this thread to help everyone properly size the turbo for there power goals and give a good estimate of how much lag you will have to deal with to get said power
so a big http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif and thank you to mainstayinc http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

I am glad other people benefit from this thread. Unfortunately, I have too many other responsibilities at this time to properly maintain this thread. Others, of course, are welcome to add to this thread and make comments.


----------



## audis3gr (Feb 23, 2009)

i have the stock displacement 81*86.4!!i want to have boost earlier than the gt3582 with 0.63 a/r!the garret spool too late and then hit the limiter for our motors!!i want 450+at the wheels at 35 psi!!i lll be happy with full boost at 4500!!can the s258 give it to me??


----------



## 50trim S (Jun 3, 2008)

*Re: (audis3gr)*

definitely make that much boost by 4500 with a .55 housing but like i said talk to passatg60 on here he can help you out probably the most of anyone on here when it comes to turbo sizing and he can sell it to you for a good deal as well. you may be able to make that amount of boost by 4500 on your motor with the .70 hotside and make more power but passatg60 could tell you best on what to do in your situation i can't tell you enough talk to him or [email protected] as its the same person just different screen names


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (audis3gr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *audis3gr* »_i have the stock displacement 81*86.4!!i want to have boost earlier than the gt3582 with 0.63 a/r!the garret spool too late and then hit the limiter for our motors!!i want 450+at the wheels at 35 psi!!i lll be happy with full boost at 4500!!can the s258 give it to me??

Tell me you're not stopping at 6500 rpms. And it doesn't take 35 psi on a 35R to make 450whp, that will make more like 600whp with the right hardware. When are you seeing full boost?


----------



## audis3gr (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: ([email protected])*

with the gt35 i had full boost at 5500-5700!!the rev limiter is not at 6500rpm http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif it is at 8000rpm!!do you thionk the s258 spool earlier than the 35r?i had read that s258 has equal boost abilities like the gt3076r!!
you think that at 35 psi with the borgwrner i can hit more than 450 whp???


----------



## TqMonstr (Apr 19, 2009)

*Re: (audis3gr)*

Yes you oughtta be able to pick up some faster spool with the BW turbos...or the HTA gt35r , they use the nice extended tip compressor wheels and spool nicely ...
there are also the PTE billet wheel turbos said to spool faster than the 35r....they have a billet wheel 3076 that is said to flow like the 35r power levels, yet spool like the 30r 
These new compressor wheel technologies are really crazy , does anyone know where to find compressor maps for any of them yet ????


----------



## TqMonstr (Apr 19, 2009)

*Re: (TqMonstr)*

any one running a turbo with one those fancy billet wheels on their dub yet ?
anyone have any experiences to share ??


----------



## TqMonstr (Apr 19, 2009)

*Re: (TqMonstr)*

SO Whow is using a HTA turbo ?


----------



## elio (Nov 15, 2006)

*Re: (TqMonstr)*

Hi friends. I need to admit that this is one of the most useful threads that I have read here in Vortex Forums. You have a huge knowledge about the topic.
Ok friends, but I have some doubts that maybe you can help.
1.- First I need the compressor map of the K04-001 Turbo (5304 101 950 0001). Supposedly it must use a #53041232005 50x36mm 2070GAA compressor wheel. I have been looking for it many time ago without any luck. Maybe you can help me.
2.- Sometime ago I was looking for the K04-0028/0029 compressor maps. According to the info that I have found that map look like this:







,
But according to the info that I have collected those turbos should use the same wheel as K04-0020/0022/0023 with the #53041232015 56x42mm 2275Exx that flows almost 0,18m3/s, but this one shows a little more flow at less shaft rpms with same 56x42mm size, do you know which compressor wheel is it???? or this can occur due to a different compressor housing????















3.- Finally how do you convert m3/s to corrected compressor flow (lb/min)?
Thanks in advance for your support


_Modified by elio at 11:33 AM 5-8-2009_


----------



## elio (Nov 15, 2006)

*Re: (elio)*

Friends also do you have the compressor map of the E05b turbo? is it the same as the K03S compressor wheel map?


----------



## elio (Nov 15, 2006)

*Re: (elio)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elio* »_Hi friends. I need to admit that this is one of the most useful threads that I have read here in Vortex Forums. You have a huge knowledge about the topic.
Ok friends, but I have some doubts that maybe you can help.
1.- First I need the compressor map of the K04-001 Turbo (5304 101 950 0001). Supposedly it must use a #53041232005 50x36mm 2070GAA compressor wheel. I have been looking for it many time ago without any luck. Maybe you can help me.
2.- Sometime ago I was looking for the K04-0028/0029 compressor maps. According to the info that I have found that map look like this:







,
But according to the info that I have collected those turbos should use the same wheel as K04-0020/0022/0023 with the #53041232015 56x42mm 2275Exx that flows almost 0,18m3/s, but this one shows a little more flow at less shaft rpms with same 56x42mm size, do you know which compressor wheel is it???? or this can occur due to a different compressor housing????















3.- Finally how do you convert m3/s to corrected compressor flow (lb/min)?
Thanks in advance for your support

_Modified by elio at 11:33 AM 5-8-2009_

Anyone have the info???????


----------



## Austin-TTom (May 19, 2009)

*Re: (elio)*

I can't help with part numbers or compressor maps...








but to convert from m3/sec to lb/min at standard conditions -->
## m3/sec * 162.04 = ## lb/min

Should get you close enough to put a dot on the compressor map


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

great thread


----------



## bdcoombs (Jul 28, 2002)

*Re: (mainstayinc)*

why not any precision maps. let see the sc6152, sc6176 since they claim to be the same comp as a 35r, maybe over lay it with a 35r. or a t61
also on a 2.0


----------



## EF9Si (Dec 12, 2003)

*Re: (bdcoombs)*

I wonder what happened to 50trims??


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Gberg888GLI* »_great thread

Thanks. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Too bad I don't have more time to properly maintain this thread.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (bdcoombs)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bdcoombs* »_why not any precision maps. let see the sc6152, sc6176 since they claim to be the same comp as a 35r, maybe over lay it with a 35r. or a t61
also on a 2.0

IM sent.
Unfortunately, Precision Turbo does not have compressor maps for their turbos as far as I can tell. I would definitely call them and ask about cheaper alternatives to the GT35R. I spoke with them last year and they were very helpful. Your 16V 2.0 should have enough displacement to handle that size turbo without too much problem. Ported head and cams will definitely help.
http://www.precisionturbo.net/contact.php
-John. 


_Modified by mainstayinc at 5:06 PM 7-22-2009_


----------



## D-Rich88 (Aug 13, 2007)

i am very interested in putting a diffedrent turbo on my car. the turbo is a K16 off of a frieghtliner truck..heres the info: 
Compressor Wheel Approx. 44mm inducer 62mm exducer
Manufacturer Part Number: 53169707119
Brand: KKK
OEM Application: Freightliner Walk-in Van 2001-2005 OM904LA-EPA (4.3)
im getting the turbo for real cheap and its brand new and i just wanted to do something differnt..if anyone could post the compressor maps for this turbo or as much info as possible on it it would be nice


----------



## engineerd18t (Dec 12, 2007)

Check out this site from borg warner.
http://www.airwerksboosted.com...7.pdf
http://www.airwerksboosted.com/
The K16 is on page 22 but doesn't look to be much of an upgrade from a k03.


----------



## D-Rich88 (Aug 13, 2007)

yea but the hot side is like that of a k27... im really trying to see a compressor map for this turbo. cuz it seems to me like i can make some good power off of it


----------



## D-Rich88 (Aug 13, 2007)

anyone?


----------



## ypsetihw (Nov 20, 2008)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (mainstayinc)*

hey main would you be willing to share said spreadsheet?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (ypsetihw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ypsetihw* »_hey main would you be willing to share said spreadsheet?

I've thought about that. However, all of the compressor maps in the spreadsheet are already published in this thread. Also, most of the maps for the larger turbos are already published in 1.8L and 2.0L for comparison. So, there would be no real benefit unless someone wanted to see the results for a completely different setup (such as 2.7T or other engine).
The other option is to publish the spreadsheet and allow the user to *add more compressor maps* to the spreadsheet. The only problem is that the compressor map has to be formatted correctly before you load it into the spreadsheet. This requires a certain degree of skill and patience that a lot of people don’t have. Oftentimes, you have to convert the map to the correct units (lbs. per minute are used in this thread), not to mention accurately overlay one map with another (it's not as easy as you think). Also, a lot of compressor maps are of poor quality to begin with. In that case, it is best to re-trace the map by hand (all of the Holset maps were painstakingly retraced).
`
So, from the perspective of keeping the results as accurate as possible, *I will not be publishing the spreadsheet at this time*. Perhaps, at a future date, I can write up some software that will format the maps automatically and release with the spreadsheet. This will help ensure the accuracy of the results.
However, *I will make a one time exception and accept new requests for compressor maps for the next week*. This includes all the requests that I had to turn down since I stopped accepting requests back in January. This includes all of the BW-AirWerks maps that username=bbeach recently provided. It also includes everyone who IM'ed me with requests (I saved those to notepad). I will not accept any requests after July 15th 5:00 pm EST. **There will be no exceptions to this deadline**
So, if you have a request for a compressor map that wasn't already published in this thread, please submit your request with your displacement requirements and *preferably* a link to the compressor map (or you could just post the map in this thread). I will also accept requests for comparisons between maps of different turbos. I will not accept any requests via IM. Also, don't wait for me to reply to your request. I will publish the results as they come in (starting with those already posted back in January). I will try to do a few each week (or more if time allows).
So, vortexers, you have one week.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (audis3gr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *audis3gr* »_hello guys !!i m new hear!!









i have an audi motor with a lot of specs like scatt rods,je pistons-stock size--,dahlback intake,port polished head,double springs,titanium retainers and cat cams---257*intake,267*exhaust and the limitr set at 8000rpm!!!huge fmic,76mm full exhaust,balanced crank and flywheel-oem- etc,turbonetics exhaust manifold,etc!!
I NEED YOUR HELP about the turbo!!i want to use a s258 borgwarner turbo .055ar turbine!!according to your maps at the start of the thread at wich rpm the car start to have boost?i want to hit 35psi!!thanks and i m waiting for your answers and opinions!!























The S258 was discussed on page 3 of this thread. At stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke), the map indicates a spool up at about 4100 RPMs. With more aggressive cams, head work and other modifications listed, you can expect spoolup to come on a few hundred RPMs later. The 0.55 a/r turbine housing may improve spoolup significantly if it is smaller than the one used to create the map. This turbo can easily hand 35 psi (although I'm not sure the 1.8T can handle that pressure at stock compression). IMO this setup is better suited to 2.0L of displacement. I have reproduced the map on page 3 for your convenience:








PLEASE NOTE: I know that this user posted a while ago and may no longer be around.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (50trim S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *50trim S* »_
*its hard to tell on the dyno but the user says full boost between 4100-4300 rpms *since you have cams and a worked head i would guess you could knock about 4-500 rpm's off of that with your mods you could probably get away with revving higher in race situations id say you would be good to 8600-8800rpm's if you held power that long into the powerband

50Trim S (does he still post in this forum?): that dyno confirms what the compressor map above shows. However, this turbo should be making close to 600 HP.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 3:37 PM 7-8-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: check out this compressor map and tell me what you think (mainstayinc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mainstayinc* »_
However, *I will make a one time exception and accept new requests for compressor maps for the next week*. This includes all the requests that I had to turn down since I stopped accepting requests back in January. This includes all of the BW-AirWerks maps that username=bbeach recently provided. It also includes everyone who IM'ed me with requests (I saved those to notepad). I will not accept any requests after July 15th 5:00 pm EST. **There will be no exceptions to this deadline**
So, if you have a request for a compressor map that wasn't already published in this thread, please submit your request with your displacement requirements and *preferably* a link to the compressor map (or you could just post the map in this thread). I will also accept requests for comparisons between maps of different turbos. I will not accept any requests via IM. Also, don't wait for me to reply to your request. I will publish the results as they come in (starting with those already posted back in January). I will try to do a few each week (or more if time allows).
So, vortexers, you have one week.

Joo liek compressor maps? Joo wunt sum mor? Then post up your requests. You have one week.


----------



## 5inchMAF (Sep 12, 2007)

*Re: (EF9Si)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EF9Si* »_I wonder what happened to 50trims??









ssssshhhhhhh!!! lets sleeping dogs lie....


----------



## ypsetihw (Nov 20, 2008)

*Re: (5inchMAF)*

two very useful links - 
sick nasty compressor map library, includes many common turbos including the borg warner k03 and k04 series, along with several garret, mitsubishi, and holset: http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/map.php
sweet flow mass converter: http://www.translatorscafe.com...lator
K03-2075 aka K03s for kicks:








Here's what I'm shooting for (red dot) at 5300ft altitude, 2.2p1/p2 16.5lb/min, approx 14.5psi at 12.2psi base atmosphere - see related thread - http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4467046:








Thoughts?










_Modified by ypsetihw at 10:25 PM 7-14-2009_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (ypsetihw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ypsetihw* »_two very useful links - 
sick nasty compressor map library, includes many common turbos including the borg warner k03 and k04 series, along with several garret, mitsubishi, and holset: http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/map.php
sweet flow mass converter: http://www.translatorscafe.com...lator

Thanks for the links. I will look into this and a few other questions I received before the July 15 deadline. I'm not on vortex as regularly as before so I don't check this thread as frequently.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

*Re: (elio)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elio* »_Hi friends. I need to admit that this is one of the most useful threads that I have read here in Vortex Forums. You have a huge knowledge about the topic.


__
Image uploading. Refresh page to view








Thanks!

_Quote, originally posted by *elio* »_Ok friends, but I have some doubts that maybe you can help.
1.- First I need the compressor map of the K04-001 Turbo (5304 101 950 0001). Supposedly it must use a #53041232005 50x36mm 2070GAA compressor wheel. I have been looking for it many time ago without any luck. Maybe you can help me.

I haven't been able to find this map.

_Quote, originally posted by *elio* »_2.- Sometime ago I was looking for the K04-0028/0029 compressor maps. According to the info that I have found that map look like this:
But according to the info that I have collected those turbos should use the same wheel as K04-0020/0022/0023 with the #53041232015 56x42mm 2275Exx that flows almost 0,18m3/s, but this one shows a little more flow at less shaft rpms with same 56x42mm size, *do you know which compressor wheel is it???? *or this can occur due to a different compressor housing????
















The map you provided is the same as the K04-2275 listed on page 21 of the BW-AirWerks catalogue that username=bbeach provided. The specs. are as follows:
Turbo Part Number: 5304 988 0023
Comp. Wheel O.D.: 2.2
C- Wheel Inducer Dia: 1.7
C Wheel Inducer Dia (mm): 42
Turb. Wheel OD: 1.97
Turb. Wheel Exducer: 1.65
Turb. Wheel Exducer (mm): 42
Turb. A/R: 0.8 sq in.
I would check the Official K04 thread for more specifics about the K04 turbo:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4223472
Below, I overlaid the K04-0028 (2275) with standard displacment (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). As you can see, efficiency is similar to the K04-2078 posted on page 1 of this thread. However, above P2/P1=2.2(about 17.6 psi), the surge line for the K04-0028 falls of more as compared to the K04-2078. Also, the K04-0028 is capable of producing slighly more corrected air flow as compared to the K04-2078, with a maximum output at 32+ lbs./min.








K04-2078 reproduced below for comparison:









_Quote, originally posted by *elio* »_3.- Finally how do you convert m3/s to corrected compressor flow (lb/min)?
Thanks in advance for your support

I use this website: http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbotech.html. It has an air flow and horsepower calculator.
PLEASE NOTE: I know that this user posted a while ago and may no longer be around.


_Modified by mainstayinc at 5:13 PM 7-22-2009_


----------



## salx (Sep 29, 2006)

For you turbo head out there, a question of a newbe  


On a stock vw 1.8t, What would happen to the map if I get a gt2871r t25 .63 a/r and get the gt2871r compressor housing? The turbo will spool faster? The powerband in high rpm gets lower compared to the one I would get with the stock housing?

I'm trying to figure out something between the gt2871r and gt3071r


----------



## bakana (Sep 18, 2005)

In hopes that Mainstaysinc is still around, I would love to see how the GTX-R series of turbos play out on both stock and 2.1l displacement. Fingers crossed


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

thought I'd give this a necromancer's bump from the dead ... this kind of information should be savored!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> thought I'd give this a necromancer's bump from the dead ... this kind of information should be savored!


 Thanks for the bump!:thumbup: 

It's nice to know that people continue to benefit from this information. At some point I might want to add to this thread, especially considering the fact that there have been some interesting developments in the past couple of years. However, that would require a good bit of my time, which, at present, I don't have. 

Presently, I am involved in other things such as running a business, renovating a house etc. I did, however, have some time to work on my exhaust system over the weekend. I added an exhaust dump to my 2.5 in. downpipe (GT28R > 2.5 in. downpipe > exhaust dump > 2.5 in. catalytic converter > stock exhaust sytem). The reason for the exhaust dump is because it is cheaper than buying a complete 2.5 in. exhaust sytem. 

Wow! That thing rips. Also improves spoolup by 100 RPMs (now at 2800 to 2900 RPMs). I will post pics or video of new exhaust dump if I can get sound to work on wife's camera. 

Best regards, 
-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I thought I would post my response to an IM I recieved here in this thread instead of the Inline-5 10v & 20v Engine Forum which has not had any activity in over two months (see below).










Here is the original IM I recieved:



PRY4SNO said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I'm Dustin, a big fan of your work... Was really impressed with what I saw when my brother linked me to a thread where you'd posted the dyno spreadsheets.
> 
> ...


I assume the 20V five cylinder refers to the 1990 Coupe quattro found here:

http://www.motorgeek.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=40430&sid=00da3034e3f0114070fbba8b50a5649e&start=25










Technically, it's not a 1.8T but it does have 20 valves. He also mentions dyno plots, but I'm going to assume he means compressor maps, which can be used to interpolate dyno numbers.

Here are the engine specs for the 20V 5 cylinder:

Bore: 82.5mm
Stroke: 86.4mm
Cylinders: 5
Displacement: 2309.3cc

Here is the Garrett GTX3576R overlaid with 2309 cc's:










As you can see, the GTX3576R is capable of close to 650 HP, with peak power occuring at about 6200 RPMs and 31.85 psi (P2/P1=3.167). The surge line for this combination ranges from about 2000 RPMs at lower boost pressure all the way above 3600 RPMs. This setup would provide a fairly responsive turbo at 2.3L similar to what you might expect from a GT3071R on 1.8L (if that means anything to you).

Below is the GTX3582R overlaid with 2309 cc's:










The GTX3582R is capable of over 750 HP with peak power at 2.3L occuring at 8200+ RPMs and 27 psi (P2/P1=2.83). However, at 2.3L, the GTX3582R leaves too much on the table with a substantial part of the map laying above 8000 RPMs and peak efficiency (dotted line in center of map) mostly occuring above 6000 RPMs. I would not recommend this turbo unless you plan to rev the 20V 5 cylinder above 9000 RPMs. In that case, the GTX3582R would be a better match.

Below is the GTX3576R and GTX3582R overlaid for comparison:










Below is the Holset Super HX40 and the GTX3582R overlaid with 2.3L for comparison. 










As you can see, the Holset is capable of close to 900 HP with peak power occuring at 8400+ RPMs and 32 psi (P2/P1=3.186). The Holset has a better surge line as compared to the GTX3582R by several hundred RPMs. That means that this turbo will begin to produce good airflow sooner and likely come into boost quicker. It also has more total corrected airflow as compared to the GTX which makes it a better choice for a higher reving application. I wouldn't recommend this turbo unless you plan to rev. to at least 8500 RPMs.

I could not find a compressor map for the HTA or PTE turbos. However, you may want to consider the BW EFR8374. Below is the EFR8374 overlaid with 2.3L:










The BW EFR8374 is capable of close to 800 HP with peak power occuring at about 8000 RPMs and 29.4 psi (P2/P1=3) with a surge line ranging from 2500 to 3500 RPMs at 2.3L. This would be a nice combination for a higher-reving application.

Below is the BW EFR8374 and GTX3582R overlaid with 2.3L for comparison:










As you can see, the BW has a slight advantage in terms of surge line and total corrected air flow which would make it a better choice over the GTX3582R in this HP range.

I hope this analysis helps!


----------



## PRY4SNO (Aug 29, 2010)

Where's the :jawdrop: smiley!

Thanks a million for the info, I'll definitely be able to use this to make a well informed decision when it comes turbo time.

Cheers! :beer:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Wow - thanks for posting all the 2.3l info John! I'm savouring a 95.5 crank for a 2.1l build (one of these days) so this is great info to ponder in the meantime…

The Holset map is by far the most impressive - not just the power potential; it's how and where the power comes on and the fact that that's Holset's old tech. Wonder how their newer offerings perform :beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PRY4SNO said:


> Where's the :jawdrop: smiley!
> 
> Thanks a million for the info, I'll definitely be able to use this to make a well informed decision when it comes turbo time.
> 
> Cheers! :beer:


:thumbup:You're welcome. Let us know which turbo you finally decide to go with.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Wow - thanks for posting all the 2.3l info John! I'm savouring a 95.5 crank for a 2.1l build (one of these days) so this is great info to ponder in the meantime…
> 
> The Holset map is by far the most impressive - not just the power potential; it's how and where the power comes on and the fact that that's Holset's old tech. Wonder how their newer offerings perform :beer:


Yeah. 2.1L is a nice upgrade. I don't know why more people don't go this route. I bought my ALH crank for $100.00 from ebay. Performs flawlessly. Also, Holsets are very impressive turbos. They are definately a good option when you see how they line up with the GTX turbos and other turbos. I think a few people use to run them. I'm not sure if anyone still does thumbup: to BR_337). It would be helpful to have some Holset feedback (dynos etc.) and see how they compare to the compressor maps.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is a PM I received from Lenny Wu of RENNtech Mercedes/Performance Research & Development in Lake Park, FL. I thought I would share the results here since many of you would appreciate this information.



RENNprd said:


> Hi John,
> 
> I found your post for plotting some GTX turbo's very informative & wanted to know if you can help in plotting the following turbos in Twin setup:
> 
> ...





RENNprd said:


> Thanks John! Also, if it's much help the A/R on the twin turbo housings are .64ar turbine & .50ar compressor. I have already gotten some engine dyno real actual results & want to compare how far off it's from those plotted compressor maps from the actual IAT temp & 0.8200 lambda =)





RENNprd said:


> It's a AMG 63 biturbo. We've used 3 versions for prototype of the GTX2863r, GTX2867r & GTX3067r on AKI93 octane. So far it made on our Dynojet 680-691rwhp & 770-810ftlb using 1.34bar. It's aprox crank 800hp with 15% drivetrain loss. Will email u dyno results.


Ok. It's not 1.8T related but it is German! Check out this video on the AMG 5.5-liter V8 Biturbo Engine:






Some information about RENNtech:

http://www.renntechmercedes.com/www/



http://www.renntechmercedes.com said:


> Welcome to RENNtech MercedesFor more than 21 years, RENNtech has been the foremost authority on Mercedes Benz tuning and offers a complete line of proprietary performance products for Mercedes Benz, AMG and Maybach vehicles. In addition, we offer complete tuning solutions for other highline marques such as Porsche, Audi, Bentley and Ferrari. RENNtech is also an Akrapovic Exhaust dealer and exclusive North & South American distributor for Aixro rotary karting race engines. We design, engineer and manufacturer our proprietary line of tuning products in-house at our Lake Park, Florida facility which features a full fabrication and machine shop with CNC and rapid prototype capabilities; an in house performance dyno, complete engine management and software tuning capabilities; a complete service/repair/installation facility and a full time design, engineering and sales staff. For more information regarding any of our products, feel free to browse our websites constantly updated product catalog or give us a call at (561) 845-7888. RENNtech. Performance without compromise.


RENNtech Tuning for Mercedes Biturbo:






Here are the engine specs for the AMG 5.5-liter V8 Biturbo Engine:

Bore: 98.0mm
Stroke: 90.5mm
Cylinders: 8
Displacement: 5461.1cc
Compression Ratio: 10:1
Boost Pressure: 1.34 Bar (19.7 psi)
Engine Redline: 6450 RPMs
Number of Turbos: 2

Below is the GTX2863R overlaid with 2731 CCs (5461 CCs divided by two for a bi-turbo setup):










As you can see, the GTX2863R is capable of over 425 HP at 1.34 Bar (point 'A' on the map). In a bi-turbo setup, that equals 850 HP. However, at 2.7L, the GTX2863R does not produce enough corrected airlfow at higher RPMs. In fact, at 1.34 bar, the GTX2863R chokes off at 4650 RPMs. This leaves 1800 RPMs or about 32% of engine RPM band operating below the 58% efficiency line (farthest efficiency line to the right or the choke line).

This is indicated by the series of connected dots plotted on the map (dark purple). These data points are taken from the actual dyno of this setup that was emailed to me (see below) and represent the actual performance of this engine/turbo setup. They are plotted based on the ratio of 10 HP per pound of corrected air flow, which is probably realistic for a 10:1 CR engine.

Notice how the line dramatically changes direction after 5000 RPMs as it approaches the choke line (pont 'B' on the map). The fact the line moves vertically downward and even backward indicates that the GTX2863R is producing mostly hot air at this point. The factory AWIC that sits in between the two cylinder banks of the AMG 5.5-liter V8 Biturbo engine cannot possibly keep up with that much hot air.










Below is the GTX2867R overlaid with 2731 CCs.










As you can see, the GTX2867R is capable of about 475 HP at 1.34 Bar (point 'A' on the map). That amounts to 950 HP in a bi-turbo setup. As with the GTX2863R, this turbo does not produce enough corrected airflow before engine redline and chokes off at 5100 RPMs (point 'A' on the map). This leaves 1350 RPMs or about 24% of engine RPM band that is underutilized due to turbo inefficiency.

I have also plotted the engine dyno data on this map as before. With the larger 67mm compressor wheel of the GTX2867R, you would expect the data points to shift up the RPMs lines as indicated by the light blue dots.

Below is the GTX3071R overlaid with 2731 CCs.










As you can see, the GTX3071R is capable of about 540 HP at 1.34 Bar (point 'A' on the map). This equals 1080 HP in a bi-turbo setup. As with the GTX2863R and GTX2867R, this turbo does not produce enough corrected airflow at higher RPMs and chokes off 500 RPMs premature of engine redline.

However, as with the GTX2867R, you would expect the data points to continue to move up the RPM lines due to the larger 71mm compressor wheel which is more efficient at producing cooler airflow at higher engine speeds.

Finally, below I have overlaid the GTX3076R with 2731 CCs displacement.










As you can see, the GTX3076R is capable of producing over 600 HP at 1.34 bar (point 'A' on the map). This amounts to an astonishing 1200 HP on a bi-turbo setup. The choke line on this setup falls just above engine redline. This makes for a nice, efficient, setup which allows the entire engine RPM band to operate within the GTX3076R's efficiency range. At 2731 CCs, there is enough engine displacement IMO to power the GT30 series exhaust wheel without much loss of transient response below 2000 RPMs.

For comparison, below I have overlaid the GTX3582R with 2731 CCs displacement:










The GTX3582R is capable of producing over 750 HP at 1.23 bar (point 'A' on the map). On a bi-turbo setup, this amounts to an extreme 1500+ HP. The surge line (farthest efficiency line on the left) ranges from 2200 to 3200 RPMs, which indicates some possible delay in turbo spoolup at 2731 CCs.

In order to get the most out of this setup, you would have to run 2.0 bar of boost (29.4 psi). This would allow you to stay within the engine's operating speed (below redline) while at the same time, maximizing the output of the GTX3582R. You would also have to lower your CR by 1 to 1.5 points in order to run this much boost or convert to E85 or similar alcohol fuel (or run W/M injection).

In conclusion, I recommend the GTX3076R or similar turbo for 5.5 liters of engine displacement in a bi-turbo setup. It is well-matched to this engine displacement and does not put a lot of demand on the factory AWIC intercooler (as a smaller, hotter turbo would or a larger, higher boost turbo would). In addition, you have a setup that is capable of over 1200 HP without much (if any) loss of transient boost response. Now, the only problem to solve is traction. You might want to consider a Mercedes Benz 4Matic AWD or Audi Quattro conversion!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Just to put these power levels into perspective, the AMG 5.5-liter V8 Biturbo has the ability to put a 2.7T RS4 to each rear wheel. However, in a race, I would choose the RS4 due to... quattro! 

[insert Legendary Audi quattro commercial here]


----------



## RENNprd (Mar 29, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> Just to put these power levels into perspective, the AMG 5.5-liter V8 Biturbo has the ability to put a 2.7T RS4 to each rear wheel. However, in a race, I would choose the RS4 due to... quattro!
> 
> [insert Legendary Audi quattro commercial here]


Hey John! Great work with the plots. The new 2014 AMG63 biturbo you can now order them in 4matic for the E63/CLS63 & new S222 S63 CGI Bluedirect. An Audi new RS6/7 Quattro or Bentley 4.0TFSI Plus version would have as much potential as the AMG M157 engine.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

RENNprd said:


> Hey John! Great work with the plots. The new 2014 AMG63 biturbo you can now order them in 4matic for the E63/CLS63 & new S222 S63 CGI Bluedirect. *An Audi new RS6/7 Quattro or Bentley 4.0TFSI Plus version would have as much potential as the AMG M157 engine.*


:thumbup:

EDIT: I think GTX3076R or GTX3576R (bi-turbo) would work great at that displacement as far as keeping stock-like drivability while having great power up top. You did mention that you were looking at the GTX3071R. I'm curious to know which way you decide to go. Also, AWD a must at these power levels.

Scusi ID=27 for being off-topic.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is an PM I received from Dustin (PRY4SNO) regarding his 20V 5 cylinder. See post#276 from page 8 of this thread.

Dustin's car:












PRY4SNO said:


> Hey John,
> 
> So I've bought my turbo. Initial results from my builder are promising. Looks like the EFR7163 has similar spool characteristics to a GTX/HTA30r with better transient response between shifts.
> 
> ...


Below is the EFR 7163 with 2.5L of displacement (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 5 cylinders). 










At this displacement, the EFR 7163 can operate within its efficiency range from as low as 1300 RPMs. This setup is capable of 590 HP at 28psi at 5800 RPMs, making this a quick-spooling, high horsepower setup.

Below I have overlaid the EFR 7163 and the GTX3071R. As you can see, the surge line is better for the EFR below 29psi (about 600 RPMs at P2/P1=2 or 14.7psi).










This makes the EFR 7163 better in terms of surge line and top end power as compared to the GTX3071R. Hope this helps.

EDIT: For those interested in seeing how the EFR 7163 compares to the GTX3071R on 2.0L displacement (83mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 4 cylinders), see below:










The EFR looks like a nice option for a high-horsepower stroker setup.

EDIT:


PRY4SNO said:


> Saweet!
> 
> Thanks John, the initial testing on my turbo on a 2.2L show it can run high boost (28psi) up to redline (8500 rpm) on e85 before running out of fuel pump.
> 
> ...


----------



## PRY4SNO (Aug 29, 2010)

Always appreciate your insight, and can't wait to see how the driving stacks up to the predictions! Will be sure to update when that happens


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is a PM I received requesting some comparisons of the EFR7163 on 1.8L and 2.0L. I decided to post this information here.



LilNipper said:


> That makes way more sense then John. So I was doing some looking around and calling local tuners etc etc etc. I came up with this, people are saying there is only like a 200 rpm difference between the gtx2871r and the gtx3071r on a 1.8-2.0 motor. That being said I then asked was there another turbo that they would recommend that would fit the needs I am trying to fill the efr 7163 people are claiming it will start out at 3,000rpm on a 1.8-2.0 motor. I was curious if you would be willing to over lay the map of a 1.8 and also a 2.0 over the efr 7163 map.
> 
> link
> http://www.full-race.com/store/image...-content-1.jpg
> ...


Below is the EFR7163 at 1.8L (1781cc) displacement:










As you can see, the surge line (left side) below P2/P1=2.6 (about 23.5psi) ranges from about 1800 to 3000 RPMs at stock displacement. This means that the EFR7163 is operating within it's efficiency area at this RPM range. This would confirm your statement about people claiming that spoolup for the EFR7163 starts around 3000 RPMs at stock displacement. This setup is capable of 580 HP at 7000 RPMs at 34psi. The optimum RPM range for this turbo at stock displacement is 3000 to 7000 RPMs at 34psi.

For comparison, below I overlaid the GTX3071R with the EFR7163:










As you can see, the surge line for the EFR7163 is much better than the GTX3071R. The GTX3071R is known to be laggy on stock displacement.

Below is the EFR7163 on 2.0L (2008cc) displacement for comparison:










This setup is capable of 580 HP at 6250 RPMs at 34psi. The optimum RPM range for this turbo at 2.0L displacement is about 2500 to 6500 RPMs at 34psi.

I hope this helps.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

Can we get an overlay of a 1.8t vs a 1.8t with stock bore and ALH crank swap with the s200sxe map?

turbo info
http://s200sxe.com/

http://www.full-race.com/store/turbos/borgwarner-airwerks/borgwarner-s200-sxe-7670-1.html

This turbo - appears - to be the old 7163, but can be had for 600-700 rather than 1700-2000 for the 7163. both turbos can be had in twinscroll. so lets twinscroll vs twinscroll


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> Can we get an overlay of a 1.8t vs a 1.8t with stock bore and ALH crank swap with the s200sxe map?
> 
> turbo info
> http://s200sxe.com/
> ...


Below is the BW S200 SXE overlaid with stock displacement.










As you can see, the surge line is at 3000 RPMs at P2/P1 = 3.4 or about 35 psi. This turbo has a very broad power band and is capable of about 640 HP on pump/race gas. It is most similar to the GTX3576R in terms of maximum power.










However, as you can see below, the BW S200 SXE is far superior in terms of overall power band, having almost 2000 RPMs more usable power between the surge line and choke line.










And for the price, starting below $700.00, you would have to be insane not to buy this turbo. For comparison, below I overlaid the BW S200 SXE with 1968cc displacement (81mm x 95.5mm).










With 1968cc's, you gain about 400 RPMs in spoolup over stock displacement. I don't think it's necessary to increase your displacement in order to get the most out of this turbo. For the price and powerband, this turbo is a game-changer.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

In your opinion what powerband will this have on a 1.8? Also, how does this compare to the efr 7163 in powerband in your educated opinion?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> In your opinion what powerband will this have on a 1.8? Also, how does this compare to the efr 7163 in powerband in your educated opinion?


Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and the BW S200 SWE with stock displacement.










Although the EFR 7163 has a better surge line below P2/P1= 2.6 (about 23 psi), it drops off significantly above that point as compared to the BW S200 SXE. Above that point, the BW S200 SXE has a very wide power band from 2800 to >9000 RPMs at 23 psi. That's more than 6000 RPMs of usable power under the curve.

Even at P2/P1=3.0 (about 2 bar or 29 psi), the BW S200 SXE has about 5400 RPMs of usable power from about 2800 to 8200 RPMs. The small advantage that the EFR 7163 has below 23 psi only comes into play between 1800 and 2800 RPMs where the turbo/engine combination can only produce a maximum of about 175 HP.

I would happily sacrifice that part of the power band (1800 to 2800 RPMs) for the much wider power band and greater maximum potential of the BW S200 EXE above 2800 RPMs. In a hill-climbing type event as you describe in your PM, you are going to need the top end power of the BW S200 SXE for the long straightaways (640 HP capable); not to mention the wide power band necessary to efficiently navigate curves. The BW S200 SXE is also capable of maximum boost of P2/P1=4.9 (or about 56 psi). That will come in handy as you gain altitude and the air becomes thinner. You'll have to push more boost at those altitudes to get the same amount of power. Overall, I think the BW S200 SXE perfectly fits the bill for that type of racing.

Nice map of pikes peak race course.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

*What sort of power do you think this will make on a 1.8 on e85 at 22 psi with a set of the bigger 3658 cams or the IE copies to get power past 5500, of the stock cams.*

IECVA1
http://www.performancebyie.com/integrated-engineering-1-8t-20v-street-strip-camshaft-set

*Or do you think you would recommend a different cam for this application/turbo?*

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5169810-Integrated-Engineering-Race-Cams-119-2hp-GAIN!!!!!!

post #16
_"We have 3 grinds available now for hydraulic lifter. One is similar to a 3658, with slightly more lift on the intake cam, and less lift on the exhaust. The cam performs similarly, with more power under the curve then a 3658. Idle on this is smooth and even with 8-10" typically of vacuum. That cam is called the IECVA1, it is a 270/274 advertised, with .370" / .378" of lift. This grind delivered gains of 97 bhp peak (119 at highest), and is the one we are using in all aggressive street / strip cars. We also tried this grind with a large T4 frame turbocharger and found power to hold strong all the way out to 8800 rpms, so this one can really deliver given a turbo with sufficient breathing ability! That setup yielded 820bhp at only 30psi. If you combine it with a small turbo, like a gt28xx, it will be a waste and the smaller camshafts should be used. We highly suggest combining it with our spring / retainer kit as even on a 600bhp turbo, you need to rev it out to get peak power.

Next is the IECVA2, a milder cam, slightly less duration on both and in particular the intake cam is a good bit smaller. It is more equivalent to a cat cams 3651, a street camshaft for those who prefer more bottom end power and a totally civilized idle. None the less, this cam still delivered gains of 60 bhp peak over the stock cam set.

Finally, we have a drop in intake cam, the IECVA3. A very mild cam which is slightly more aggressive then the Autotech intake cam, this will show absolutely no signs externally or in feeling to being cammed, other then the extra 37 bhp"
_
I am not a fan of cat cams on the fact that there is little to no information on timing them, I like IE because they answer - and fast.

*When it comes down to it- as you said, you don't think, in this application and this turbo, that is is worth stroking the engine out?*

*Lastly is the A/R going to affect this turbo map at all? Is there a specific A/R you would recommend with this application?*

Thanks John, you are awesome as always!
_
Lil'Nipper_


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> *What sort of power do you think this will make on a 1.8 on e85 at 22 psi with a set of the bigger 3658 cams or the IE copies to get power past 5500, of the stock cams.*


As far as how much power you can make with the BW S200 SXE on E85, take the maximum corrected air flow (in lbs. per minute) from the compressor map and multiply by 12. So for 64 lbs. per minutes, that equals 768 HP. For pump/race gas, on a good setup, multiply the maximum corrected air flow by 10. So for 64 lbs. per minutes, that equals 640 HP.

At 22 psi at stock displacement, you would have to rev out to 9800 RPM to achieve maximum output with the BW S200 SXE. Below is a graph with the BW S200 SXE overlaid with different boost levels.










You can lower your maximum engine speed by increasing the amount of boost to achieve the same amount of power. As follows:

P3 (22 psi) = 9800 RPMs
P2 (29 psi) = 8200 RPMs
P1 (36 psi) = 7100 RPMs

So, if you wanted to maintain stock rev limit of 7200 RPMs without cams on stock displacement, you would have to run 36 psi boost. If you wanted to run less boost on stock displacement, then I would recommend stroking engine and/or cams. Below is a graph with the BW S200 SXE overlaid with 1968cc displacement (95.5mm stroke x 81mm bore):










Maximum engine speeds decrease as follows:

P3 (22 psi) = 9000 RPMs (-800 RPMs)
P2 (29 psi) = 7400 RPMs (-800 RPMs)
P1 (36 psi) = 6300 RPMs (-800 RPMs)

This turbo seems to favor higher boost levels to achieve maximum output. Since E85 is very tolerant of higher boost, I would strongly recommend running 29 psi (or higher) on your setup with or without cams. With cams, plan to rev out to 8200 RPMs on stock displacement at 29 psi. You can get away with no cams or a mild cam if you stroke engine out to 1968cc's. Plan on reving out to 7400 RPMs on stroked motor to achieve maximum output at 29 psi.



LilNipper said:


> *Lastly is the A/R going to affect this turbo map at all? Is there a specific A/R you would recommend with this application?*
> 
> Thanks John, you are awesome as always!
> _
> Lil'Nipper_


The A/R will definitely effect the map a few hundred RPMs in either direction. I am not familiar with BW turbos so I can't make a specific recommendation.

Also, I thought the IECVA1 and IECVA2 cams were out of stock at IE. Can someone please confirm.

EDIT: I spoke with someone from IE yesterday. The IECVA1 and IECVA2 cams are not currently available. Late summer is the next ETA. But I wouldn't count on it.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

So this is the problem that I'm trying to solve I'm trying to make at least 400 wheel horsepower at minimum and I don't really want much more than 450 wheel horsepower. I have that all wheel drive car the Audi TT. The map sensor is only good for 22 to psi Factory. Without just a ridiculous amount of screwing around to get more than 22 PSI I'm pretty screwed. So I'm trying to figure out what is going to be the best option. That's why when I asked what kind of power do you think I'll be making with 22 PSI at sY 8000 RPM, I'm trying to solve that problem. If I have to go to 2.1 or 2.0 that's fine also I just have to figure out what I need to do to make that power with only 22 to psi.

If you're trying to figure out why only 450 and not more it's because once you hit that 500 Mark there's a lot more screwing around with this motor and I really don't need more than that for the type of racing that I'm doing in the class I'm in.

So if you have some insight on that or a way to make it so that I can use more than that with using me7 in this car, that would be pretty awesome but right now I'm pretty screwed it feels like without going to stand alone like Max did.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> So this is the problem that I'm trying to solve I'm trying to make at least 400 wheel horsepower at minimum and I don't really want much more than 450 wheel horsepower. I have that all wheel drive car the Audi TT. The map sensor is only good for 22 to psi Factory. Without just a ridiculous amount of screwing around to get more than 22 PSI I'm pretty screwed. So I'm trying to figure out what is going to be the best option. That's why when I asked what kind of power do you think I'll be making with 22 PSI at sY 8000 RPM, I'm trying to solve that problem. If I have to go to 2.1 or 2.0 that's fine also I just have to figure out what I need to do to make that power with only 22 to psi.
> 
> If you're trying to figure out why only 450 and not more it's because once you hit that 500 Mark there's a lot more screwing around with this motor and I really don't need more than that for the type of racing that I'm doing in the class I'm in.
> 
> So if you have some insight on that or a way to make it so that I can use more than that with using me7 in this car, that would be pretty awesome but right now I'm pretty screwed it feels like without going to stand alone like Max did.


I see. If you want to stay at 22 psi and make 400 WHP, that's no problem. Assuming a 20% drivetrain loss on the AWD Audi TT quattro, you would have to make 480 crank horsepower on pump/race gas (400 WHP x 1.2 = 480 HP) or 48 lbs. per minute corrected air flow on the compressor map. On E85, you would have to make 480 crank horsepower (400 WHP x 1.2 = 480 HP) or 40 lbs. per minute corrected air flow (48 lbs. per minute / 1.2 for E85 = 40 lbs. per minute) on the compressor map.

Below I overlaid these points for pump/race gas (blue) and E85 (yellow) with stock displacement:










As you can see, for pump/race gas, you can achieve 48 lbs. per minute (480 CHP) at about 7600 RPMs at stock displacement at 22 psi. I would recommend upgrading cams or stroking engine for pump/race gas. If you decide to stroke engine, subtract about 800 RPMs (7600 - 800 = 6800 RPMs maximum engine speed). This assumes you are increasing displacement from 1781 cc stock displacement to 1968 cc (95.5mm x 81 mm).

For E85, you can achieve 40 lbs. per minute (480 CHP) at about 6200 RPMs at stock displacement at 22 psi. I do not recommend going to the expense of upgrading cams or stroking engine for E85. However, you will have to upgrade your fuel system to handle 40% more fuel for E85.

At these power levels, I assume you will upgrade your bottom end with stouter connecting rods and forged crankshaft. If your Audi TT is a 225 version, you already have the forged crankshaft but not connecting rods IIRC.

The BW S200 SXE will give you room to grow if you decide to push power beyond 400 WHP even at 22 psi. The maximum *calculated* WHP you can achieve with E85 on stock displacement and stock cams at 22 psi is 46 lbs. per minute at 7200 RPMs or 550 CHP or 460 WHP assuming a 20% drivetrain loss for quattro.

EDIT: No need for standalone engine management. Also, if you decide to go above stock boost, you can get a 4 bar MAP sensor and Gonzo tune. That's what I run.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

yes, I have the 225 version.

Correct me on this if this is not true John...

"The BW S200 SXE has a very wide power band from 2800 to >9000 RPMs at 23 psi. That's more than 6000 RPMs of usable power under the curve."

This cam
http://www.performancebyie.com/integrated-engineering-1-8t-20v-street-intake-camshaft

Valve train kit
http://www.performancebyie.com/integrated-engineering-1-8t-20v-valve-spring-retainer-kit

The rods
https://store.034motorsport.com/rod-set-scat-144mm-20mm-pin-4-cyl.html

That is *1444.98* (not including all the little things, but those add up no matter what direction you go to "build the motor") this is still less than stroking it.

One may want to just do pistons as long as you are there so you don't have to worry about going more than 500hp.

http://www.performancebyie.com/je-1...95mSAkOT3ggX_peUbua8ilZse06Ogxcvx0aArAY8P8HAQ

And oil pump...

https://www.ecstuning.com/ES1876862...0jQ4nIhQhaZ2M-MAO6lJvbftZLsaYU1j00aAs4H8P8HAQ

All the arp stuff needed

https://store.034motorsport.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=arp+1.8t

Exhaust valves (which are only good for about 400hp hence the upgrage) 

These are way better than the other options and there is only a 10$ difference...
http://www.performancebyie.com/ferrea-exhaust-valve-set-1-8t-super-alloy

I am sure the list goes on- and on. But the main point still holds true- to my knowledge.

I may decide to just do rods and then replace retainers/sprigs instead of crank etc. prob cheaper to rev the 1.8t to make power rather than stroke it looking at prices (including machining etc). It appears there would be gain, but,only because revving it will make more power easier, with E85. *The cam will run out- but that turbo will keep building power to 9k, and the top end kit I just listed looks to me that it can handle a 9k redline without doping valves etc.*

And for others reading this this is a link to factory 1.8t part limits.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6930456-Power-limits-of-OEM-1-8T-components


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> yes, I have the 225 version.
> 
> Correct me on this if this is not true John...
> 
> "*The BW S200 SXE has a very wide power band from 2800 to >9000 RPMs at 23 psi. That's more than 6000 RPMs of usable power under the curve*."


Yes. That's what the compressor maps reads. >6000 RPMs of usable power under the curve with this turbo.


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

*Help*

Off topic a little...Not a VW but a Genesis Coupe. It is a 2.0T 86mm x 86mm square bore and stroke. The engine is fully built and sleeved. The head has been ported and polished as well as 1mm over valves. It also has 274 cams. All other supporting mods including water/meth. Engine is still in this process and hasn't been finished yet.

Question is, What turbo would be the best for this motor? Prior to all mods, I had(sold) a GT3071R and made 403hp on stock everything(excep t3" turbo back exhaust). Been looking at the GTX3076R, the GTX3576R and the GTX3582R. Strongly debating between both of the 35's but, the more I read, watch dyno videos and try to understand compressor maps, the more confused I become. My power goal is between 600-650hp to the wheels. Could go E85 if needed. If you can post/send some maps to compare, will really appreciate it.

Anticipated Thanks!

Infamos


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> Off topic a little...Not a VW but a Genesis Coupe. It is a 2.0T 86mm x 86mm square bore and stroke. The engine is fully built and sleeved. The head has been ported and polished as well as 1mm over valves. It also has 274 cams. All other supporting mods including water/meth. Engine is still in this process and hasn't been finished yet.
> 
> Question is, What turbo would be the best for this motor? Prior to all mods, I had(sold) a GT3071R and made 403hp on stock everything(excep t3" turbo back exhaust). Been looking at the GTX3076R, the GTX3576R and the GTX3582R. Strongly debating between both of the 35's but, the more I read, watch dyno videos and try to understand compressor maps, the more confused I become. My power goal is between 600-650hp to the wheels. Could go E85 if needed. If you can post/send some maps to compare, will really appreciate it.
> 
> ...


I always liked the 86mm square bore/stroke engine at 1998cc's. For 600 WHP, you will have to make 690 HP at the crank assuming a 15% drivetrain loss for rear wheel drive (600 x 1.15 = 690). The GTX3076R and GTX3576R are both rated at about 65 lbs. of air per minute, which, on a good race gas setup, can achieve 650 HP or 565 WHP at the wheels. Below, I have overlaid the GTX3076R and GTX3576R for comparison. As you can see, you can expect to achieve 65 lbs. of air per minute at 6875 RPMs and P2/P1=3.3 or about 33 psi on 1998cc's displacement.










However, that number falls short of your 600 to 650 WHP goal. To achieve that output, you would have to run E85 with either of those turbos. On E85, you can expect to see a maximum output of 678 WHP (65 x 1.2 for E85 / 1.15 for drivetrain x 10) on a well-tuned setup.

You might also want to consider the GT3582R which is rated at 62.5 lbs. of air per minute. At 1998cc's, the GT3582R is capable of 652 WHP on E85 (62.5 x 1.2 for E85 / 1.15 for drivetrain x 10). Below, I have overlaid the GT3582R and GTX3576R for comparison. As you can see, you can expect to achieve 62.5 lbs. of air per minute at 8750 RPMs and P2/P1=2.5 or about 22psi on 1998cc's displacement.









There are a number of other turbos that can achieve your 600 to 650 WHP goal from EFR, Precision Turbo etc. On race gas, the choke line (farthest line to the right) would have to correspond to 69 to 75 lbs. of air per minute along the x-axis when reading a compressor map. On E85, the choke line would have to correspond to 58 to 62 lbs. of air per minute. 

EDIT: Below is the GTX3582R with 1998cc's displacement. As you can see, you can achieve 75 lbs. of air per minute at 8000 RPMs and P2/P1 = 3.3 or about 33 psi. On race gas, this corresponds to 750 HP or about 652 WHP. There is no need IMO to run E85 with this turbo to achieve your desired output. Hope this helps!


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

This is awesome! I appreciate your hard work. I have compared the GTX3582R to the Borg Warner S200SXE 7670 and it seems that the Borg Warner might be better for me. If you can compare those two to confirm my research, I will appreciate it. 

If you think that any other turbo will be better for me than those I have mentioned, let me know. Again, I don't have 1/10 of the knowledge that you have. I trust your work and expertise.

Again,

Thanks!

Infamos


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

Sorry, I guess I posted before refreshing my browser. Thanks for the map on the GTX3582R.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> This is awesome! I appreciate your hard work. *I have compared the GTX3582R to the Borg Warner S200SXE 7670 and it seems that the Borg Warner might be better for me. If you can compare those two to confirm my research, I will appreciate it*.
> 
> If you think that any other turbo will be better for me than those I have mentioned, let me know. Again, I don't have 1/10 of the knowledge that you have. I trust your work and expertise.
> 
> ...


I have the Borg Warner S200SXE compressor map on file. I will post a comparison with the GTX3582R once I have some more time.


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

Great, thanks!


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

Well, that would explain why my k04-015 runs out of air after 4500-5000 rpm... murzic/Daz tune @20psi

Also, to confirm, pushing a turbo past the upper right limits would be over spinning the turbo and could lead to premature failure? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> Well, that would explain why my k04-015 runs out of air after 4500-5000 rpm... murzic/Daz tune @20psi
> 
> Also, to confirm, pushing a turbo past the upper right limits would be over spinning the turbo and could lead to premature failure?
> 
> ...


Yes. The K05-15 runs out of steam pretty quickly as the compressor map shows. As far as premature failure, there are people here who have pushed their K04 turbo well past the choke line on a regular basis without failure. User=Marcus_Aurelius is the first to come to mind if I'm not mistaken. I haven't seen him post here in a while, though.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> Great, thanks!


The Borg Warner S200SXE is most closely related to the GTX3576R in terms of total output. Below, I have overlaid the BW S200SXE with the GTX3576R. As you can see, the BW S200SXE can produce about 63 lbs. of air per minute at 7200 RPMs and P2/P1=3.1 or about 30psi at 1998cc's displacement. However, the surge line for the BW S200SXE is way better than the GTX3576R. At P2/P1=3.1, the surge line for the BW S200SXE is almost 2000 RPMs farther to the left than the GTX3576R. That means that you can expect the BW to spoolup significantly sooner than the GTX3576R, as it has a much wider efficiency range at that pressure ratio and across the board. 










For overall drivability, the BW S200SXE is a better turbo.

EDIT: It looks like the S200SXE 7670 has a slightly different compressor map. I can take a look at that and maybe do some comparisons once I have some time. The S200SXE 7670 has about the same total output at the standard S200SXE, but the surge line is different.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is the BW S200SXE 7670 aka "S257". The total output for this turbo is slighly more (+1 lb. per minute) than the standard S200SXE. However, the surge line is about 400 RPMs higher. My recommendation as far as engine speed and boost targets are the same however. P2/P1=3.1 (30 psi) at 7200 RPMs at 1998cc displacement.


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

I think you definitely narrowed it out for me! Thanks! The way you do the calculations is AMAZING!!!! 

On the S200SX-E, those numbers are for 93 or E85?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> I think you definitely narrowed it out for me! Thanks! The way you do the calculations is AMAZING!!!!
> 
> *On the S200SX-E, those numbers are for 93 or E85?*


Thanks for the compliments. The calculations are quite easy and will give you a pretty good estimate of what you can expect from a particular turbo. For pump/race gas, take the maximum output and multiply by 10. So, for example, for the S257, the maximum output is about 64 or 65 lbs. of air per minute. Multiplying by 10 gives you maximum crank horsepower (65 x 10 = 650 HP). For E85, multiply the maximum output by 12. For the S257, the maximum crank horsepower you can expect is 780 (65 x 12 = 780 HP).

To get wheel horsepower, divide by some percentage of drivetrain loss. For front or rear wheel drive, you can use 15%. For all wheel drive, you can use 20%. So, in the above example, the S257 can make about 565 WHP on front or rear wheel drive chassis (650 HP/1.15 = 565 WHP). On E85, the S257 can make about 678 WHP (780 HP/1.15). Keep in mind that these numbers assume that your setup can cool your intake charge to ambient temperature (21 C or 70 F). Anything above ambient temperature will reduce your estimated output.

EDITED for typos. The stupid WYSIWYG editor is not working very well.


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

I see! This is GREAT information!!! I guess for my setup, and for the numbers I'm looking for, I will go with the base S200SX-E and convert everything to E85. Do you happen to know the part number of the one that is not the 7670? I'm looking at part numbers and I see 2, one with a 52mm compressor inducer (12709095019)and one with a 57mm(12769095003). I'm trying to find the one that you posted before the 7670.

Again, Thanks!

Infamos


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

Perhaps S252(12709095019) instead of the S257(12769095003) or S200SX-E 7070(12709095019) vs S200SX-E 7670(12769095003)? All kinds of numbers on the internet making it hard to figure out the specific one I'm after. Lol


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> Perhaps S252(12709095019) instead of the S257(12769095003) or S200SX-E 7070(12709095019) vs S200SX-E 7670(12769095003)? *All kinds of numbers on the internet making it hard to figure out the specific one I'm after. Lol*


Not only that, but there are a number of turbine housings for this turbo which will effect your spoolup and top end power. Not sure about part numbers, but make sure you get the one I've been calling the "standard" S200SXE as that has a better surge line and will give you better spoolup without sacrificing top end.


----------



## Infamos (May 14, 2016)

True that! Thanks for all your help. It has been a learning experience and a pleasure to see your work. Again, Thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Infamos said:


> True that! Thanks for all your help. It has been a learning experience and a pleasure to see your work. Again, Thanks!


Glad you like. :thumbup:


----------



## FRANK_N (Jan 15, 2016)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> Well, that would explain why my k04-015 runs out of air after 4500-5000 rpm... murzic/Daz tune @20psi



Not that it makes a HUGE amount of difference, but that map you've posted is for the slightly larger compressor wheel used in the Audi 2.7T K04 turbos. The K04 for the 1.8T longitudinal engine had a smaller 2075-series compressor wheel.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Just out of curiosity, do you have the compressor map for k04-23?

Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

FRANK_N said:


> Not that it makes a HUGE amount of difference, but that map you've posted is for the slightly larger compressor wheel used in the Audi 2.7T K04 turbos. The K04 for the 1.8T longitudinal engine had a smaller 2075-series compressor wheel.
> 
> http://s557.photobucket.com/user/fritznh/media/K04_2075_ECD.png.html


Thanks. That's a good find. I can post this one at some future date.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Just out of curiosity, do you have the compressor map for k04-23?
> 
> Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


I don't think I have that one on file. However, it looks like there are a lot of K03 and K04 compressor maps published on the internet. Maybe someone can post one for the K04-23 here.


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

FRANK_N said:


> Not that it makes a HUGE amount of difference, but that map you've posted is for the slightly larger compressor wheel used in the Audi 2.7T K04 turbos. The K04 for the 1.8T longitudinal engine had a smaller 2075-series compressor wheel.


Only further explains the fall off :thumbup:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is a PM I received from Mattias. He has a 2012 Nissan R35 GTR with a 3.8L V6 (engine code VR38DETT).



Matsson said:


> HI!
> Saw that you know how to read a compressor map correctly and would like you to do a comparison on the GTX3584RS vs gen 2 GTX3582 please.
> I have a Nissan R35 GTR (2012) and want to go for the twin GTX3584RS instead of the Gen2 GTX3582 because i feel its to going to be to laggy with the 3584RS.
> That's why i would like to do a comparison to help me see when i can get the turbo to spool, power and you seemed to have that figured out how to do that.
> ...


Below is the GTX3584RS overlaid with the second generation GTX3582R on 1.9L displacement (1899.6 CC's). As you can see, the compressor map for the second generation GTX3582R and GTX3584RS have the same basic shape. In fact, it looks like Garrett used the same map for both turbos and just scaled one up or down. Unfortunately, this method ignores any subtle effects of the new super-efficient turbine wheel and larger compressor of the GTX3584RS. The second generation GTX3582R uses the older GT35-series turbine wheel.









As you can see, the GTX3584RS is slightly better in terms of overall power at the 7000 RPMs stock redline as compared to the GTX3582R at about 72.5 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1 = 3.8 or about 41 psi. This translates into 725 crank HP on pump/race gas or 870 HP on E85. Twin GTX3584RS turbos combine to produce 1450 HP on pump/race gas or 1740 HP on E85.

I placed a red dot at the 7000 RPM stock redline for the GTX3582R for comparison. As you can see, the GTX3582R produces slighly less output at 69 lbs. per minute at P2/P1 = 3.65 or about 38.4 psi.

At 8000 RPMs, the GTX3584RS is capable of about 78 lbs. of air per minutes at P2/P1 = 3.6 or about 37.7 psi. Twin GTX3584RS turbos combine to produce 1560 HP on pump/race gas or 1872 HP on E85.

The surge line for the GTX3584RS ranges from 4000 to 4200 RPMs on 1.9L above P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi. I think you can resonable expect to start to see spoolup around 4000 to 4200 RPMs on this setup. The surge line for the GTX3582R will be a few hundred RPMs better.

You may want to consider a single turbo setup using the GTX5533R. This turbo comes in a range of inducer sizes from 85mm to 98mm. Below is the GTX5533R with the 85mm inducer overlaid with 3.8L (3799.3 CCs).










As you can see, the GTX5533R - 85mm is capable of 160 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1 = 4.2 or about 46 psi. That translates into 1600 crank HP on pump/race gas or about 1920 HP on E85.

The second red dot along the 7000 RPM line is the GTX3582R in a twin turbo setup. As you can see, the single turbo GTX5533R has a significantly higher output than the GTX3582R twin turbo setup and the GTX3584RS (not shown).

The surge line for the GTX5533R is also better, especially below P2/P1 = 2.6 or about 23 psi. You can expect spoolup to be 300 to 400 RPMs better with the single turbo setup below 23 psi. Above that point, spoolup with be about the same as a twin turbo GTX3584RS setup.


----------



## Matsson (Dec 28, 2016)

Thanks a lot mainstayinc...Appreciated!

I have to go for a twin set up and looks like its going to be GTX3584RS like i wanted. The engine will only be running on E85 so will hopefully make enough power for an 8 second pass.

Thanks.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Matsson said:


> Thanks a lot mainstayinc...Appreciated!
> 
> I have to go for a twin set up and looks like its going to be GTX3584RS like i wanted. The engine will only be running on E85 so will hopefully make enough power for an 8 second pass.
> 
> Thanks.


That's going to be a nice setup! GL with your 8 second goal. You'll be making a lot of power with a twin 'RS setup.


----------



## odem (Jan 18, 2017)

*help*

was searching on google for different compressor maps and found this thread.
finally people blessed with more brain then me lol -->mainstayinc
maybe i can ask you this question here as it would really helping me to progress.

my car is a 997 turbo where we just finished the build of the engine.
we went up from 3,6 to now 3,8liter, done with gt3 sleeves and mahle pistons 102,7mm.
CR is 8,2:1.
we also did CNC the heads to gt3 specs. intake manifold is ported according to that size. 
switched to schrick cams. redline should be now at 7.500Rpm.
so much for the base.

i do want to make the car have 1000-1100hp. max boost will be 30psi...maybe 35 but thats pretty hard.
no e85 because it gets no longer supported at our gas stations.
but we have 102octane pump gas pretty much everywhere. so that will be fuel of choice.

i was looking at borg warner efr7163 but maybe i can go one size bigger to 7670. 
or the new gtx GEN2 series 3076 or 3576.

i would appriciate if you could help.
maybe you can propose something totally different just out of your experience.
greetings from germany!
martin


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

odem said:


> was searching on google for different compressor maps and found this thread.
> finally people blessed with more brain then me lol -->mainstayinc
> maybe i can ask you this question here as it would really helping me to progress.
> 
> ...


Thanks, Martin. That sounds like an exciting build. I'll be happy to look at that and give you my opinion. Give me a day or two to put something together.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

The Porsche 997 Turbo is, in my opinon, one of the most stunning 911's since the 993. It features a 3.6L engine derived from 911 GT1 with a bore and stroke of 100mm x 76.4mm (in contrast to the standard Carrera and Carrera S models with a bore and stroke of 96mm x 82.8mm). This engine in stock form produces 473 BHP at 6000 RPMs and uses variable vane technology, variable valve timing and direct injection.










Here is a short 10 minute video which highlights some of the technology built into the 997 turbo.






The specs for Martin's build are as follows:
Bore: 102.7mm
Stroke: 76.4mm
Displacement: 3797.3CC's (3.8L)
Compression Ratio: 8.2:1 using Mahle pistons (great choice! I'll be using Mahle's in my next build).
Redline: 7,500 RPMs.
Maximum Boost: 30 to 35 psi.
Fuel: 102 RON (about 98 AKI in the USA).
Power Target: 1000 to 1100 HP.
Turbos: EFR7163, EFR7670, Gen2 GTX3076R, Gen2 3576R etc.

Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 with 1.9L (1898.7CC) displacement. At P2/P1=3.0 (about 29 psi), this turbo is capable of making about 59 lbs. of air per minutes at 7300 RPMs. This turbo is well suited to this displacement with a surge line ranging from about 1700 RPMs to 4200 RPMs. At lower boost levels, you should see positive boost response from as low as 2200 to 2700 RPMs. However, the surge line for the EFR 7163 drops off dramatically as boost increases, especially above P2/P1 = 2.7 or about 25 psi. At P2/P1 = 3.0 or 29spi, the surge line drops to 3300 RPMs. Expect maximum boost to come on under hard acceleration between 3800 RPMs but not later than 4300 RPMs (3300 surge line + 500 to 1000 RPMs).










To get the widest powerband out of this setup, I would consider running a maximum boost of P2/P1=2.7 or 25 psi at 7400 RPMs (see below). This setup is capable of about 53 lbs. of air per minute or 1060 BHP in a twin-turbo setup. This is still well within your horsepower target.










However, you will have to choose the single-scroll turbine housing for the EFR 7163 as a twin-scroll housing cannot be utilized on a 6 cylinder twin turbo setup (with two seperate cylinder banks) without great difficulty. I am fairly confident each turbocharger manufacturer publishes their compressor maps with the best combination of turbine housing and compressor wheel. For the EFR 7163, this means their 71mm compressor wheel with their 64mm turbine wheel in a twin-scroll housing. Going to a single-scroll housing might give you a 300 to 400 RPM penalty in spoolup as the following dyno chart suggests.










If that's the case, then you will have to adjust the above numbers accordingly for a single-scroll setup.

More on the EFR 7670, GTX3076R_2, GTX3576R_2 etc. to come.


----------



## odem (Jan 18, 2017)

thanks a lot man!!!!...i am eager to read about the other options.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

odem said:


> thanks a lot man!!!!...i am eager to read about the other options.


:thumbup:

Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and the second generation GTX3071R with 1.9L (1898.7CC) displacement. Although you didn't specifically mention the Gen_2 GTX3071R, I thought I would post up a comparison with the EFR 7163. As you can see, the second generation GTX3071R is capable of 60 lbs. of air per minute and possibly more. At P2/P1=2.9 or about 27.5 psi, you can expect to produce about 57 lbs. of air per minute or 570 BHP at 7200 RPMs. At this boost pressure, you will have a nice 5000 RPM powerband due to the exceptionally strong surge line above P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi. 

In fact, if you compare the surge lines of the GTX3071R_2 and the EFR 7163, they go in opposite directions. Whereas the surge line for the EFR 7163 is strong below P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi, it drops off significantly above that point as boost pressure increases. In contrast, the surge line for the GTX3071R_2 is not as strong below 22 psi. However, above 22 psi, it actually improves by 300 RPMs. I think this will translate into stronger, faster boost response.

Also, keep in mind that the compressor map for the EFR 7163 was probably mapped using a twin scroll turbine as mentioned above. So you would have to apply a 300 to 400 RPM penalty for a single-scroll setup. That would make the GTX3071R_2 even more attractive IMO.










The other nice thing about the second generation GTX3071R is that it is offered in reverse rotation. This is escpecially important for twin turbo setups like the Porche 997 as it simplifies turbo piping and allows for a symmetrical setup.










More to come.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below I overlaid the EFR 7670 and the second generation GTX3076R with 1.9L (1898.7CC) displacement. The second generation GTX3076R and GTX3576R share the same compressor map. In practice, the map would be slighly different for the larger GT35 exhaust wheel. As you can see, the EFR7670 is capable of about 64 lbs. of air per minute at it's maximum point. Although both feature a 76mm compressor wheel, the second generation GTX3076R is capable 68 lbs. of air per minute and possibly more. Both turbos are plenty large to achieve your 1000 to 1100 HP goal and would max out to 1300 to 1400 HP if pushed to the limit on pump/race gas in a twin-turbo setup.










As you can see, I drew a vertical line at 55 lbs. of air per minute which correspond to three (3) different boost levels. Any of these points would satisfy your performance criteria. Point P1 corresponds to 25 psi at 7500 RPMs, P2 corresponds to 27.5 psi at 7000 RPMs and P3 corresponds to 35 psi at 6000 RPMs. You will notice that all three of these points are closer to the maximum efficiency islands on the GTX3076R2 than the EFR 7670. This means that the second generation GTX3076R will produce cooler, more efficient boost at those levels.

Although the EFR 7679 has a slighly better surge line, that would be offset by the use of a single-scroll setup as mentioned earlier. The GTX3076R2 also comes in reverse rotation which allows for a symmetrical setup. In terms of maximum power and efficiency, and the simplified packaging of a symmentrical setup, I would go with the Garret over the Borg Warner unit.

In conclusion, any of the four turbos mentioned above are a good option and satify your performance goals. If you want the best spoolup and don't plan to increase your HP goal in the future, then the second generation GTX3071R is a great option (although the EFR 7163 a nice option too). If you want some room to grow into the 1300 to 1400 HP range and don't mind giving up a few hundred RPM in spoolup, then I would definately recommend the second generation GTX3076R/GTX3576R.

If you really want to do something different, then I would consider doing a single-turbo setup such as the GTX4508R. This will allow you to run a twin-scroll turbine housing by combining the exhaust primaries from each cyclinder bank into each side of the twin scroll housing. In the picture below, for example, you would combine cylinders 1, 2 and 3 into one side of the scroll and cylinders 4, 5 and 6 into the other. This arrangement will potentially allow you to gain several hundred RPMs in spoolup over a twin-turbo, single-scroll setup.










Below I overlaid the GTX4508R with 3.8L displacement (3797.3 CCs). Suggested boost points for 110 lbs. of air per minute or 1100 HP are P2/P1=3.4 or 35 psi at 6000 RPMs and P2/P1= 27.5 psi at 7000 RPMs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^^^EDIT: Here are some pictures of an Audi (B5) S4 single-turbo, twin scroll setup.

http://www.motorgeek.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=43459


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received an email from our friend ALCOBENDAS.



ALCOBENDAS said:


> Hi, send pics and video
> 
> When have time send compare gtx3582 gen 2 vs gtx3584rs
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS and the EFR 8374 on stock 1.8L displacement (1781 CC's). The EFR 8374 is able to produce about 79 lbs. of air per minute or 790 crank HP at it's maximum point before it chokes off. As you can see, I drew some lines which correspond to 77.5 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1=3.6 or about 38 psi at 8500 RPMs. You will notice that the GTX3584RS is close to the 70% efficiency line at this point (not shown on map) whereas the EFR 8374 is completely choked off at it's 58% efficiency line. Consequently, the GTX3584RS will be producing cooler, more usable boost at this point.

Beyond this point, the choke line for the EFR dives vertically straight down whereas the GTX3584RS can still produce another 12.5 lbs. of air per minute or 125 HP. However, on stock 1.8L displacement, you cannot use this area of the map unless you plan to rev the engine past 10,000 RPMs.

You will notice that the surge lines are virtually identical for both turbos, with the single scroll GTX3584RS keeping pace with the twin scroll EFR8374. Add a twin scroll turbine housing to the GTX and you will see a better surge line. I think it's clear that the new GTX3584RS with its redesigned turbine wheel is better overall than the EFR 8374.










Both turbos are better suited IMO to 2.0 or 2.1L displacement. Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS and the EFR 8374 on 2.1L displacement (2067 CC's). As you can see, the EFR 8374 is stuck at 79 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1=3.3 or about 33.5 psi at 8000 RPMs whereas the GTX3584Rs can produce more than 84 lbs. of air per minute at 8500 RPMs. That's an additional 50 HP while still achieving 68% efficiency. The GTX3584RS can produce an additional 30 or 40 HP at 2.1L displacement if you plan to rev your engine past the 8500 mark.










Here is a nice video ALCOBENDAS sent of an AWD Seat Leon with the EFR 8374 mated to a Divided T3 SPA manifold.






Here is a screen shot of EFR 8374


----------



## ALCOBENDAS (May 13, 2012)

Thanks for all mainstayinc!!

The doubts I have left .. 

T3 twin scroll are small for 650hp??? (Is the target with only fuel 98)

For 1780cc i think in t3 twin scroll ar83.. but ATP only have 1.01.. Will be small 83? It will be very large 1.01 ??

Thanks!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ALCOBENDAS said:


> Thanks for all mainstayinc!!
> 
> The doubts I have left ..
> 
> ...


They only offer the new T3 Twin scroll turbine housing in 1.01 A/R for the GTX3584RS. I talked with their sales rep., Linda, several weeks ago and she initially said that they can machine the housing for both 1.01 A/r and 0.83 A/R. However, they came back and said that the 0.83 A/R would be too small (restrict top end flow). So, they currently don't list that housing as an option for the GTX3584RS. You can always call them and see if they can modify the 0.83 A/R housing for the GTX3584RS. However, I think the 1.01 A/R housing is a better fit for the GTX3584RS. That's the one I plan on buying for my next project (MK1 Rabbit GTI + 2.1L + E85 + Haldex + GTX3584RS). By the way, this project might start sooner than later. I am in contact with Bill Schimmel who can schedule me in the next few weeks.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> ...By the way, this project might start sooner than later. I am in contact with Bill Schimmel who can schedule me in the next few weeks...



Good news :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Good news :thumbup:


 :thumbup:. Thanks. I'm very excited to finally start the build after collecting so many the parts.


----------



## ALCOBENDAS (May 13, 2012)

I have been talking to ATP by email and have included ar 83 

http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchan...de=tp&Product_Code=ATP-HSG-213&Category_Code=

I hope that the manifold spa not Do not be very small for 84 rs.. t3 twin i see small...

http://www.turbozentrum.de/en/showr...se-cast-iron-t3-twinscroll-top-mount/a-63945/


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

Hello! 
Please compare 
efr 6758 and Gtx 2867 Gen 2 

I have 1,8 turbo tt Bt, and I want about 450-500 hp

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

djpadelis said:


> Hello!
> Please compare
> efr 6758 and Gtx 2867 Gen 2
> 
> ...


Sorry. I must have missed your post. Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 and the second generation GTX2867R with stock 1.8L displacement (1781cc's). As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 500 HP. However, the second generation GTX2867R has a much better surge line above P2/P1= 2.0 or about 14.5 psi.











Suggested boost targets for the second generation GTX2867R are P2/P1=3 or 29 psi at 6000 RPMs producing about 46 lbs. of air per minute or 460 HP; and P2/P1=2.45 or about 21 psi at 8000 RPMs producing over 49 lbs. of air per minute.

Here is a quick comparison of the first and second generation GTX2867R. Notice the better surge line with the second generation GTX and higher overall output.


----------



## ssxrnr (Dec 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> Suggested boost targets for the second generation GTX 2867R are P2/P1=3 or 29 psi at 6000 RPMs producing about 46 lbs. of air per minute or 460 HP; and P2/P1=2.45 or about 21 psi at 8000 RPMs producing over 49 lbs. of air per minute.
> 
> Here is a quick comparison of the first and second generation GTX2867R. Notice the better surge line with the second generation GTX and higher overall output.


I am currently using a GTX2867R on my HPA tuned Stage 3 Golf R. HPA and I have been in discussion about further developing the 2.0 FSI. I would like your opinion or advice of turbo choice. EFR 7163 vs Gen II GTX2867R I know APR is now using the EFR 7163 on their Stage 3 kits for the MK7 Golf R, not sure of the why? Any help would be much appreciated.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ssxrnr said:


> I am currently using a GTX2867R on my HPA tuned Stage 3 Golf R. HPA and I have been in discussion about further developing the 2.0 FSI. I would like your opinion or advice of turbo choice. EFR 7163 vs Gen II GTX2867R I know APR is now using the EFR 7163 on their Stage 3 kits for the MK7 Golf R, not sure of the why? Any help would be much appreciated.


Below is the second generation GTX2867R overlaid with the EFR 7163 on 2.0L displacement (2008 cc's). As you can see, the EFR is capable of about 600 HP as compared to 500 HP for the second generation Garret. The difference in output is mainly due to the larger compressor wheel on the EFR (71mm v. 67mm).










The EFR is a better choice since you have a similar surge line but higher overall output. The nice surge line for the EFR can be explained in part by the twin-scroll turbine housing. The second generation Garret uses a single scroll. So, this is not quite a fair comparison. You may also want to consider the second generation GTX3071R which has a much better surge line than the previous generation and can benefit from Garret's new twin-scroll Ni-Resist T3 turbine housing.


----------



## ALCOBENDAS (May 13, 2012)

mainstayinc, hi and thanks for all.. i thinking in new 9174 iwg ts for my proyect .. It would almost plug & play.. 


You could compare it with the gtx3584rs for mi 1780cc ??


And give me your opinión.. thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ALCOBENDAS said:


> mainstayinc, hi and thanks for all.. i thinking in new 9174 iwg ts for my proyect .. It would almost plug & play..
> 
> 
> You could compare it with the gtx3584rs for mi 1780cc ??
> ...


Hey man! Nice to hear from you again. Below I overlaid the GTX3584Rs with the EFR 9174 on 1.8L (1781 CC's). As you can see, the EFR is capable of 95 lbs. of air per minute or 950 HP on pump/race gas. But that's with the turbo maxed out at 0% efficiency where the choke line goes vertical. I think that realistically, the EFR would max out just over 90 lbs. of air per minute at 60% efficiency, which is the standard that Garrett uses.









I marked a point at P2/P1=4.2 or about 47 psi and 8500 RPMs on stock displacement. That corresponds to 91.5 lbs. of air per minute or about 915 HP on pump/race gas and 1098 HP on E85. At that boost level, I would definitely run on E85 or have a good chemical intercooling system.

The surge line for the EFR 9174 is around 5300 RPMs at stock displacement. That is where this turbo will start to produce positive, efficient boost. Add another 500 to 1000 RPMs to allow the turbo to spoolup, and you should see full spool between 5800 and 6300 RPMs. That only gives you about a 2700 to 3200 RPM powerband (9000 RPMs - 5800 to 6300 RPMs). And that's with a twin-scroll turbine housing. This turbo is best suited for a drag setup IMO with a short geared 02M type transmission.

The Garrett GTX3584RS, on the other hand, will spool about a 1000 RPMs sooner on stock displacement but will produce about 140 HP less on pump/race gas at 8500 RPMs. See the GTX3584RS V. EFR 8374 comparison above. Also keep in mind that this comparison is between the twin-scroll EFR and single-scroll GTX. Add a twin scroll to the GTX and the surge line will improve by 400 RPMs without losing any top end.

Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS with the EFR 9174 on 2.0L (2008 CC's) displacement. I drew a point at P2/P1=4.2 or about 47 psi and 7500 RPMs. This corresponds to 91.5 lbs. of air per minute or about 915 HP on pump/race gas or 1098 HP on E85. The surge line improves by 600 RPMs to 4700 RPMs. You can expect full spool by 5200 to 5700 RPMs on 2.0L displacement.


----------



## ALCOBENDAS (May 13, 2012)

I see that it is a bad idea to mount the 91 with 1780cc .. the maximum pressure that I will use is about 32psi .. I liked 91 and not 8374 because I saw some comparisons about evo X where there was only 150rpm difference in the spool up ... Everything points to that I have to decide between gtx3584rs (I have doubts about a/r TS 82 or 1) or the 8374 iwg ar 92 ..


Thanks for all! 

In one week I will have results of 1.8t 1900cc with 8374 iwg with methanol


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ALCOBENDAS said:


> I see that it is a bad idea to mount the 91 with 1780cc .. the maximum pressure that I will use is about 32psi .. I liked 91 and not 8374 because I saw some comparisons about evo X where there was only 150rpm difference in the spool up ... Everything points to that I have to decide between gtx3584rs (I have doubts about a/r TS 82 or 1) or the 8374 iwg ar 92 ..
> 
> 
> Thanks for all!
> ...


Yeah, I agree. At 32 psi, you will only be able to produce about 700 HP on pump/race gas (see below). That can easily be obtained by using the GTX3584RS.










As far as the TS housing, I am going with the largest 1.01 A/R versus the smaller 0.83 A/R on my project. I am pretty sure I will spoolup better than the stock single scroll v-band without losing anything up top. Also, interested to see the results of the 1.8T with EFR 8374 IWG on methanol. That should be very interesting.


----------



## sandman1111 (Oct 21, 2015)

Hello

I like your work a lot. I saw that you made a chart with the s200sx-e 57mm, but in my opinion the 52mm is a lot nicer setup. Would you please be so kind if you have time, and make a nice chart between the 52 and 57mm. I don´t care about what displacement, i just want to compare them.
Actually it would be cool to compare it with something similar from Garret range, I quess the gt3071r would be something that is more expensive, and widely used. I´d like to see how badly it gets beaten. The new gen2 gtx line looks to be similar. They got better surge lines after 1bar or smthing, but those little 2 litre engines have hard time to get there so it is not really important.. And just think about the price difference.










Thank you very much.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sandman1111 said:


> Hello I like your work a lot. I saw that you made a chart with the s200sx-e 57mm, but in my opinion the 52mm is a lot nicer setup. Would you please be so kind if you have time, and make a nice chart between the 52 and 57mm. I don´t care about what displacement, i just want to compare them.Actually it would be cool to compare it with something similar from Garret range, I quess the gt3071r would be something that is more expensive, and widely used. I´d like to see how badly it gets beaten. The new gen2 gtx line looks to be similar. They got better surge lines after 1bar or smthing, but those little 2 litre engines have hard time to get there so it is not really important.. And just think about the price difference.Thank you very much.


Yeah, I'd be happy to do that. I'll post something in the next day or two.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

The BW S200SX-E comes in a 52mm inducer (71mm exducer) version and a 57mm inducer (76mm exducer) version. Both share the same 61.4mm/69.6mm turbine wheel.










Below I overlaid the 52mm (BLUE) with the 57mm (RED) on 2.0L (1984cc) displacement. As you can see, the 57mm version is able to produce 65 lbs. of air per minute or 650 BHP at 6100 RPMs at P2/P1= 3.8 or about 41 psi. In comparison, the 52mm version is able to produce 53.5 lbs. of air per minute at 5000 RPMs at about 41 psi. In this case, I would prefer the 57mm (76mm exducer) version since you only lose about 400 RPMs in surge line for an additional 115 BHP up top. At least that's what the compressor map indicates.









Below I overlaid the 52mm version (BLUE) with the second generation GTX3071R. Both of these are 71mm exducer turbos.









As you can see, the second generation GTX3071R is able to produce 57 lbs. of air per minute or 570 BHP at P2/P1=2.9 or 28 psi on 2.0L displacement. It can produce as much as 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 BHP at 8500 RPMs at this displacement. The surge line at 28 psi is actually better for the Garrett turbo. However, below this boost level, the Borg Warner has about a 400 to 500 RPM advantage. Transient boost response will be better for the BW unit. However, I think if you push the Garrett unit hard up to 28+ psi, you will have equal if not better spoolup. That's just my opinion. It would be interesting to see how these compare in a real world application.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below I overlaid the 52mm version (BLUE) with the GT3071R (DARK BLUE). Both of these are 71mm exducer turbos.










The Borg Warner is slightly better in terms of surge line and overall output.


----------



## sandman1111 (Oct 21, 2015)

Thank you again. Love how the "budget" turbo has a better compressor map than much higher priced ones. OFC the new gen2 line has really nice maps, but everything cheaper than gen2 or older, gets spanked. That kinda shows that all the other stuff is hugely overpriced.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sandman1111 said:


> Thank you again. Love how the "budget" turbo has a better compressor map than much higher priced ones. OFC the new gen2 line has really nice maps, but everything cheaper than gen2 or older, gets spanked. That kinda shows that all the other stuff is hugely overpriced.


:thumbup: The BW S200SX-E is a nice turbo for sure.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

The BW S200SX-E is a nice turbo for sure.[/QUOTE]

I'm new here but I like the S200 series for these engines as well. I did wonder though, for my 2jzgte (3.0) is the 257 too small? It's T4 single scroll mani so the step up to the S362 seems a bit much on a stock engine. All the housings are huge for t4. Plus I'm still only looking to stay around 500whp. Just a street car so response is paramount at this point. Well, Until I can get a R33 or 34 GTR


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I'll look into that on Monday.:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> I'm new here but I like the S200 series for these engines as well. I did wonder though, for my 2jzgte (3.0) is the 257 too small? It's T4 single scroll mani so the step up to the S362 seems a bit much on a stock engine. All the housings are huge for t4. Plus I'm still only looking to stay around 500whp. Just a street car so response is paramount at this point. Well, Until I can get a R33 or 34 GTR


I wasn't sure which S257 turbo you are referring to so below I overlaid the older BW S200 SXE (aka S257) with the newer S200 SXE 57mm turbo mentioined in the previous post with 3.0L displacement (86mm x 86mm x 6 cylinders). As you can see, both turbos are capable of 65 lbs. of air per minute or 650 HP or 556 WHP on a rear wheel drive setup like the 2JZ-GTE engine used in the MK IV Toyota Supra.










I drew 3 horizontal lines corresponding to 65 lbs. of air per minutes as follows:

41 psi at 4000 RPMs
29 psi at 5000 RPMs
22 psi at 6000 RPMs

These turbos are on the small side IMO for 3.0L displacement but will give you very good boost response even for a single scroll T4 turbine housing.

More info on the 2JZ-GTE engine: http://www.jdmspecengines.com/toyota-engines/jz-series/2jz-gte.html


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Ok that's what I figured. Choke up top:/ What about the s360sxe. It's 5mm bigger with a much larger turbine it'll flow more than I'm looking for but will it be efficient at 400 to 500 hp?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Ok that's what I figured. Choke up top:/ What about the s360sxe. It's 5mm bigger with a much larger turbine it'll flow more than I'm looking for but will it be efficient at 400 to 500 hp?


Let me check into that.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Ok that's what I figured. Choke up top:/ What about the s360sxe. It's 5mm bigger with a much larger turbine it'll flow more than I'm looking for but will it be efficient at 400 to 500 hp?


Yes, definitely more efficient for 400 to 500 WHP. Below is the S300 SX-E 62mm turbo which is the smallest of the S300 SX-E series turbos offered by BW. It has a 5mm larger compressor wheel inducer.










For consistency, I marked a vertical line at 65 lbs. of air per minute or 556 WHP on 3.0L displacement. As you can see, this line intersects the higher efficiency islands in the center of the map. According to the compresssor map, you will lose about 400 RPMs in spoolup. However, you will still get very good boost response on 3.0L displacement and better, more efficient, flow up top for your power goals.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Great. I figured nearly 500rpm loss before boost but it'll be less hot air so that's good Any clue on which AR housing to get? Smallest is .88SS, .91TS, 1.00TS, and 1.15TS. They all seem huge:/


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Great. I figured nearly 500rpm loss before boost but it'll be less hot air so that's good Any clue on which AR housing to get? Smallest is .88SS, .91TS, 1.00TS, and 1.15TS. They all seem huge:/


You can afford to go with a smaller A/R since your goal is quicker spool over maxing out the turbo. Also, TS will gain you back 300 to 400 RPMs if you go with a short runner-style exhaust manifold. So, my recommendation is definitely the 0.91 TS or 1.00 TS turbine housing with short runner divided manifold.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

You can afford to go with a smaller A/R since your goal is quicker spool over maxing out the turbo. Also, TS will gain you back 300 to 400 RPMs if you go with a short runner-style exhaust manifold. So, my recommendation is definitely the 0.91 TS or 1.00 TS turbine housing with short runner divided manifold.[/QUOTE]

Great stuff. Thanks a ton for the info. Really helpful


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Great stuff. Thanks a ton for the info. Really helpful


:thumbup: Glad to help.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

There's a new 67mm turbo from Garrett that is capable of 600 HP on pump/race gas and over 700 HP on Ethanol according to my calculations. It's the new G25-660. Below is the compressor map overlaid with 2.0L displacement (2008 CC's).










As you can see, it's capable of about 600 HP at P2/P1=2.9 or about 27.5 psi at 7200 RPMs at 2.0L displacement. Compare that to the second generation GTX2867R which is capable of about 500 HP at P2/P1=2.4 or about 20 psi at 7200 RPMs.










Notice how the surge lines (left side of the map) are basically the same for the G25-660 and the second generation GTX2867R. That means that you can expect similar spoolup times with both turbocharges. But... you gain an additional 100 HP up top with 7.5 psi more boost at 7200 RPMs. That is, my friends, yet another game changer from Garrett.

Here's a link to more information on this turbo.










EDIT: Here's the main overview page for the new G-Series turbos. Apparently, they developed a new turbine wheel which is ultra efficient similar to the GTX3584RS but in the smaller 54mm size.

NOTE: I'll have to go back and re-host all the stupid broken links on this thread from photobucket at some point.


----------



## brwmogazos (Oct 12, 2011)

FFS...i only installed my GTX3067R two days ago LOL.....


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brwmogazos said:


> FFS...i only installed my GTX3067R two days ago LOL.....


LOL. Makes me want to upgrade my first generation GTX2867R.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is the new G25-660 67mm turbo compared to the second generation GTX3071R which is a 71mm turbo on 2.0L displacement (2008 CC's).










As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 60 lbs. of air per minute or about 600 HP. However, the G25-660 can produce this output at 7200 RPMs and P2/P1=2.9 or about 27.5 psi. Whereas the second generation GTX3071R must rev to 8200 RPMs and P2/P1=2.55 or 22.5 psi on 2.0L displacement. Considering that the new G25-660 has a slightly better surge line (left side of the map) and can produce about the same output at the second generation GTX3071R but at a lower RPM and slightly higher boost, I prefer this turbo over the second generation GTX3071R for the 550 to 600 HP range.


----------



## cuprafan (Aug 26, 2017)

:wave:
nice work mainstayinc like this new turbo to the G25-550 and ^^ 
(my new engine that I like to build my first intentions where a low compresion and high boost the gtx3071r )
but now I would over think this and gett one off this new garretts 

do you have a good advice 
thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cuprafan said:


> :wave:
> nice work mainstayinc like this new turbo to the G25-550 and ^^
> (my new engine that I like to build my first intentions where a low compresion and high boost the gtx3071r )
> but now I would over think this and gett one off this new garretts
> ...


My recommendations:

350 to 400 HP range:
First Gen. GTX2860R

400 to 450 HP range:
First Gen. GTX2863R
Second Gen. GTX2860R

450 to 500 HP range:
First Gen GTX2867R
Second Gen. GTX2867R
G25-550

500 to 600 HP range:
Second Gen. GTX3071R
G25-660

I do not recommend the first generation GTX3071R as that turbo tends to be laggy on 1.8L or 2.0L displacement. Also, I think 9.0:1 compression is a good compromise on higher boost applications. I run 9.0:1 Mahle pistons at 29 psi on pump/race gas with great results on 2.1L with my first generation GTX2867R.

The new G25-660 is a great choice at least on paper. It will be interesting to see if people get the same results on the dyno that are predicted by the compressor map. Also, there are some additional G-Series models that are coming soon. That will be very exiciting. Hopefully, Garrett releases some larger options in the G-Series model line. Not that 600 HP is anything to sneeze at with the G25-660. Also, the 660 HP rating for the G25-660 is a little over-rated in my opinion.

EDIT: I started the process of re-hosting all of the images in the thread. It will take some time.


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

I just put my 2867 gen 2 on my 1.8 Audi tt mk1 

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

djpadelis said:


> I just put my 2867 gen 2 on my 1.8 Audi tt mk1
> 
> Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


How's your spoolup? I'm curious to see a dyno with the new second generation GTX2867R.


----------



## cuprafan (Aug 26, 2017)

hello thanks again mainstayinc
oke gtx gen2 3071R or G25-660 for easy 500hp 
would you use the smalport head "would it be to restricted for the turbo"or the AEB head 
a very good intercooler is on my list 

and my purpose is not to use race gas or to high octane gasoline thats why I would choose 
to lowerring the compresion a bit

thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cuprafan said:


> hello thanks again mainstayinc
> oke gtx gen2 3071R or G25-660 for easy 500hp
> would you use the smalport head "would it be to restricted for the turbo"or the AEB head
> a very good intercooler is on my list
> ...


I would recommend the large port head for anything above 6500 RPMs. The small port head becomes restrictive after 6500 RPMs according to my calculations. Here is an interesting discussion about the AWP versus AEB Head. Check out post #38 on page 2 of this thread where I compare the AWP, AEB and ABF head. After working through the numbers, I decided to go with the large port AEB head for my newest project.

Both of those turbos can make 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP fairly easily according to the compressor maps. I plotted two lines that intersect at P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi and 50 lbs. of air per minute at around 6500 RPMs. So, in theory, you could make 500 HP at around 6500 RPMs using the small port head without too much restriction. However, in practice, you will have to run higher boost or increase your engine speed above 6500 RPMs to achieve 500 HP since you do not have perfect intercooling. In that case, I would recommend the large port head to avoid restriction issues. Although the small port head wouldn't be too bad in the 6500 to 7200 RPM range.


----------



## cuprafan (Aug 26, 2017)

hello mainstayinc :thumbup: your great thanks for info and link

I would keep the small P heads and check port matching intake and polisch the intake ports
and would buy new camshafts for it

what did you mean whit this text
> since you do not have perfect intercooling. In that case, I would recommend the large port head to avoid restriction issues<

would buy the garrett 600hp intercooler


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cuprafan said:


> hello mainstayinc :thumbup: your great thanks for info and link
> 
> I would keep the small P heads and check port matching intake and polisch the intake ports
> and would buy new camshafts for it
> ...


The air flow numbers on the compressor maps are corrected to ambient temperature (70 F or 21 C). To achieve 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP at P2/P1 = 2.7 or 25 psi at 6500 RPMs, you would have to cool your intake charge to ambient temperature. For anything above ambient temperature, you would have to increase boost or engine speed to achieve the same mass flow rate. Remember, warm air is less dense than cool air. It's the mass of air flow that determines power, not volume.

For example, if your intake charge is 45 C (113 F) after your intercooler, you can calculate your adjusted boost pressure as follows:

Take intake temperature in Celsius and add 273.15 to get degrees Kelvin: 45 + 273.15 = 318.15 K
Divide your intake temperature in degrees Kelvin by 294.15 (21 C or ambient temperature): 318.15/294.15 = 1.08
Multiply this ratio by the absolute pressure from the compressor map (25 psi + 14.7): 1.08 x 39.7 psi = 42.88.
Subtract 14.7 from the absolute pressure to get boost pressure: 42.88 - 14.7 = 28 psi.

So, you would have to run 28 psi at 6500 RPMs to achieve the same 50 lbs. of air per minute with an inlet temperature of 45 C. Here's a link to an article that deals with air density and intercooler efficiency. However, they use degrees Rankine which is the farenheit absolute temperature scale. Whereas I used degrees Kelvin which is the Celsius absolute temperature scale. Both scales work just fine.

Likewise if you run 25 psi with an inlet temperature of 45 C, then you would have to increase your engine speed above 6500 RPMs to achieve the same mass flow rate. Take the same ratio above and multiply by 6500 RPMs from the compressor map. 1.08 x 6500 = 7020 RPMs. That is why I recommended the large port head since you have to rev above 6500 RPMs.

Hope that helps.


----------



## cuprafan (Aug 26, 2017)

mainstayinc said:


> The air flow numbers on the compressor maps are corrected to ambient temperature (70 F or 21 C). To achieve 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP at P2/P1 = 2.7 or 25 psi at 6500 RPMs, you would have to cool your intake charge to ambient temperature. For anything above ambient temperature, you would have to increase boost or engine speed to achieve the same mass flow rate. Remember, warm air is less dense than cool air. It's the mass of air flow that determines power, not volume.
> 
> For example, if your intake charge is 45 C (113 F) after your intercooler, you can calculate your adjusted boost pressure as follows:
> 
> ...



hello oke nice link I am not a math scientist
but are there no tricks to compensate that high temp what I would do is ramair hood induction near turbo for the air filter 
or bigger intercooler 
like the link said and maby use bigger dia pipe after the intercooler >not to big< just thinking out load
thanks mainstayinc


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cuprafan said:


> hello oke nice link I am not a math scientist
> but are there no tricks to compensate that high temp what I would do is ramair hood induction near turbo for the air filter
> or bigger intercooler
> like the link said and maby use bigger dia pipe after the intercooler >not to big< just thinking out load
> thanks mainstayinc


You should be fine with your Garrett 600 HP intercooler and port-matched small port cylinder head. There are no tricks that I know of to compensate for higher intake temperatures other than good intercooling. You should consider running chemical intercooling since you plan to use pump gas and need to run 28 or 29 psi to achieve 500 HP with the stock rev limiter. Lower compression pistons will definitely help but I wouldn't go lower than 8.5:1 compression ratio. Also, each setup will be a little different so you have to fine tune your setup to make it work. I think 2.25 or 2.5 inch intercooler pipe is just fine in most cases. Like you said, *not too big*.


----------



## cuprafan (Aug 26, 2017)

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

I love this thread. Very informative! Some of the newer Garrett turbos are real impressive! Early spool and hold boost up top.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> I love this thread. Very informative! Some of the newer Garrett turbos are real impressive! Early spool and hold boost up top.


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I thought I would post up the compressor map for the new G25-550. Below is the G25-550 with stock displacement (1781 CC's). I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.9 or about 27.5 psi at 6500 RPMs which corresponds to 48 lbs. of air per minute or 480 HP (417 WHP).










Below is the G25-550 overlaid with the second generation GTX2860R, another 60mm turbo. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are almost identical below P2/P1=2.3 or about 19 psi. That means you can expect similar spoolup with both turbos on stock displacement. However, the G25-550 can produce an additional 75 HP up top (425 versus 500 HP). This make the G25-550 the better choice in the 60mm category.










Below is the G25-550 (BLUE) overlaid with the first (RED) and second generation (PURPLE) GTX2860R for comparison. All three are 60mm turbos.










Below is the G25-550 overlaid with the second generation GTX2867R. Both turbos are capable of about 500 HP. However, the G25-550 has a slightly better surge line (left side of map) below P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi as compared to the second generation GTX2867R. This means that you can expect better spoolup with the G25-550 (about 200 RPMs). This makes the 60mm G25-550 better IMO than the 67mm second generation GTX2867R.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

mainstayinc said:


> I thought I would post up the compressor map for the new G25-550. Below is the G25-550 with stock displacement (1781 CC's). I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.9 or about 27.5 psi at 6500 RPMs which corresponds to 48 lbs. of air per minute or 480 HP (417 WHP).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Long time no talk, nice to see your are keeping this updated.

How does this perform (rpm to rpm) on a 1.8 and 2.0 vs the 200sxe we've talked about? And wow, took garret long enough to come out with something new, I know there is a ton of work involved but man, its been a while it feels- but- could be just me.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> Long time no talk, nice to see your are keeping this updated.
> 
> How does this perform (rpm to rpm) on a 1.8 and 2.0 vs the 200sxe we've talked about? And wow, took garret long enough to come out with something new, I know there is a ton of work involved but man, its been a while it feels- but- could be just me.


Nice to hear from you! Yeah, it looks like Garrett finally put some time into designing a new series of turbine wheels. Their *evolutionary ultra-high flow G-series turbine wheel* looks like it can extract the most power out of their new 60mm and 67mm compressor wheels. 600 HP from a 67mm compressor wheel is very impressive.

The BW S200 SXE has a 76mm compressor wheel and compares more closely to the 67mm G25-660 which has a 67mm compressor wheel. Below, I overlaid the BW S200 SXE and G25-660 with 1.8L (1781 CCs) displacement. As you can see, the G25-660 has a better surge line than the BW, especially above P2.P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi. Expect the G25-660 to come on 300 to 400 RPMs sooner compared to the BW above that point. I marked a point on the compressor map corresponding to 7000 RPMs and P2/P1=3.3 or about 34 psi. At that point, the G25-660 is able to produce 58.5 lbs. of air per minute or about 585 HP on pump/race gas on stock displacement with good intercooling. Above that point, the BW S200 SXE outflows the Garret by another 40 lbs. of air per minute or about 40 HP. After all, it has a 9mm larger compressor wheel.










Below I overlaid the BW S200 SXE and G25-660 with 2.0L (2008 CCs) displacement. As you can see, the surge line comes in as low as 2000 RPMs for the G25-660. Expect stock-like spoolup with this turbo on 2.0L displacement. I marked a point on the compressor map corresponding to 6800 RPMs and P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi. At that point, the G25-660 is able to produce 59 lbs. of air per minute or about 590 HP on pump/race gas on 2.0L displacement with good intercooling. The G25-660 on 2.0L displacement is a hard combination to beat IMO for a street performance car.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

mainstayinc said:


> Nice to hear from you! Yeah, it looks like Garrett finally put some time into designing a new series of turbine wheels. Their *evolutionary ultra-high flow G-series turbine wheel* looks like it can extract the most power out of their new 60mm and 67mm compressor wheels. 600 HP from a 67mm compressor wheel is very impressive.
> 
> The BW S200 SXE has a 76mm compressor wheel and compares more closely to the 67mm G25-660 which has a 67mm compressor wheel. Below, I overlaid the BW S200 SXE and G25-660 with 1.8L (1781 CCs) displacement. As you can see, the G25-660 has a better surge line than the BW, especially above P2.P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi. Expect the G25-660 to come on 300 to 400 RPMs sooner compared to the BW above that point. I marked a point on the compressor map corresponding to 7000 RPMs and P2/P1=3.3 or about 34 psi. At that point, the G25-660 is able to produce 58.5 lbs. of air per minute or about 585 HP on pump/race gas on stock displacement with good intercooling. Above that point, the BW S200 SXE outflows the Garret by another 40 lbs. of air per minute or about 40 HP. After all, it has a 9mm larger compressor wheel.
> 
> ...


The car is for hill climb events that i am building and we are trying to keep rpm below 7000 rpm. We are after as much power as early as possible as wide as possible. We haven't decided if we are going to go 2.0 but it is very likely. As with any build there has been time and money hickups a long the way, but it is still going. 

With this in mind what is your opinion based on the maps?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> The car is for hill climb events that i am building and we are trying to keep rpm below 7000 rpm. We are after as much power as early as possible as wide as possible. We haven't decided if we are going to go 2.0 but it is very likely. As with any build there has been time and money hickups a long the way, but it is still going.
> 
> *With this in mind what is your opinion based on the maps?*


I think that the G25-660 will give you great spoolup on 2.0L and a very wide powerband below 7000 RPMs with an impressive 600 HP potential on pump/race gas. If you decide to stay with stock displacement, then the G25-550 is a great choice with a slightly better surge line.

I run a first generation GTX2867R on 2.1L displacement (2067 CCs) and basically have insta-spool even with my lower compression 9:1 Mahle pistons. I have a mountain of torque below 3000 RPMs which makes driving on the highway in 5th gear and in traffic in 1st through 3rd a lot of fun. The G25-660 has a better surge line than the first generation GTX2867R but has an extra 125 HP on top. That's a hard combination to pass up.


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

I hello again in a few days I'll Dyno my big turbo setup 2867 gen 2 
In pbc boost controller saw peak boost at 3590 rpm 2,35bar till 7500 rpm with 7800 limit. 
The turbo is perfect!! 

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

djpadelis said:


> I hello again in a few days I'll Dyno my big turbo setup 2867 gen 2
> In pbc boost controller saw peak boost at 3590 rpm 2,35bar till 7500 rpm with 7800 limit.
> The turbo is perfect!!
> 
> Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


Thanks for posting. I am very anxious to see the results of the gen 2 GTX2867R. Please post some pictures of your setup and/or dyno graph if you can.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

Any experience with electric turbos?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=831&v=LrN_mz6e4ss


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> Any experience with electric turbos?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=831&v=LrN_mz6e4ss


Wow! That's a nice Audi TT quattro. I wish they would have shown more details about the electric turbo. It takes something like 50 to 75 HP to drive a moderately sized turbocharger. So, the electric motor in that setup must be no joke. It will definitely weigh more than an exhaust turbine powered turbocharger. Also, packaging such a system might be an issue. Other than that, the electric version can probably be tuned to give you little to no lag since you get instant torque from the electric motor. The compressor wheel would still be subject to the laws of physics where the choke line is concerned. So, I wouldn't expect an electric turbocharger to have any additional top end power as compared to the turbine powered version.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Wow! That's a nice Audi TT quattro. I wish they would have shown more details about the electric turbo. It takes something like 50 to 75 HP to drive a moderately sized turbocharger. So, the electric motor in that setup must be no joke. It will definitely weigh more than an exhaust turbine powered turbocharger. Also, packaging such a system might be an issue. Other than that, the electric version can probably be tuned to give you little to no lag since you get instant torque from the electric motor. The compressor wheel would still be subject to the laws of physics where the choke line is concerned. So, I wouldn't expect an electric turbocharger to have any additional top end power as compared to the turbine powered version.


The electric turbo is just a supplement to the traditional turbo, so it doesn’t need a huge electric motor. It’s called an E biturbo. Pretty much eliminates turbo lag. That TT in the video looks awesome, thanks for sharing!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> The electric turbo is just a supplement to the traditional turbo, so it doesn’t need a huge electric motor. It’s called an E biturbo. Pretty much eliminates turbo lag. That TT in the video looks awesome, thanks for sharing!


Yes, thanks for that correction. After looking more closely at the video, it is plumbed separately into the intake tract. Also, I think the guy from Audi said it runs on a 48 volt system. Very interesting.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

mainstayinc;

What about a sequential turbo setup with modern turbos? Can you make a recommendation for the 1.8 based on all the new map data? As in lowest rpm small turbo to feed a larger turbo (obviously) that will be able to feed much more power higher up? Keeping all rpm below 7,000 rpm.

Or, in the current state of turbocharging in your opinion does it not make sense?

example;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgwpaW0O1aI

It is a gm motor, but still.

Anyhow. keep in mind this is a kill climb car. Thanks John!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> mainstayinc;
> 
> What about a sequential turbo setup with modern turbos? Can you make a recommendation for the 1.8 based on all the new map data? As in lowest rpm small turbo to feed a larger turbo (obviously) that will be able to feed much more power higher up? Keeping all rpm below 7,000 rpm.
> 
> ...


It's funny you mention a sequential turbo setup. I was going to do a sequential setup in my new project until the GTX3584RS was released. I had planned to use a GTX4202R turbo which doesn't come onto boost until 5500 to 6000 RPMs. A smaller GTX2860R or similar turbo would be used to spoolup the larger turbo. However, I decided to abandon that design for a number of reasons. First, you would have to introduce a 1-way valve in the intake tract to close off the smaller turbo once the larger turbo kicked in. That would present a flow restriction into the system. You would also have to introduce a 1-way valve into the exhaust system for the same reasons. This, combine with the difficulty of tuning a sequential turbo setup made this design unattractive. At the end of the day, I decided to go with the GTX3584RS which has a super-efficient turbine wheel which should begin to spool <4000 RPMs on 2.1L's. I also decided to go with a twin-scroll turbine housing along with a divided exhaust manifold (4+1 and 2+3 primaries) which should improve spoolup by a few hundred RPMs.

I don't think a sequential turbo setup makes sense except in a drag car application. There are plenty of turbos from the Garret line and others which will give you a 5000+ RPM powerband and be efficient up to 7000 RPMs on 1.8L's. It's just a matter of matching your displacement with the right turbo. If you decide to go with a bigger turbo and want to improve your spoolup, there are a couple of things you can do. First, you can use an 02M transmission with shorter gears that will allow you to stay within a narrower powerband. Second, you can use a quick spool valve which is popular in the diesel world (see below). That would require you to use an undivided exhaust manifold with a twin-scroll turbine housing.










You can also combine super-charging and turbo charging together like the newer, smaller VW/Audi engines. However, that would create more plumbing challenges. Lastly, there is, of course, nitrous which can be used to spoolup a large turbo or top off a small turbo. I will be using the latter option in my GTX3584RS street car application.

EDIT: Quick spool valve comparison.


----------



## Nikitas_6rs (Dec 31, 2017)

Dear mainstayinc hope you are doing well. After going through almost all your posts I have to say that I am really impressed from your level of knowledge and professionalism. Excellent really!!!!

Kindly I would like to ask your opinion on selecting turbocharger for my new built.

Evo 6rs
Bore 85.5 with Carrillo pistons 9.5 compression 
Stroke 88 Manley billet crank shaft
LR 156 Manley I turbo tuff rods
Ported valve head with HKS stage 2 cams
Ported intake manifold with 70 tb
Tubular exhaust manifold with external waste gate 
AEM series 2 ecu

My plan is to use the car for track days and also have some fun on the streets.
Possible options 
G25-660
GTX3071gen2
GTX3076gen2
Open to any other suggestions 

I would really appreciate it if you could provide rpm spooling for each option and max rpm out put. Reving the engine high for my set up will not be a problem.

Thank you in advance for your guidance and support 

Happy new year 

Nikitas


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nikitas_6rs said:


> Dear mainstayinc hope you are doing well. After going through almost all your posts I have to say that I am really impressed from your level of knowledge and professionalism. Excellent really!!!!
> 
> Kindly I would like to ask your opinion on selecting turbocharger for my new built.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your interest! Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the second generation GTX3071R. As you can see, both turbos are quite similar with the G25-660 spooling several hundred RPMs sooner and having a few more HP up top. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 2.95 or about 28 psi at 7000 RPMs for the G25-660 on 2021CC displacement. That will give you a healthy 4500+ RPM powerband on your setup and max out the G25-660 at around 59 lbs. of air per minute or 590 HP (or 490 WHP on an AWD setup). You can expect this turbo to start to spool between 2200 and 2500 RPMs at your displacement.










I would also seriously consider the second generation GTX3076R at your displacement. Below, I overlaid the second generation GTX3076R with 2021CC displacement. As you can see, this turbo is capable of 65 lbs. or air per minute or 650 HP (540 WHP on an AWD setup) at P2/P1= 3.2 or about 32 psi. The second generation GTX3076R will spoolup about 500 to 600 RPMs later than the G25-660 but will give you 60 to 75 more HP up top. Considering the fact that you have a ported cylinder head, stage 2 intake cams, a tubular exhaust manifold etc., that will shift your powerband upward. That makes the second generation GTX3076R a better fit if you are willing to give up some low end boost for more top end power. 










You can gain some of the spoolup back and have healthier mid-range power if you switch to a divided exhaust manifold and twin scroll turbine housing. Below is a link to Garret's new Ni-Resist line of twin scroll turbine housings and a dyno comparison between single scroll and twin scroll.

https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=tp&Product_Code=ATP-HSG-211&Category_Code=NGH










I would also seriously consider the EFR 7670 which already comes with a twin scroll turbine housing as an option from the factory. As you can see, the EFR 7670 will spoolup 200 to 300 RPMs sooner than the second generation GTX3076R but wont have as much top end. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.4 or about 35 PSI at 6500 RPMs on 2021CC displacement.










Make sure your intercooling is up to spec.


----------



## Nikitas_6rs (Dec 31, 2017)

Thank you very much for your fast response. At this stage the 3076 gen2 looks very attractive indeed! 
What do you think will be the power band with single scroll? Considering that will start spooling at 3000rpm will I have full boost at 3800rpm? At the track rpm will always be higher than 4000 so I don't think this will be an issue. Will it be capable of pushing the car up to 8500 or 9000rpm? giving a clean 4500rpm+ usable power band? 
I was thinking that turbine housing should not be bigger than 0.82 for my cc but twin scroll set up is 1.01 will this be ok?
Currently I am using a front mount big intercooler with 3" piping.

Thanks 
Nikitas


----------



## brwmogazos (Oct 12, 2011)

mainstayinc said:


> Sorry. I must have missed your post. Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 and the second generation GTX2867R with stock 1.8L displacement (1781cc's). As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 500 HP. However, the second generation GTX2867R has a much better surge line above P2/P1= 2.0 or about 14.5 psi.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just for the fan of it looking at your GTX2867-2867 gen 2 map on a stock stroke-bore engine its seems that my GTX3067R spools similar to what is displayed by the 2867R map shifted to the right a bit (few hundred rpm)

Still breaking in my clutch so i need a few weeks to install bigger injectors, second in line fuel pump and completely new tune so that we can compare how the 67mm Gen 1 compressor performs in my current setup.






For now on a top gear (5th 02J box) pull the 3067 pushes 0.5bar @ 2600rpm and climbs up to wg spring pressure (1.1bar spring) @ 3200rpm.
For me its looking good so far for a 60mm turbine but still i need to see what boost levels i can reach throughout the rev range when i re tune the engine.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brwmogazos said:


> Just for the fan of it looking at your GTX2867-2867 gen 2 map on a stock stroke-bore engine its seems that my GTX3067R spools similar to what is displayed by the 2867R map shifted to the right a bit (few hundred rpm)
> 
> Still breaking in my clutch so i need a few weeks to install bigger injectors, second in line fuel pump and completely new tune so that we can compare how the 67mm Gen 1 compressor performs in my current setup.
> 
> ...


That's very interesting. It's nice to see that the 30-series turbine doesn't hurt spoolup too much on the GTX3067R. 0.5 bar at 2600 RPMs is a very good result. Thanks for sharing and please feel free to post any more results here.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nikitas_6rs said:


> Thank you very much for your fast response. At this stage the 3076 gen2 looks very attractive indeed!
> What do you think will be the power band with single scroll? *Considering that will start spooling at 3000rpm will I have full boost at 3800rpm? *At the track rpm will always be higher than 4000 so I don't think this will be an issue.


It's hard to say. According to the compressor map you should start to see positive boost just before 3000 RPMs. However, with a ported cylinder head, hot cams and a tubular exhaust manifold, positive boost will come on a few hundred RPMs later. For the purpose of analysis, I usually allow 1000 to 1500 RPMs from the surge line (left side of map) to the time full boost comes on. So, in your case, I would estimate full boost between 4000 to 4500 RPMs. It also depends on how aggressive your tune is and how *hot* those cams are. Also, turbine A/R will obviously effect spoolup.



Nikitas_6rs said:


> *Will it be capable of pushing the car up to 8500 or 9000rpm? giving a clean 4500rpm+ usable power band?*


Yes. You can definitely push the second generation GTX3076R on 2.0L displacement up to 9000 RPMs. However, you can only gain an additional 25 HP *in real terms* between 7000 and 9200 RPMs as the choke line becomes vertical. Below I marked a second line corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi and 9200 RPMs. As you can see, power increases from 65 lbs. per minute to about 67.5 between 7000 and 9200 RPMs. Also, good intercooling becomes more important past 7000 RPMs as you push the turbo up to its limit. So, to answer your question, you could potentially have a very nice 4500+ powerband between 4000 and 8500 or 4500 and 9000 RPMs as long as your intercooling system is up to the task.












Nikitas_6rs said:


> *I was thinking that turbine housing should not be bigger than 0.82 for my cc but twin scroll set up is 1.01 will this be ok?
> *Currently I am using a front mount big intercooler with 3" piping.
> 
> Thanks
> Nikitas


That sounds about right.


----------



## Nikitas_6rs (Dec 31, 2017)

Thank you very much for answering all my queries. 
Next couple of weeks the engine built will be completed and start the break in period. I will post some videos just to keep you updated and later surely share the dyno results for further discussion

Cheers 
Nikitas


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nikitas_6rs said:


> Thank you very much for answering all my queries.
> Next couple of weeks the engine built will be completed and start the break in period. I will post some videos just to keep you updated and later surely share the dyno results for further discussion
> 
> Cheers
> Nikitas


Yes, please post any updates. Looking forward to videos etc.


----------



## Lenge84 (Mar 20, 2018)

Hey mainstayinc i would need your Knowledge

I would like to ask your opinion on selecting turbocharger for my new built.

Golf 1.8T AGU Big Port
Bore 81.5 with Wiseco and 8.2 compression
Stroke Stock
IE Intake Manifold
Custom Manifold with extern MVS Wastegate

I only use the Car on the streets, I'm from Germany so my options a only 100 and 102 Octane Fuel. I'd like to Reach 5xxhp on the Crank with a good Spool

Possible options
G25-660 0.92ar
GTX3071gen2 Tial 0.82ar


I would be really happy if you could tell me rpm spooling for each option and max rpm/hp out put or how i reach my HP Goals. I would like to Rev 7500

Very big thx you would help me very much! And sorry for my bad english!

Matthias


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received an email from Matthias in Germany.

[quote="Lenge84']Hey,

i'm Matthias from Germany i read your compressor map threat in votex forum, sorry for my bad english. i'd have an question, i'm building a golf mk2 with 1.8t and want to have 5xxhp on crank. My 2 options would be gtx3071r gen2 with tial 0.82ar and g25 660 with 0.92ar, can you make a compairision and tell me what spool i'd have to expect? Bore are 81,5mm pistons, 1800ccm and i can only use 100 or 102 octane! Bigport Head!
would be very nice to hear from you!

Greats
Matthias
[/quote]

Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3071R and the G25-660 with 1803CC's displacement. As you can see, both turbos are nearly identical in terms of surge line and maximum corrected air flow with the G25-660 having a slightly better surge line and more potential up top. The 0.92 A/R housing is the largest offered for the G25-660 while the 0.82 A/R housing is the middle housing TiAL offers for the GTX3071R. That will shift the GTX3071R a few hundred RPMs to the left and bring it closer to the G25-660's surge line. These turbos are virtually identical IMO and either one would make a great choice for 500 crank HP.










For 500 crank HP, I would suggest a boost target of P2/P1=3.25 or about 33 psi at 6000 RPMs or P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi at 7000 RPMs for either turbo. Add 2 to 3 psi if your intercooling is less than ideal. As far as spoolup, you can expect to see positive boost starting around 2500 RPMs with maximum boost at around 3500 to 3800 RPMs at 1803CC displacement.


----------



## Lenge84 (Mar 20, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I received an email from Matthias in Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you very much mainstayinc so you say i can use both turbos they spool same so there is none to prefere?





Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Lenge84 said:


> Thank you very much mainstayinc so you say i can use both turbos they spool same so there is none to prefere?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes. Based on the compressor maps and the turbine housings you mentioned, both should spool about the same. However, if I had the choice, I would choose the G25-660.


----------



## Lenge84 (Mar 20, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes. Based on the compressor maps and the turbine housings you mentioned, both should spool about the same. However, if I had the choice, I would choose the G25-660.


You would choose it because of more top end right  ? I'm bit surprised about fast spool of both because i had to choose 8,2:1 comp ratio. I will see which Turbo is available faster here in Germany


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Lenge84 said:


> You would choose it because of more top end right  ? I'm bit surprised about fast spool of both because i had to choose 8,2:1 comp ratio. I will see which Turbo is available faster here in Germany


Yes, more top end. Also, it has a smaller 67mm compressor wheel as compared to the 71mm. So, it has a lighter rotating mass and can theoretically spool quicker. I have a first generation GTX2867R on 2067 CCs and it spools instantly. I recently replaced my 9.5:1 JE pistons with 9.0:1 Mahle's and did not notice any change in spoolup. I think with a large port AGU head and 8.2:1 compression ratio, you may see a slight penalty in spoolup as compared to a small port with higher CR. Add maybe 150 to 300 RPMs to the surge line.


----------



## EZ30R (Mar 30, 2018)

Hi mainstayinc, 

I came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! Was hoping to ask for your advice with my own turbo setup. 

I have a 3.0L H6 engine, forged, closed deck, springs and nicely flowing heads, with stock cams, redline is around 7500. 

The purpose for the car is as a daily, with maybe an occasional track visit. Power goal is - 450-550hp at all 4 wheels. Fuel it's going to use is 98 ron, pump fuel, so I'm guessing it'll be limited to 22 psi of boost safely, without needing E85?

Turbo choices are:
EFR7670 1.05 A/r (single turbo, twinscroll)
EFR8374 1.05 A/r (single turbo, twinscroll)
EFR6258 0.64 A/r (twin turbo, single scroll)
G25 550 in either 0.49 or 0.72 A/r (twin turbo, single scroll)

The exhaust ports are on the bottom, so a low mount twin setup will have much shorter runners from the engine to the turbo. Single EFR will have much longer runners, plenty more heat loss, as well as longer intercooler piping. 

I'm estimating we only need a 70lbs/min turbo for my goals, so the twin turbo setup might be a little overkill? 

Which setup do you think will be the best responsive, since it's a street car? And what do you think is the best all rounder - response vs power?

Thank you!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EZ30R said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> 
> I came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! Was hoping to ask for your advice with my own turbo setup.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your interest! I'll post up my opinion with some analysis in the next day or two.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Overview of Subaru's boxer engine technology:






The 3.0L H6 engine (EZ30D) has a bore of 89.2mm and stroke of 80mm for a total displacement of 2999.6 CC's. From Wikipedia:



Wikipedia said:


> *Subaru EZ engine*
> 
> The (*Japanese: Subaru EZ series*) was introduced in 1999 in the Japanese market, in the Subaru Outback, and in 2000 in the United States market, also in the Outback. It is a flat-six, 24-valve, quad-cam engine with an aluminium block and heads. It is available in EZ30 and EZ36 variants. Though the second iteration of the EZ30D used from 2003 to 2009 was heavily updated from the early EZ30D used from 2001 to 2003, Subaru continued to identify it as EZ30D. "EZ30R" is a false engine code often used on the Internet for the later EZ30, but Subaru has never used it as an official engine code.[11] All EZ-series engines use dual timing chains and feature coil-on-plug ignition.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the EFR7670 [RED] and the closest equivalent from Garrett the second generation GTX3076R [BLUE] with 3.0L displacement. As you can see, both turbos are capable of around 650 HP with a surge line (left side of map) below 2000 RPMs. This means that you will start to see boost on or below 2000 RPMs on 3.0L displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 5200 RPMs for 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP on pump/race gas with good intercooling. Add 2 to 3 psi or a few hundred RPMs if your intercooling is less than ideal.










Overall, I think this is a great match to the 3.0L H6 engine and will give you an additional 100 HP up top if you decide to push this turbo to its limit. Also, since the firing order on the 3.0L H6 engine alternates between opposing cylinder banks (1-6-3-2-5-4), you get the maximum separation between exhaust events (240 degrees). This arrangement lends itself very well to a twin-scroll turbo setup. The tradeoff, as you mentioned, is the long runner length needed to connect both cylinder banks into the twin-scroll turbine housing. However, I think that can be mitigated somewhat with heat wrap and modest exhaust pipe diameter.











EDIT: Below I overlaid the EFR 8374 [RED] and the closest equivalent from Garrett the GTX3584RS [BLUE] on 3.0L. The EFR is capable of around 80 lbs. of air per minute or 800 HP while the Garrett, with its updated turbine wheel, is capable of 90 lbs. of air per minute or 900 HP. The surge line (left side of map) for both turbos is around 2500 RPMs at P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi. Both turbos provide more than enough air flow to meet your 550 HP goal at 22 psi. In fact, both turbos will be operating at maximum efficiency at this point. If you are willing to trade off about 500 to 700 RPMs in spoolup but gain an additional 150 to 250 HP over the EFR and Garrett 76mm turbos, then these are a nice option.










Please note that Garrett/ATP Turbo offers a T3 and T4 twin scroll option for the GTX358RS which will extend your surge line to the left. You could gain an additional 300 to 500+ RPMs in spoolup depending on your manifold design while not sacrificing anything up top. Garrett also offers the T3 twinscroll housing for the GTX3076R/GTX3576R turbo(s) I mentioned above.

More to come on other turbos...


----------



## EZ30R (Mar 30, 2018)

Thank you John, that is amazing! 

I'd like to add in a few extra details, which will hopefully paint a clearer picture. 

Our H6 engine has the compression lowered from 10.7:1 to 8.5:1, so we can run more boost safely - I'm not sure if that will affect your graphs a little?

You're exactly correct about the ideal firing order of the H6, to suit the twin scroll (or twin turbo) application - so if we go to a single turbo, it would definitely be a twinscroll. After your analysis, it definitely makes me want to get the EFR8374 (for the titanium wheel's response), if we go to a single. 

In terms of location and routing, the biggest question in my mind is - the single or twin turbo? I've linked some photos below from other people's setups. You can see that the exhaust manifold for a single turbo is easily 4 times longer than with the twin turbos. On top of that - the intercooler piping with the single is also at least 2 times the length of the twins. 

In terms of responsiveness and spool due to volume difference (not to mention the heat loss/enthalpy) - it should be adding a very noticeable difference, and costing a bunch of torque. And if twin turbos are inherently more responsive than a large single...I'm wondering just how much more response we might get with the twins overall? Not to mention that the twins will flow more air than any of the singles, bar the GTX3584rs. 

And finally, I'm really keen to hear your opinion on the EFR Gamma-Ti 62mm turbines vs the G25 Gamma-M 54mm turbines, and if there would be a noticeable difference in response on such small turbines?

Single turbo - intercooler piping









Single scroll, single turbo exhaust manifold









Twinscroll, single turbo (EFR8374) exhaust manifold









Twinscroll, single turbo (EFR8374) exhaust manifold









Twin turbo (GT2860) location and intercooler piping


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

Hello again, 

Look my Gtx 2867 Gen 2 at high boost 2,35 bar peak 
https://youtu.be/1TU7iuqBHqk

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EZ30R said:


> Thank you John, that is amazing!
> 
> I'd like to add in a few extra details, which will hopefully paint a clearer picture.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the pictures. Now that I see how long the primaries are for the twin-scroll setup, I definitely think that you will lose boost response. I posted some graphs in another thread showing a 1000 RPM improvement going from a long-runner divided manifold to a short-runner divided manifold. So, I definitely think you will lose a lot of the benefits of a twin-scroll setup due to the long runner length necessary on the H6 boxer engine. I recommend a twin-turbo setup in this case. I will post up some comparisons in the next day or two. Also, dropping compression ratio from 10.7 to 8.5 will definitely effect the efficiency of the setup when you are off-boost or in low boost situations. It's hard to say how much since there are other factors like camshaft timing etc. which come into play. I went from 9.5:1 JE pistons to 9.0 Mahle pistons and didn't notice any change in spoolup or boost response.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

djpadelis said:


> Hello again,
> 
> Look my Gtx 2867 Gen 2 at high boost 2,35 bar peak
> https://youtu.be/1TU7iuqBHqk
> ...


Love it! Looks like you have nice power all the way to redline.:thumbup:


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

djpadelis said:


> Hello again,
> 
> Look my Gtx 2867 Gen 2 at high boost 2,35 bar peak
> https://youtu.be/1TU7iuqBHqk
> ...


That’s awesome! What exhaust manifold are you running and what rpm does boost start to hit?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EZ30R said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> 
> I came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! Was hoping to ask for your advice with my own turbo setup.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the EFR6258 [RED] and the closest equivalent from Garrett the first generation GTX2863R [BLUE] with 1.5L displacement (3.0L/2) for a twin-turbo setup. As you can see, both turbos are capable of around 440HP. The surge line (left side of map) for the EFR6258 at P2/p1=2.5 or 22 psi is around 2400 RPMs while the GTX2863R comes in at 3000 RPMs. This means that you can expect the EFR to start to spoolup 600 RPMs sooner than the GTX turbo at that boost level. The EFR6258 will give you good response in a twin-turbo setup so long as your exhaust primaries are kept reasonably short. This twin-turbo setup is capable of 88 lbs. of air per minute or 880 HP with good intercooling.










EDIT: Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-550 with 1.5L displacement for a twin-turbo setup. This turbo has a surge line of about 2600 RPMs at P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi or possibly better with the smaller 0.49 A/R or 0.72 A/R turbine housing(s). This turbo is capable of just under 1000 HP on a twin-turbo setup with pump/race gas and good intercooling. Since the G25-550 comes in regular and reverse rotation, exhaust primaries and intercooler piping can be made symmetrical in a twin-turbo setup. I highly recommend this turbo if you decide to go with a twin-turbo setup.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^^^bump for EDIT above.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

I love reading about these different turbos! 

So with 1.8l displacement the EFR 6258 should hit 22psi earlier than 2400 rpm and still be capable of 440 crank hp?
And the G25-550 1.8l should spool 200ish rpm later, but be closer to 500hp?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> I love reading about these different turbos!
> 
> So with 1.8l displacement the EFR 6258 should hit 22psi earlier than 2400 rpm and still be capable of 440 crank hp?
> And the G25-550 1.8l should spool 200ish rpm later, but be closer to 500hp?


Well, in the above example, on 1.5L the EFR 6258 should start to spoolup at around 2400 RPMs. Add another 500 to 1000 RPMs to achieve full spoolup after that. So, I would say full spool between 2900 and 3400 RPMs with a maximum output of 440 HP on pump/race gas and even more with E85. On a twin-turbo setup, double that number.

For the G25-550, expect full spoolup between 3100 and 3600 RPMs on 1.5L with a maximum output of 500 HP on pump/race gas.

Glad you like the comparisons!


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

ticketed2much said:


> That’s awesome! What exhaust manifold are you running and what rpm does boost start to hit?


I have full 76mm exhaust from Downpipe, and the spool is for 3600 full boost. 
From 50-55 km I have won cars more than 550 hp 

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Well, in the above example, on 1.5L the EFR 6258 should start to spoolup at around 2400 RPMs. Add another 500 to 1000 RPMs to achieve full spoolup after that. So, I would say full spool between 2900 and 3400 RPMs with a maximum output of 440 HP on pump/race gas and even more with E85. On a twin-turbo setup, double that number.
> 
> For the G25-550, expect full spoolup between 3100 and 3600 RPMs on 1.5L with a maximum output of 500 HP on pump/race gas.
> 
> Glad you like the comparisons!


Aah Gotcha. Looking for a turbo with early spool that can hit about 400whp. Looks like either would be good.




djpadelis said:


> I have full 76mm exhaust from Downpipe, and the spool is for 3600 full boost.
> From 50-55 km I have won cars more than 550 hp
> 
> Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk



That’s awesome!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Aah Gotcha. Looking for a turbo with early spool that can hit about 400whp. *Looks like either would be good*.
> 
> That’s awesome!


Have no doubt about it, the EFR 6258 and G25-550 are nice turbos. As a general rule, add 500 RPMs to the surge line for each 1 bar boost +/- 100 RPMs.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

John, have you done any of the testing bfor these turbos via your math on the new ea888 2.0 motors? Or is that just a displacement change in the math alone?

I am trading in the TT for a 7.5r honestly after all the work done the new 7.5r is so damn good I just don't find a point in modding the old 1.8t in comparison anymore than I already have. Also trading in my daily Honda, which I kinda hate- it's the 2015 Honda "doesn't" Fit.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

Hi mainstayinc,,

i´ve stumbled across this thread when searching information on a good charger setup and your way of getting through the compressor maps is amazing. I have been looking into them for quite a while and the problem is i can´t find a charger which suits my needs. I was hoping you may have a tip or two.

Specs: 3L inline six cylinder engine with 10.2:1, 84mm bore and 89.6mm stroke. The engine is called M54B30 and its a BMW unit with Dual Vanos (variable camshaft both inlet and outlet). The engine in it´s stock state seems pretty long lasting even with quite a bit of boost, 600hp have been done on all stock. I´m using 110octane LPG as fuel.

However, my aim is a bit different. Maybe you know the N55B30 in the BMW 135i/335i with its single twinscroll charger and that impressive torque?! Thats what i´m aiming for, just a bit more top end power. So what i would like to acchieve is ~400hp (engine hp would be ok), but as fast as spool up as possible. Due to the engine bay being really tight, i can´t use twin turbos and i would prefer a internal wastegate. I can build a twinscroll header with short runner lenghts, thats no big deal. 

Would you happen to have any idea on what charger to pick?

kind regards
Daniel


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

16V-Sauger said:


> Hi mainstayinc,,
> 
> i´ve stumbled across this thread when searching information on a good charger setup and your way of getting through the compressor maps is amazing. I have been looking into them for quite a while and the problem is i can´t find a charger which suits my needs. I was hoping you may have a tip or two.
> 
> ...


The stock fuel system cant handle 400 on that motor for long, the di injectors go. All you need to do is get better injectors and use the OEM turbos on that setup. That engine already is at 330, or 330 with over boost. You don't need a different turbo with that setup. Going single will slow that engine down, a lot. You are asking the wrong questions bin the wrong place. All this is covered on that motor in the bimmer forums... All of it. I spent maybe 1 min in my, just waking up mode, of remembering my race team's research on that motor.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

LilNipper said:


> The stock fuel system cant handle 400 on that motor for long, the di injectors go. All you need to do is get better injectors and use the OEM turbos on that setup. That engine already is at 330, or 330 with over boost. You don't need a different turbo with that setup. Going single will slow that engine down, a lot. You are asking the wrong questions bin the wrong place. All this is covered on that motor in the bimmer forums... All of it. I spent maybe 1 min in my, just waking up mode, of remembering my race team's research on that motor.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I´m running the 230hp M54B30 engine which is NA ;-) I tried to match the N55 charger, but i would have to delete my AC (which won´t happen!) and the stock single charger (N54 twin turbo, N55 single turbo) isn´t able to push 400hp. So i´m looking for one that has a bit more power potential without sacrificing to much of the incredible spool.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

You are going to have to get into the block 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LilNipper said:


> John, have you done any of the testing bfor these turbos via your math on the new ea888 2.0 motors? Or is that just a displacement change in the math alone?
> 
> I am trading in the TT for a 7.5r honestly after all the work done the new 7.5r is so damn good I just don't find a point in modding the old 1.8t in comparison anymore than I already have. Also trading in my daily Honda, which I kinda hate- it's the 2015 Honda "doesn't" Fit.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


For the AE888 2.0T engine with direct injection, I would keep the displacement the same but multiply the lbs. of air per minute by 10.5 instead of 10 to calculate HP in order to reflect a 5% increase in efficiency. So, for example, if you are using the G25-660 on the 1.8T producing 50 lbs. of air per minute, then I would calculate HP by multiplying 50 x 10 to achieve 500 HP on pump/race gas. If you are using the same G25-660 on the AE888 2.0T direct injection engine, then I would calculate HP by multiplying 50 x 10.5 to achieve 525 HP. Alternatively, if you wanted 500 HP on the AE888 2.0T, then you would only have to produce 47.5 lbs. of air per minute using the G25-660.

The Golf R 7.5 is quite a nice car. Here is a review from Australia that covers the most important points:






The Golf has come a long way since I purchased my first MK2 back in 1995. It was a 1991 Wolfsburg Edition Jetta with a 1.8L 8V NA engine. The Jetta at that time was just a modified Golf chassis with a trunk. It did not even come with cup holders as I think most Germans at the time felt that a car was for driving and not eating or drinking. I don't think electric windows were even an option on the MK2 as I have only seen hand-crank windows. These days, as with the current Golf R, you have in-vehicle amenities such as a 9.2 inch infotainment screen with gesture control, 12" active info heads up display, 14 way adjustable heated seats with 3 position memory, etc.


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

mainstayinc said:


> For the AE888 2.0T engine with direct injection, I would keep the displacement the same but multiply the lbs. of air per minute by 10.5 instead of 10 to calculate HP in order to reflect a 5% increase in efficiency. So, for example, if you are using the G25-660 on the 1.8T producing 50 lbs. of air per minute, then I would calculate HP by multiplying 50 x 10 to achieve 500 HP on pump/race gas. If you are using the same G25-660 on the AE888 2.0T direct injection engine, then I would calculate HP by multiplying 50 x 10.5 to achieve 525 HP. Alternatively, if you wanted 500 HP on the AE888 2.0T, then you would only have to produce 47.5 lbs. of air per minute using the G25-660.
> 
> The Golf R 7.5 is quite a nice car. Here is a review from Australia that covers the most important points:
> 
> ...


Pretty much, I am just waiting for my oryx white r to get here. I am on a waiting list.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> Hi mainstayinc,,
> 
> i´ve stumbled across this thread when searching information on a good charger setup and your way of getting through the compressor maps is amazing. I have been looking into them for quite a while and the problem is i can´t find a charger which suits my needs. I was hoping you may have a tip or two.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your interest. I'm looking into this now and will post some information and tips in the next day or two.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> I´m running the 230hp M54B30 engine which is NA ;-) I tried to match the N55 charger, but i would have to delete my AC (which won´t happen!) and the stock single charger (N54 twin turbo, N55 single turbo) isn´t able to push 400hp. So i´m looking for one that has a bit more power potential without sacrificing to much of the incredible spool.


For a twin-scroll single turbocharger with internal wastegate, I definitely recommend a BorgWarner EFR turbo. Below is an application chart showing different horsepower ranges:










I think any turbo in the 500 to 650 HP range will give you great spoolup on 3.0L displacement using a twin-scroll setup. This includes the EFR6758, EFR 7163, EFR7064 and EFR7670. The EFR 6258 I think is just too small on 3.0L displacement and will seriously limit your top end.

Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 turbo with 3.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is around 1400 RPMs on 3.0L displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2 or about 14.5 psi at 5300 RPMs producing around 450 HP with good intercooling. Add a few hundred RPMs and/or 2 or 3 psi if your intercooling system is less than ideal. You will easily see full boost by 3000 RPMs on this setup and will give you the instant spoolup and massive torque you are looking for.










Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 turbo with 3.0L displacement. Even though this turbo has a larger compressor wheel than the EFR 6758, the surge line is less than 1200 RPMs on 3.0L displacement. This turbo is easily capable of 550 HP and will have better spoolup than the smaller EFR 6758 at least according to the compressor map.










If you are willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup but gain an extra 50 to 100 HP up top, then you might want to consider the EFR 7670. Below I overlaid the EFR 7670 turbo with 3.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge line comes in around 1500 to 1800 RPMs on 3.0L displacement. For an easy 550 HP, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 5300 RPMs.










Hope this is helpful!


----------



## EZ30R (Mar 30, 2018)

Thank you very much John! That was super helpful. 

I've just got two questions for you, if you get a chance to answer:

1. Do you think the titanium wheel of the EFR will be a better choice for a street turbo on the 6258, over the gamma M turbine on the G25 550? Titanium should be more responsive...but not sure if it makes enough difference on such small wheels. 

2. Do you think you could graph a GTX3071 (gen 1, not 2) on a 2.5L, 99.5 bore and 79mm stroke that revs to 8000rpm - that's what I have now, and it'd be great to have something to compare to in real life!

Thanks again, love your work and appreciate your help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EZ30R said:


> Thank you very much John! That was super helpful.
> 
> I've just got two questions for you, if you get a chance to answer:
> 
> ...


Sure. No problem. I'll check into that as soon as I can. As far as the titanium aluminide turbine wheel of the EFR turbo(s) versus the Mar-M super alloy of the Garrett, I don't have a lot of information. Maybe other people can chime in with their opinions. I did read, however, that even though the EFR turbine wheel is lighter than the Garrett and reduces the rotating mass of the CHRA (which ultimately allows quicker spool), the turbine blades have to be made thicker as compared to the Garrett which negatively effects flow through the turbine wheel.


----------



## EZ30R (Mar 30, 2018)

Thanks  Oh and the 2.5L is a 4cyl by the way, which you probably worked out. 

Yeah looking at some photos the blades look a fair bit thicker, but then in other photos they don't look much different. Then you have the fact that the g25 wheel is heavily scalloped and the EFR wheel is "full back" disk and a bigger diameter wheel overall - the overall moment of inertia and rotational mass really starts to climb higher than what the 50% density would suggest. 

But even if there is a 10-20% difference in MOI - I wonder how much of that difference translates into the car. It seems like everyone who has tried an EFR says that "response" is much nicer BUT that spool is not always better over other similarly sized turbos.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EZ30R said:


> Thank you very much John! That was super helpful.
> 
> I've just got two questions for you, if you get a chance to answer:
> 
> ...


Per your request, below I overlaid the first generation GTX3071R with 2.5L displacement. This turbo is known to be quite laggy on 2.0L displacement with full boost not coming on until 4000 to 4500 RPMs. On 2.5L, the situation improves with the surge line moving farther to the left by over 500 RPMs. I would expect full boost to come on between 3500 and 4000 RPMs with 2.5L displacement. Choice of turbine housing A/R and other factors will, of course, effect how fast the GTX3071R will spoolup.










The highest efficiency lines fall between 4500 and 4700 RPMs on 2.5L displacement with good intercooling. Expect maximum torque around that range +/- 100 RPMs.


----------



## Speed-Freak (Jan 9, 2001)

mainstayinc,

Would you mind doing a couple of your plots for me?

2008cc 1.8T stroker:
Borg EFR 6258
Borg SX-E S252SX-E

You have already made plots for the other turbos I am looking at.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Speed-Freak said:


> mainstayinc,
> 
> Would you mind doing a couple of your plots for me?
> 
> ...


Sure, no problem. Let me check into that.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Per your request, below is the BW S200 SXE 7070 (AKA S252 SXE) overlaid with 2.0L displacement (2008CCs). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is between 2000 and 2300 RPMs which is pretty good for a 500+HP turbo. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.9 or about 28 psi at 6000 RPMs for 500 HP; or P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6300 RPMs for 450 HP with good intercooling.










EDIT: Below is the BW EFR 6258 overlaid with 2.0L displacement (2008CCs). This would be a quick spooling turbo on 2.0L displacement with the surge line at 1500 to 1800 RPMs. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.2 or about 18 psi at 6400 RPMs for 400 HP with good intercooling.


----------



## Speed-Freak (Jan 9, 2001)

Thank you very much mainstayinc.
Unfortunately these graphs made me more indecisive.

My 2001 Jetta Wolfsberg will be my daily driver. I love the lightning fast spooling characteristic of the K03 1.8T. Top gear going down the highway, dip your toe for some passing torque. Leaving a light, careful on the throttle you can get a bit too much boost pretty easy. I want as close to that as possible with a larger than KKK series turbo. Making 500hp while still FWD is stupid but so is buying expensive turbos twice. 300hp at the motor while FWD would be plenty. Then there is the price difference with the turbos. Plus, I want to maximize off boost torque so you can more easily drive the car off boost around town for economy. I want it all! So, now reality is hitting me in the face and I have to make compromises and I am struggling.

At the moment my car has an upgraded Quattro 02M 6 speed with lightened single mass flywheel 400hp rated clutch and Raxles in it. So, car is good for whatever. My plan is to convert to AWD later when I can afford it. This will be a few years from now. Engine build now will be a FSI crank and 83mm pistons for 2008cc. At the moment I want to go full crazy on the bottom end with an IE girdle kit with the tall main caps. Just build the bottom end to withstand the abuse I know I will put it through. Like full boost low rpm highway passing, money shift boost spikes, or leaving a light in third gear. The head will also get built up. I am looking at +1mm size increase on the intake and exhaust valves but am undecided on cams. For other engines bumping up cam duration and lift can help turbo spooling without any noticeable effect on off boost driving. No idea about the 1.8T.

Stock cams, intake only, or a "street" set with more lift and duration?

K03s rebuild - $100
K03s rebuild and billet wheel - $200
BW S200 SXE S252 - $650 journal bearing
BW EFR 6258 - $1200 best everything and internal BOV
Garret G25-550 - $1900 best everything

Is the EFR 6258 worth the extra $600 over the SXE? Why would I consider the G25-550 when the EFR is just as good for me and cheaper?

I would love some feedback from everyone.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Speed-Freak said:


> Thank you very much mainstayinc.
> Unfortunately these graphs made me more indecisive.
> 
> My 2001 Jetta Wolfsberg will be my daily driver. I love the lightning fast spooling characteristic of the K03 1.8T. Top gear going down the highway, dip your toe for some passing torque. Leaving a light, careful on the throttle you can get a bit too much boost pretty easy. I want as close to that as possible with a larger than KKK series turbo. Making 500hp while still FWD is stupid but so is buying expensive turbos twice. 300hp at the motor while FWD would be plenty. Then there is the price difference with the turbos. Plus, I want to maximize off boost torque so you can more easily drive the car off boost around town for economy. I want it all! So, now reality is hitting me in the face and I have to make compromises and I am struggling.
> ...


You can always settle for a Frankenturbo kit if you want 300 HP in a stock turbo frame. However, with those engine modifications and 2.0L displacement, you can afford to go bigger without losing too much spool. I would definitely recommend the BW S252 SXE or EFR 6258 or even the EFR 6758. Come to think of it, any BW or Garrett turbo in the 60mm to 67mm compressor size will give you great spool on 2.0L displacement. My first generation GTX2867R on 2.1L gives me instant spoolup but has so much more on top. The second generation GTX2867R and the new G25-660 are even better. Don't sell yourself short. Also, stock cams are just fine IMO with stock 6500 RPM rev limit.


----------



## Frozenf10 (May 9, 2018)

Hello John!
I did surf around the web and came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! I know I’m kinda in the forum but hoping to ask for your advice with my own twin turbo setup. 

I have bmw V8 4.4 L engine, redline is around 7300rpms. Power goal is - 700-800whp to the wheels. Fuel it's going to use is 98 ron with methanol injection.
I was really looking in to new G25-660 IWG 0.92 a/r set up mainly because symmetrical in a twin-turbo setup but Garrett still haven’t released yet with internal wastegate so I decided to go with regular twin gt3582r Garrett small compressor housing 0.60 and Tial internally wastegated turbine housing 0.62 a/r
Would you mind doing a couple of your plots for me?
Thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Frozenf10 said:


> Hello John!
> I did surf around the web and came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! I know I’m kinda in the forum but hoping to ask for your advice with my own twin turbo setup.
> 
> I have bmw V8 4.4 L engine, redline is around 7300rpms. Power goal is - 700-800whp to the wheels. Fuel it's going to use is 98 ron with methanol injection.
> ...


Hey, no problem. I'll look into that and post something in the next day or two.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Frozenf10 said:


> Hello John!
> I did surf around the web and came across this thread and have been very impressed with your analysis! I know I’m kinda in the forum but hoping to ask for your advice with my own twin turbo setup.
> 
> I have bmw V8 4.4 L engine, redline is around 7300rpms. Power goal is - 700-800whp to the wheels. Fuel it's going to use is 98 ron with methanol injection.
> ...


It looks like TiAL makes an internally wastegated turbine housing for the GT28, GT30 and GT35 Garrett turbos. Too bad the G25-660 hasn't been released yet with reverse rotation, as that would be a killer twin-turbo setup on 4.4L and could easily support your HP goals. That leaves you with the second generation GTX3071R, GTX3076R, GTX3576R and GTX3582R with reverse rotation. Below I overlaid these turbos with 2.2L displacement (92mm bore x 82.7mm stroke x 4 cylinders) from the M62B44 or M62TUB44 BMW engines found on the E39 540i and E38 740i.

Below is the second generation GTX3071R (RED) and the G25-660 (BLUE) overlaid with 2.2L displacement. As you can see, these turbos are pretty closely matched with the surge line for the 67mm G25-660 coming in at 2000 RPMs and about 2200 RPMs for the 71mm GTX3071R. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6300 RPMs for an easy 1000 HP (870 WHP) on a symmetrical twin turbo setup with good intercooling and/or methanol injection.










Below is the second generation GTX3076R overlaid with 2.2L displacement. As you can see, the surge line for this turbo comes on at around 2600 RPMs with an additional 75 HP (150 HP on a twin turbo setup) up top as compared to the second generation GTX3071R and the G25-660 above. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7000 RPMs for an 1100 HP (955 WHP) twin turbo setup with good intercooling and/or methanol injection.










Below is the second generation GTX3582R overlaid with 2.2L displacement. The surge line ranges from 3000 to 3300 RPMs with an additional 125 HP (250 HP on a twin turbo setup) up top as compared to the second generation GTX3076R above. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 7300 RPMs for an 1400 HP (1215WHP) twin turbo setup with good intercooling and/or methanol injection.










For your goals, I think the second generation GTX3071R with reverse rotation would make a nice, quick spooling turbo with plenty of HP to grow into.


----------



## Frozenf10 (May 9, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> It looks like TiAL makes an internally wastegated turbine housing for the GT28, GT30 and GT35 Garrett turbos. Too bad the G25-660 hasn't been released yet with reverse rotation, as that would be a killer twin-turbo setup on 4.4L and could easily support your HP goals. That leaves you with the second generation GTX3071R, GTX3076R, GTX3576R and GTX3582R with reverse rotation. Below I overlaid these turbos with 2.2L displacement (92mm bore x 82.7mm stroke x 4 cylinders) from the M62B44 or M62TUB44 BMW engines found on the E39 540i and E38 740i.
> 
> Below is the second generation GTX3071R (RED) and the G25-660 (BLUE) overlaid with 2.2L displacement. As you can see, these turbos are pretty closely matched with the surge line for the 67mm G25-660 coming in at 2000 RPMs and about 2200 RPMs for the 71mm GTX3071R. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6300 RPMs for an easy 1000 HP (870 WHP) on a symmetrical twin turbo setup with good intercooling and/or methanol injection.
> 
> ...



Thank you very much John ))
I did cancel my order from Tial and definitely going to go with second gen GTX3071r ))


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Frozenf10 said:


> Thank you very much John ))
> I did cancel my order from Tial and *definitely going to go with second gen GTX3071r *))


Great choice!:thumbup:


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

Sort of a side topic here but what are the top small frame Turbos for stock displacement 1.8t? I remember the gt2860rs was top dog, but that was YEARS ago.

I'm running a f21 and just started a block build to replace my 240k mile stock motor. I'm only planning ie rods and possibly forged pistons. I like to keep my revs low and the f21 is awesome at letting me do that. But down the road I would like to look into options for a more brutal top end without too much of a bottom end loss. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mat3833 said:


> Sort of a side topic here but what are the top small frame Turbos for stock displacement 1.8t? I remember the gt2860rs was top dog, but that was YEARS ago.
> 
> I'm running a f21 and just started a block build to replace my 240k mile stock motor. I'm only planning ie rods and possibly forged pistons. I like to keep my revs low and the f21 is awesome at letting me do that. But down the road I would like to look into options for a more brutal top end without too much of a bottom end loss.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


My first "big turbo" was a GT28R which is smaller than the GT2860RS and spooled quick on stock displacement. I then stroked out motor to 2.1L and got the GTX2867R and that setup spools quicker than the GT28R. The second generation GTX2867R is even better based on how the compressor maps line up. If you want a quick spooling turbo on stock displacement without too much loss of low-end, then I would recommend the following:

First Gen. GTX2863R
Second Gen. GTX2860R
G25-550

The last option is good for almost 500 HP.


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

That's what was lookin at. I have enough fueling to support about 450hp, but unless I manage a Quattro swap I wouldn't want to go much over 350 if that. With rods and pistons I will open up the f21 and see what it can do, but i still think I'll be looking at a 28 series turbo in the future. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## adldesign (May 12, 2018)

*Hello, John!*

Hello, John! 

Greetings from Europe! Your analysis and help to people are impressive. Thank you for your help.

We are building a turbo Honda accord (Acura TSX) cl9 2.4l with a target of 300-350 horsepower at 0.5-0.7 bar. The manifold will be a log-style, short, for the most quick spool. We are building "street car". The work of the turbine is most interesting from 2500 to 5500 rpm and spooling at low rpm.

I chosing between 3071r and 200sx-e (7070)

As a result, we bought the S200sx-e 52mm wheel (7070) with AGP single scroll hausing .63 a / r. 

What do you think about our choice? Could you make analis graf for me?

Thank you for your help.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

adldesign said:


> Hello, John!
> 
> Greetings from Europe! Your analysis and help to people are impressive. Thank you for your help.
> 
> ...


Hello! Thanks for your interest. It looks like the K24A engine was used in the first generation Acura TSX here in American and the seventh generation Honda Accord in Japan and Europe. It has a bore of 87mm and stroke of 99mm for a total displacement of 2354CC's. Below is the 71mm GT3071R overlaid with 2354CC's. I marked two (2) points corresponding to P2/P1=1.5 or about 7psi (0.5 bar) and 6000 RPMs producing about 30 lbs. of air per minute or 300 HP (260 WHP); and P2/P1=1.7 or about 10 psi (0.7 bar) and 6200 RPMs producing about 35 lbs. of air per minute or 350 HP (305 WHP) with good intercooling. The surge line (left side of map) for the older technology GT3071R ranges from 1400 to 1600 RPMs for that boost level and would make for a quick-spooling setup on 2354CC's.










Below is the 70mm BW S252SX (AKA S200SX-E 7070) overlaid with 2354CC's. Again, I marked two (2) points corresponding to 0.5 bar and 0.7 bar for 30 and 35 lbs. of air per minute. The surge line (left side of map) for the BW ranges from 1300 to 1400 RPMs for that boost level and would make for an even quicker spooling setup on 2354CC's.










Either turbo would make a decent choice for your boost level and power goals.


----------



## adldesign (May 12, 2018)

Thank you very much for the analysis.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

adldesign said:


> Thank you very much for the analysis.


:thumbup:


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

Any opinions on the GT2835R-56T? I've tentatively decided on the gtx gen 2, but I'm still a year out before I actually buy the turbo. Not much info on the 2835r for some reason. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## okkim (Sep 4, 2016)

Hi mainstayinc,

Thanks for your great posts!

Could you make a comparison of dual Garrett G25-660’s and EFR 6758”s on a Audi 2.7 V6 (stroked to 3.0)?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

okkim said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> 
> Thanks for your great posts!
> 
> Could you make a comparison of dual Garrett G25-660’s and EFR 6758”s on a Audi 2.7 V6 (stroked to 3.0)?


No problem. I'm super busy this week so it may be a couple of days before I can post some information.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

okkim said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> 
> Thanks for your great posts!
> 
> Could you make a comparison of dual Garrett G25-660’s and EFR 6758”s on a Audi 2.7 V6 (stroked to 3.0)?


I had a little time at the end of the day to put some information together. Below I overlaid the Garrett *G25-550* and the EFR 6758 with 1488 CC's (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 turbos). The 60mm Garrett closely matches the 67mm EFR. As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP. However, the smaller diameter Garrett has a better surge line (300 to 500 RPMs) as compared to the larger diameter EFR. Above P2/P1 = 2.4 (about 20 psi), the advantage is even better. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 3.0 or about 29 psi at 7100 RPMs with good intercooling. That is good for 900 HP (720 AWHP) on a twin-turbo setup.










Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the EFR6758 with 1488 CC's. As you can see, the surge lines for both 67mm turbos are about the same. However, the Garrett is able to produce at least 100 more HP as compared to the EFR and is simply a much better turbo in terms of maximum output. However, you would have to rev your engine past 7100 RPMs and 29 psi to take advantage of the Garrett's superior output on 1488 CC's. I think for a 3.0L twin turbo setup, the G25-550 is the best option.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

In case anyone is interested, below is the G25-660 and EFR6758 overlaid with stock displacement (1781 CC's). The surge line is at 2500 RPMs for the Garrett with a recommended boost target of P2/P1=3 or about 29 psi at 7200 RPMs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or about 550 HP (478 WHP).










Below is the same comparison but with 2.0L displacement (2008 CC's). The surge line improves to 1700 to 2200 RPMs with a recommended boost target of P2/P1=3 or about 29 psi at 6400 RPMs producing the same output as above.


----------



## vcosmin (Sep 5, 2004)

I am looking to best turbo for a street driven 2226cmc i5 engine am i not sure what whould be the best match g2-550, s200sxe , or the gtx3071 series ? Thank you .


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vcosmin said:


> I am looking to best turbo for a street driven 2226cmc i5 engine am i not sure what whould be the best match g2-550, s200sxe , or the gtx3071 series ? Thank you .


I would recommend the G25-660 or second generation GTX3071R for a street driven car on 2226 CC's. Below I overlaid these turbos with 2226 CC's displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3 or about 29 psi at 5800 RPMs or P2/P1 = 2.5 or about 22 psi at 7000 RPMs for 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP (478 WHP). The G25-660 will be slightly better as it has a better surge line (left side of map) and higher maximum output above 22 psi.










You may also want to consider the BW EFR 7670 or the second generation GTX3076R. You will lose about 400 to 600 RPMs in spoolup, but gain and additional 50+ HP up top. See below.


----------



## vcosmin (Sep 5, 2004)

Hey, thank you for fast reply, can you approximate the spool up for g25-660 on this engine (2226cm) , i would sacrifice some topend for faster spool up , thank you !




mainstayinc said:


> I would recommend the G25-660 or second generation GTX3071R for a street driven car on 2226 CC's. Below I overlaid these turbos with 2226 CC's displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3 or about 29 psi at 5800 RPMs or P2/P1 = 2.5 or about 22 psi at 7000 RPMs for 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP (478 WHP). The G25-660 will be slightly better as it has a better surge line (left side of map) and higher maximum output above 22 psi.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## okkim (Sep 4, 2016)

mainstayinc said:


> I had a little time at the end of the day to put some information together. Below I overlaid the Garrett *G25-550* and the EFR 6758 with 1488 CC's (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 turbos). The 60mm Garrett closely matches the 67mm EFR. As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP. However, the smaller diameter Garrett has a better surge line (300 to 500 RPMs) as compared to the larger diameter EFR. Above P2/P1 = 2.4 (about 20 psi), the advantage is even better. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 3.0 or about 29 psi at 7100 RPMs with good intercooling. That is good for 900 HP (720 AWHP) on a twin-turbo setup.
> 
> Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the EFR6758 with 1488 CC's. As you can see, the surge lines for both 67mm turbos are about the same. However, the Garrett is able to produce at least 100 more HP as compared to the EFR and is simply a much better turbo in terms of maximum output. However, you would have to rev your engine past 7100 RPMs and 29 psi to take advantage of the Garrett's superior output on 1488 CC's. I think for a 3.0L twin turbo setup, the G25-550 is the best option.


Thanks a lot! Who wants to buy my EFR’s?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

okkim said:


> *Thanks a lot!* Who wants to buy my EFR’s?


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vcosmin said:


> Hey, thank you for fast reply, can you approximate the spool up for g25-660 on this engine (2226cm) , i would sacrifice some topend for faster spool up , thank you !


Well, the surge line for the G25-660 (left side of map) aligns at exactly 2000 RPMs on 2226 CC's displacement. This means that you will start to see positive boost at around 2000 RPMs. I usually allow 1000 to 1500 RPMs to achieve full spool depending on the boost level. So, to answer your question, I would expect you to see full spool between 3000 and 3500 RPMs. You will see massive torque between 2000 and 3000 RPMs as the turbo spools up which will make this setup very streetable and fun to drive. Make sure your transmission is up to spec. I blew up my transmission when I upgraded to the first generation GTX2867R on 2067 CC's which made for a quick-spooling setup.

EDIT: What car do you have? The Audi 2.2L I5 engine (2226 CC's) came in the Audi Coupe Quattro and a few other models. These are very exciting cars IMO. Post some pictures if you have any.


----------



## vcosmin (Sep 5, 2004)

Hi, thanks for reply i have 2 i5 cars, one is my daily driver the first s4 audi (audi 100 c4 s4) , which is the audi URS4 from USA and Audi 80 B4 quattro which has the same engine but using the 2.5 i5 tdi block with 20v gasoline cylinder head. Gearboxes are very strong on this cars i use a stock gearbox on 800hp / 800nm B4 quattro ! 

Here is the 80 B4 i have with a 76mm turbo  , i will need a new turbo for this one aswell, probably the new gtx3584rs , hope to hit 800+ hp on E85 with 5000 rpm full boost on 2.5engine 

https://ibb.co/nc8Oqy












mainstayinc said:


> Well, the surge line for the G25-660 (left side of map) aligns at exactly 2000 RPMs on 2226 CC's displacement. This means that you will start to see positive boost at around 2000 RPMs. I usually allow 1000 to 1500 RPMs to achieve full spool depending on the boost level. So, to answer your question, I would expect you to see full spool between 3000 and 3500 RPMs. You will see massive torque between 2000 and 3000 RPMs as the turbo spools up which will make this setup very streetable and fun to drive. Make sure your transmission is up to spec. I blew up my transmission when I upgraded to the first generation GTX2867R on 2067 CC's which made for a quick-spooling setup.
> 
> EDIT: What car do you have? The Audi 2.2L I5 engine (2226 CC's) came in the Audi Coupe Quattro and a few other models. These are very exciting cars IMO. Post some pictures if you have any.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vcosmin said:


> Hi, thanks for reply i have 2 i5 cars, one is my daily driver the first s4 audi (audi 100 c4 s4) , which is the audi URS4 from USA and Audi 80 B4 quattro which has the same engine but using the 2.5 i5 tdi block with 20v gasoline cylinder head. Gearboxes are very strong on this cars i use a stock gearbox on 800hp / 800nm B4 quattro !
> 
> *Here is the 80 B4 i have with a 76mm turbo  , i will need a new turbo for this one aswell, probably the new gtx3584rs *, hope to hit 800+ hp on E85 with 5000 rpm full boost on 2.5engine
> 
> https://ibb.co/nc8Oqy


Nice!


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I had a little time at the end of the day to put some information together. Below I overlaid the Garrett *G25-550* and the EFR 6758 with 1488 CC's (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 turbos). The 60mm Garrett closely matches the 67mm EFR. As you can see, both turbos are capable of producing about 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP. However, the smaller diameter Garrett has a better surge line (300 to 500 RPMs) as compared to the larger diameter EFR. Above P2/P1 = 2.4 (about 20 psi), the advantage is even better. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 3.0 or about 29 psi at 7100 RPMs with good intercooling. That is good for 900 HP (720 AWHP) on a twin-turbo setup.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


so for a street driven supra on pump 93 the G550 or G660, which would be better to hit the 600whp on pump goal? vs say a twin EFR 6258. Not sure which A/R to go with either.
https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/g-series-g25-550
https://www.full-race.com/store/borg-warner-efr/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-6258-turbo/

so you'd lean towards a G550 .64 (.49/.72/.92 also available) IWG vs a EFR 6258 .64 (.85 also available) IWG?

I've also been thinking about a single in terms of a Efr 9180 1.05 or a GTX3582R gen 2 1.01 A/r 
https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/gtx3582r-gen-ii
https://www.full-race.com/store/borg-warner-efr/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-9180-turbo-2/

Inlet Cam Duration 224 deg
Cam Degrees In Open 3 BTDC, Close 41 ABDC, Ex Open 52 BBDc, Close 4 ATDC
Inlet Cam Lift 7.8mm

2997cc
86x86 bore/stroke

8.5:1 compression

8,000 rev limit current. 8,500 later w/ VVTI and GSC1 cams https://www.power-division.com/gsc-power-division-billet-vvti-2jz-gte-s1-camshafts.html

Whats your opinion on the matter?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> so for a street driven supra on pump 93 the G550 or G660, which would be better to hit the 600whp on pump goal? vs say a twin EFR 6258. I can't see any pictures by the way, is there a post count needed for that? Not sure which A/R to go with either .72 / .92 or custom options like .64
> 
> Inlet Cam Duration 224 deg
> Cam Degrees In Open 3 BTDC, Close 41 ABDC, Ex Open 52 BBDc, Close 4 ATDC
> ...


Let me check into that. I'll post up some comparisons in the next day or two.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> so for a street driven supra on pump 93 the G550 or G660, which would be better to hit the 600whp on pump goal? vs say a twin EFR 6258. Not sure which A/R to go with either.
> https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/g-series-g25-550
> https://www.full-race.com/store/borg-warner-efr/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-6258-turbo/
> 
> ...


For 600 WHP on a street driven car, you will need each turbo to produce 345 HP in a twin-turbo setup (600 WHP x 1.15 / 2 = 345 HP). Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-550 and EFR 6258 with 1499 CC's. As you can see, the 62mm EFR has a slightly better surge line (left side of map) as compared to the 60mm Garrett. However, the Garrett is able to produce an additional 65 HP up top. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 2.5 or about 22 psi at 6500 RPMs. Either turbo would be a good choice for a 600 WHP twin-turbo setup with the Garrett giving you the option to increase you maximum power to over 950 HP (825 WHP).

As far as turbine A/R, you can afford to go with a smaller A/R and quicker spool since your boost target is in the center of the map for both turbos. However, the choke line (right side of map) for the EFR drops off quickly so you won't be able to go too small. You can, however, choose a smaller A/R for the Garrett since it has a more generous choke line. That will give you quicker spool without having to worry about choking off the turbo on the top end.

I'll check into the single turbo options tomorrow and post my opinion.


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

@mainstayinc you are a God amongst men. I do have one more question regarding a stock displacement 1.8t. Of the 3 Turbos you listed what one would you personally choose for a daily driver on pump gas. Currently I don't plan to bore or stroke the motor at all, nor do I plan to build the head for an 8k Rev limit. The only thing I may add in the future is water/meth injection or possibly e85 since it's becoming available local now. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mat3833 said:


> @mainstayinc you are a God amongst men. I do have one more question regarding a stock displacement 1.8t. Of the 3 Turbos you listed what one would you personally choose for a daily driver on pump gas. Currently I don't plan to bore or stroke the motor at all, nor do I plan to build the head for an 8k Rev limit. The only thing I may add in the future is water/meth injection or possibly e85 since it's becoming available local now.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Thanks for the compliment. I'm just your average car nerd. For stock displacement, there is only one turbo I would choose: the G25-550.


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for the compliment. I'm just your average car nerd. For stock displacement, there is only one turbo I would choose: the G25-550.


Really? Hmm, looks like I need to do some more digging and look at maps. To me it seemed like I woundnt get positive pressure until 2700 rpm and 18psi wouldn't hit until about 4k.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mat3833 said:


> Really? Hmm, looks like I need to do some more digging and look at maps. To me it seemed like I woundnt get positive pressure until 2700 rpm and 18psi wouldn't hit until about 4k.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Here's a repost of post# 377.

It looks like the surge line ranges from 1500 to 2300 RPMs on stock displacement. I would expect to see positive pressure around 2000 RPMs with full boost around 3500 RPMs. That's about what I have on my 2.1L + GTX2867R (first gen) setup which is very streetable and fun to drive below 3000 RPMs. Turbine housing A/R, tune, cams and wastegate control will also effect how quickly the turbo spools. You might have been looking at the G25-550 overlaid with ~1500 CCs which will start to see positive pressure around 2700 RPMs.


----------



## mat3833 (Jan 30, 2008)

I was looking at the wrong map, thank you for the clarification. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> For 600 WHP on a street driven car, you will need each turbo to produce 345 HP in a twin-turbo setup (600 WHP x 1.15 / 2 = 345 HP). Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-550 and EFR 6258 with 1499 CC's. As you can see, the 62mm EFR has a slightly better surge line (left side of map) as compared to the 60mm Garrett. However, the Garrett is able to produce an additional 65 HP up top. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 2.5 or about 22 psi at 6500 RPMs. Either turbo would be a good choice for a 600 WHP twin-turbo setup with the Garrett giving you the option to increase you maximum power to over 950 HP (825 WHP).
> this info is great, thank you, either turbo choice should be fine running up to 8k non-issue?
> As far as turbine A/R, you can afford to go with a smaller A/R and quicker spool since your boost target is in the center of the map for both turbos. However, the choke line (right side of map) for the EFR drops off quickly so you won't be able to go too small. You can, however, choose a smaller A/R for the Garrett since it has a more generous choke line. That will give you quicker spool without having to worry about choking off the turbo on the top end.
> so 63 on the EFR and 49 on the g550?
> ...



Thank you, if you had to choose between the BW and Garrett which would you choose? It sounds like the g25-550 is the better choice because you can size down the turbine a/r and still make great top end while reducing spool time.

However in the EFR side of things, since they are able to spool so fast shouldn't I go with the larger option 85 in that stead? I feel like they'd be about equal in those aspects


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> Thank you, if you had to choose between the BW and Garrett which would you choose?* It sounds like the g25-550 is the better choice because you can size down the turbine a/r and still make great top end while reducing spool time.
> *
> However in the EFR side of things, since they are able to spool so fast shouldn't I go with the larger option 85 in that stead? I feel like they'd be about equal in those aspects


Yes. I would choose the Garrett. Even with a larger turbine A/R, the EFR will not be able to produce nearly as much air flow up top.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mat3833 said:


> I was looking at the wrong map, thank you for the clarification.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> so for a street driven supra on pump 93 the G550 or G660, which would be better to hit the 600whp on pump goal? vs say a twin EFR 6258. Not sure which A/R to go with either.
> https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/g-series-g25-550
> https://www.full-race.com/store/borg-warner-efr/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-6258-turbo/
> 
> ...


Below is the second generation GTX3582R with 3.0L displacement. The surge line ranges from 1500 to 2300 RPMs with a maximum output of about 825 HP. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs. This turbo is a very good fit for 3.0L and would make for a very streetable setup. I recommend getting the T4 twin-scroll turbine housing. That will improve your surge line 300 to 400 RPMs to the left and make for an even quicker boosting turbo.



















Below is the EFR 9180 with 3.0L displacement. The surge line ranges from about 2000 to 3300 RPMs with a maximum output of about 950 HP. This will be a slower spooling turbo as compared to the second generation GTX3582R but with higher maximum output.


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Below is the second generation GTX3582R with 3.0L displacement. The surge line ranges from 1500 to 2300 RPMs with a maximum output of about 825 HP. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs. This turbo is a very good fit for 3.0L and would make for a very streetable setup. I recommend getting the T4 twin-scroll turbine housing. That will improve your surge line 300 to 400 RPMs to the left and make for an even quicker boosting turbo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So it looks like the the GTX3582R is like 90 percent the spool, power and much cheaper to do than a twin setup, and it'll spool a bit faster than the 9180.

I'll explore both costs and post back here.

Thanks for the info sir!!!

is there an excel sheet that you could send me? or something with input? i'd like to play around with your program if possible.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> *So it looks like the the GTX3582R is like 90 percent the spool, power and much cheaper to do than a twin setup, and it'll spool a bit faster than the 9180*.
> 
> I'll explore both costs and post back here.
> 
> ...


Yes. Please post back here and let us know which direction you decide to go. There is an excel spreadsheet but I don't want to give that out at this time.


----------



## vcosmin (Sep 5, 2004)

How about , fastest spooling turbo for 900hp on e85 on 2.5 engine with 8250 rpm redline the rpm drop is like this 

1 > 2 drops to 4450 rpm
2 > 3 drops to 5760 rpm
3 > 4 drops to 6438 rpm
4 > 5 drops to 6888 rpm

so it would help to have a 5000-5500 rpm full boost , i was thinking on new gtx3584rs ? or the larger 6870 from precision ?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vcosmin said:


> How about , fastest spooling turbo for 900hp on e85 on 2.5 engine with 8250 rpm redline the rpm drop is like this
> 
> 1 > 2 drops to 4450 rpm
> 2 > 3 drops to 5760 rpm
> ...


Yes. I'll check into that. I've been wanting to post your setup with the GTX3584RS since you first mentioned it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vcosmin said:


> How about , fastest spooling turbo for 900hp on e85 on 2.5 engine with 8250 rpm redline the rpm drop is like this
> 
> 1 > 2 drops to 4450 rpm
> 2 > 3 drops to 5760 rpm
> ...


Below is the GTX3584RS overlaid with 2.5L displacement (81mm bore x 95.5mm stroke x 5 cylinders). In order to make 900 HP on E85, you will have to make a minimum of 75 lbs. of air per minute. On a good setup with efficient intercooling and timing, I usually multiply the lbs. of air per minute by 12 for E85. So, for your setup, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 3.0 or about 29 psi at 7200 RPMs producing 75 lbs. of air per minute making 900 HP on E85 (75 x 12 = 900). With an 8250 redline, you can produce an additional 10 lbs. of air per minute or 85 lbs. (not shown on graph) making over 1000 HP on E85 (85 x 12 = 1020 HP).

Notice how much usable area the GTX3584RS has on 2.5L. The surge line ranges from 2000 to 3200 RPMs and doesn't choke off (right side of map) until 10,000+ RPMs. That's over 7000 RPMs of useable air flow under the curve. Expect full spool by 4500 RPMs on 2.5L. That should work well with your shifting points listed above since your largest RPM drop is from first to second gear (4450 RPMs). I definately don't expect this turbo to stop spooling between gear shifts on your setup. Overall, I think the GTX3584RS would make a nice fit for a street/race setup on 2.5L.










I don't have a compressor map for the Precision 6870 Turbo. If anyone can find, please post here. Also, below is a picture of my GTX3584RS setup on 2.1L (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke x 4 cylinders). Pat @ Pit Soundworks custom fabricated my divided (4+1, 2+3) manifold. With a divided manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing, I expect to see full spool between 4500 and 5000 RPMs on 2.1L. I will take a small RPM penalty using the AEB largeport head but hope to gain that back with VVT valve timing and twin-scroll manifold. We'll see.


----------



## p-car993 (Jun 27, 2018)

This is an impressive bit of information. I have a porsche 993 tt and have been searching the web for information on the G-25-660 and the EFR 7163. I came across this thread and joined the so I could post a question. The air cooled Porsche forums are not as informative when it comes to high HP stuff. 

mainstayinc your map plots are very interesting and I would greatly appreciate if you could plot a G25-660 and a EFR 7163 using my build specs.

The build
3.8l 74.6 stroke X 102 bore
Gt2 EVO cams http://www.drcamshafts.com/911profiles.htm 
1650 injectors
Shuffle pinned case
rods
APR
Maffless 
82 mm TB
Gt3076 HTA wheels with K24 housing. the housing equals .72 ar
massive intercooler 
I'm running an Syvec ECU setup for flex fuel So I run E-85 for the Hi HP
The current setup makes 882 hp at 30psi @6200 rpm and 764 tq @ 4500 rpms 
I plan on changing the intake that will have larger runners and should help the top end. 

https://rennlist.com/forums/993-turbo-forum/1053787-intake-intercooler-project.html

I'm looking for improved spool, response and low end torque. 
The larger intake may hurt me a little on the low end. I also re geared my tranny to taller gears and this could cause a bit of lag as well. 
Maybe a twin scroll 7163 with a quick spool valve? 

I have data logs of the current setup if it helps.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

p-car993 said:


> This is an impressive bit of information. I have a porsche 993 tt and have been searching the web for information on the G-25-660 and the EFR 7163. I came across this thread and joined the so I could post a question. The air cooled Porsche forums are not as informative when it comes to high HP stuff.
> 
> mainstayinc your map plots are very interesting and I would greatly appreciate if you could plot a G25-660 and a EFR 7163 using my build specs.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your interest. I have to say that the Porsche 993 is by far my favorite 911 ever built. Unfortunately, I doubt I will ever own one since good examples sell for over $200,000 on ebay and other sites. Below is a stock photo of the 993 Turbo S Coupé in silver.










I hope you don't mind, but I reposted some pictures of your custom intake manifold and intercooler setup from the link to the rennlist forum you provided above.




























Here's your video from the 2016 Texas Mile. Jump to the 1:15 mark where all the action starts.






And here's the dyno graph you emailed me. Amazing how you go from 250 to over 750 ft. lbs. of torque in less than 800 RPMs!










Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the EFR7163 with 1.9L displacement (102mm bore x 76.4 stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 = 1873CC's on a twin turbo setup). As you can see, the 67mm Garrett has the same choke line (right side of map) as the 71mm Borg Warner. Both turbos are able to produce about 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas or 720 HP on E85 with optimized timing and good intercooling. That's 1200 HP to 1440 HP in a twin turbo setup. However, the surge line (left side of map) is about 500 RPMs better for the BW. That would make the BW a better turbo overall as compared to the Garrett. 

However, keep in mind that the BW map was probably plotted using their twin-scroll housing and not their undivided (single) scroll housing. That would account for the 500 RPM advantage of the BW over the Garrett. I estimate that both turbos are equally matched both in terms of the surge line and choke line if a single scroll housing were used. The twin-scroll housing can only be used on a super-single turbo in an H6 (flat) or V6 engine configuration. I would recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 6200 RPMs producing 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 x 2 = 1000 HP on a twin turbo setup on pump/race gas or 600 x 2 = 1200 HP on E85 with optimized timing and intercooling.










I definitely recommend a quick spool valve if you want to improve spool and low end torque. Also, please post some pictures of the actual car. If you are having trouble posting pictures, just email them to me and I will post.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Nvy (Jun 28, 2018)

@mainstayinc

Hey,
Im reading for quite some time on internet and havent found somebody so dedicated like you are and have read through the tread but maybe i missed the info. I wanted to ask you about your opinion on what turbo to go for my build. Info below:

Car: Toyota mr2 spyder/roadster(depends on the side of the world)
Engine: 1.8l 1zz-fe i will throw some pistons, rods, new bearings and arp head studs. Maybe some head porting if i can find somebody to do it around here and new springs/retainers. Redline will be around 7000 rpm.
Cooling: water to air charge cooler from Twin turbo Merc, they have 2x but im going to use just one/nice heat exchanger/nicely designed system with res pumps and so on. All the bells and whistles.
Cooling2: water/meth injection if needed.
Power goal: couple of maps - around 10-12 psi for daily driving/middle of the pack ~ 15-16 psi/full retard map going for max boost on pump + meth and im hoping to go around 400 hp at the crank.

In general i will want positive pressure as early as possible and full boost around 3500 rpms and as linear as possible power delivery so i dont break the tranny. I will try to reinforce it with some new gears but they are rated to around 300 ft-lbf of torque. It could do more but the stress on the tranny should be as little as possible in the low rpms.

I found a cast iron manifold from turbokits.com thats with T2 flange and i was hoping to use it but if its going to restrict the build i will have to make my own and fix turbo to the engine somehow.

Turbos im looking at:
EFR line 6258/6758/7163 - id be happy to go with 7163 if i can do single scroll manifold to twin scroll turbo with the opening/closing valve.
Garrett 2867 or something that can bring me to that power.

Ideally id like to use my T2 manifold and go single scroll turbo if i can get the spool right. I have looked more into EFR line coz i like that they are all in one and no need of additional stuff are needed. Id also prefer to use internal waste gate.

/Ivo

P.S. Can you also give me an advice with what A/R to go coz i think 0.64 will be better for this small engine but it could suffer top end power?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nvy said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> Hey,
> Im reading for quite some time on internet and havent found somebody so dedicated like you are and have read through the tread but maybe i missed the info. I wanted to ask you about your opinion on what turbo to go for my build. Info below:
> ...


I'll check into that later today.


----------



## p-car993 (Jun 27, 2018)

thanks for taking the time to plot this for me. The expert air cooled turbo guys are say you can only get about 8.5 Hp per pound of air. The current turbo are said to be 59 lb flow rate. This about what i'm seeing 59 *2 =118 * 8.5 =1003- 15% For drive train loss = 852 On the dyno we were seeing power dropping off at 6200 rpms. I believe the GT3 intake will allow power to climb to 7400. So maybe I can get the 8.5 HP /lb up to 9.5 thats the goal of the manifold. It would have nice to have been monitoring turbo wheel speed at the time. 


I need a turbo that will be a good match for the upper RPMs with minimal lag. So The quick spool valve looks to be designed for twin scroll housings. I'm wondering if I could use this if I plumb same a single scroll with the QS valve. I need to research. Another option would be a VGT turbo but I can't seam to find a unit slightly larger then the units used on the Porsche 997. The 997 units create too much back pressure on the top end and will restrict the engine to about 700 hp. BW makes larger units for diesel trucks but may be an issue given the EGTs are higher. I think I'm going to focus on EFRs for now. I'v been using the Borg warner match bot for plotting. looks @2500 rpms i should see 5psi? seams to optimistic but that would be good. What do you think? 
Thanks I'll update you


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

p-car993 said:


> thanks for taking the time to plot this for me. *The expert air cooled turbo guys are say you can only get about 8.5 Hp per pound of air.* The current turbo are said to be 59 lb flow rate. This about what i'm seeing 59 *2 =118 * 8.5 =1003- 15% For drive train loss = 852 On the dyno we were seeing power dropping off at 6200 rpms. I believe the GT3 intake will allow power to climb to 7400. So maybe I can get the 8.5 HP /lb up to 9.5 thats the goal of the manifold. It would have nice to have been monitoring turbo wheel speed at the time.
> 
> 
> I need a turbo that will be a good match for the upper RPMs with minimal lag. *So The quick spool valve looks to be designed for twin scroll housings.* I'm wondering if I could use this if I plumb same a single scroll with the QS valve. I need to research. Another option would be a VGT turbo but I can't seam to find a unit slightly larger then the units used on the Porsche 997. The 997 units create too much back pressure on the top end and will restrict the engine to about 700 hp. BW makes larger units for diesel trucks but may be an issue given the EGTs are higher. I think I'm going to focus on EFRs for now.* I'v been using the Borg warner match bot for plotting. looks @2500 rpms i should see 5psi?* seams to optimistic but that would be good. What do you think?
> Thanks I'll update you


8.5 HP per pounds of air sounds about right for air cooled on pump/race gas as they tend to run hotter. Without a compressor map for your current turbo setup it's hard to tell whether you are approaching the limits of the HTA GT3076R turbo charger (i.e. turbo is running hotter and less efficient at 6200 RPMs and 30 psi) or whether there is a restriction in your intake system. An air intake temperature data log would be very helpful in this case. It will be interesting to see if the GT3 intake will net you additional HP up top.

Considering the space limits of the 993's engine bay, you may want to consider running a water-to-air intercooler instead of air-to-air. You could have the water tank and heat exchangers (i.e.: radiator) ideally located up front where there is maximum air flow and have twin water-to-air intercoolers sit on top of your intake manifold similar to your current air-to-air setup and keep everything short. My engine builder, Bill Schimmel, had a Porsche 911 turbo (964 I think) with twin GT3071Rs which he sold a couple of year ago. Here is the only picture I have from his website of the car. I'm not sure if he ran air-to-air or water-to-air intercoolers. I'll have to ask him the next time I stop by his shop.










As far as the quick spool valve, you would need an undivided exhaust manifold (i.e.: regular exhaust manifold) connected to a twin scroll turbine housing to make it work. There would be no benefit if you used a single scroll turbine housing. Also, base on the compressor map for the EFR7163 using a single scroll housing, 5psi by 2500 RPMs sounds plausible.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Some nice pictures Mike (p-car993) sent me.




























He owns a machine shop in the Austin, TX area. Here is his website.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nvy said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> Hey,
> Im reading for quite some time on internet and havent found somebody so dedicated like you are and have read through the tread but maybe i missed the info. I wanted to ask you about your opinion on what turbo to go for my build. Info below:
> ...


Any of those turbos will get you to 400 HP at the crank. You could even go slightly smaller and still achieve your HP goals. For the quickest spool on 1.8L in the Garrett line I recommend either the second generation GTX2860R or the G25-550. Both are 60mm turbos and are available with internal wastegate. The second generation GTX2860R is also available with a twin scroll turbine housing. Below I overlaid both turbos with 1.8L (1794 CC) displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6200 RPMs producing 40 lbs. of air per minute or 400 HP. The surge line (left side of map) comes in at about 2000 RPMs for both turbos. However, the G25-550 is able to produce up to 500 HP and will more easily achieve your HP goals.










I also recommend the second generation GTX2867R. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX2867R with the G25-550 for comparison on 1.8L (1794CC) displacement. The second generation GTX2867R will spoolup about 300 RPMs later than the G25-550 according to the compressor map. Both turbos are capable of 50 lbs. of air per minute or about 500 HP on pump/race gas.










I'll post some more information on the EFR turbos in the next day or two.


----------



## p-car993 (Jun 27, 2018)

Thanks for the additional information. I'm looking into the EFR 7163 with a twin scroll housing. I will modify the housing with a quick spool valve. However the only A/R size is .80. The BW match bot shows 10psi backpressure on the top end. Ideally i can find a larger A/R in a twin scroll. 

http://www.turbos.borgwarner.com/go/XNNH67


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

p-car993 said:


> Thanks for the additional information. I'm looking into the EFR 7163 with a twin scroll housing.* I will modify the housing with a quick spool valve. *However the only A/R size is .80. The BW match bot shows 10psi backpressure on the top end. Ideally i can find a larger A/R in a twin scroll.
> 
> http://www.turbos.borgwarner.com/go/XNNH67


:thumbup: Nice! I'd like to see the final result. Post back here if you get a chance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nvy said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> Turbos im looking at:
> *EFR line 6258/6758/7163 - id be happy to go with 7163 if i can do single scroll manifold to twin scroll turbo with the opening/closing valve.
> ...


Below I overlaid the G25-550 and the EFR 6258 with 1.8L (1794CC) displacement. The surge lines for the G25-550 and EFR 6258 are about the same. However, you would be pushing the EFR 6258 close to its choke line (right side of map) to achieve 400 HP.










Below is the G25-550 and the EFR 6758 overlaid with 1.8L (1794CC) displacement. Both turbos are capable of 500 HP. However, the G25-550 has a better surge line and will spoolup a few hundred RPMs faster according to the compressor map.










Below is the G25-660 and the twin-scroll EFR 7163 overlaid with 1.8L (1794CC) displacement. Both turbos are capable of 600 HP. The EFR 7163 has a better surge line due to twin-scroll option.


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

Do you happen to know the charts for the Xona rotor turbos?
Been looking into putting a Xona 8267(tial 1.03AR Vband hotside) on my 1.9L 20v, but have no idea what it would do, maybe you can compare it with a gen2 GTX3076r.
Also have a second 8267 to put on my 2.5 07K build, maybe you can compare that with a gen1 gt3584rs I already have on it?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CorrieG60 said:


> Do you happen to know the charts for the Xona rotor turbos?
> Been looking into putting a Xona 8267(tial 1.03AR Vband hotside) on my 1.9L 20v, but have no idea what it would do, maybe you can compare it with a gen2 GTX3076r.
> Also have a second 8267 to put on my 2.5 07K build, maybe you can compare that with a gen1 gt3584rs I already have on it?


I'll check into that.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CorrieG60 said:


> Do you happen to know the charts for the Xona rotor turbos?
> Been looking into putting a Xona 8267(tial 1.03AR Vband hotside) on my 1.9L 20v, but have no idea what it would do, maybe you can compare it with a gen2 GTX3076r.
> Also have a second 8267 to put on my 2.5 07K build, maybe you can compare that with a gen1 gt3584rs I already have on it?


I don't have a compressor map for the Xona XR 8267. However, it is quite a large turbo with an 88mm compressor wheel and would be quite laggy on 1.9L. Here is an interesting discussion about this turbo.


----------



## Nvy (Jun 28, 2018)

Hey,
Thanks for the detailed answer!

I would be inclined to go with bigger frame turbo than G series coz it will most likely have lower temps(i think that EFR should be bigger than G series). What A/R would you recommend to go with - either 7163 single scroll or 6758 single scroll? Can i get away with single scroll ERF 7163? Id go with EFR coz they are all in one and ill not have to worry about BOV, oil restrictors, etc. If 7163 in single scroll is not good enough ill go with 6758 and that way i can use my T2 manifold and will not have to come up with my own design.

7163 - 0.85 A/R T25, Single Scroll (Internal WG) (P/N 11631008000)
6758 - T25, .64ar, Single Scroll (External WG) (P/N 11581009006)/ T25, .85ar, Single Scroll (Internal WG) (P/N 11581008000) - i wanted internal waste gate but will find adapter or will make my own if i have to go with .64 ar.

Will i see positive boost around 2000 rpms with the .85 ones and full boost(10-12 psi) around 3500-3600? 

Cheers,
Ivo


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nvy said:


> Hey,
> Thanks for the detailed answer!
> 
> I would be inclined to go with bigger frame turbo than G series coz it will most likely have lower temps(i think that EFR should be bigger than G series). What A/R would you recommend to go with - either 7163 single scroll or 6758 single scroll? Can i get away with single scroll ERF 7163? Id go with EFR coz they are all in one and ill not have to worry about BOV, oil restrictors, etc. If 7163 in single scroll is not good enough ill go with 6758 and that way i can use my T2 manifold and will not have to come up with my own design.
> ...


I think for a single scroll turbo you will see the best boost response from either the G25-550 or the EFR 6258 according to the compressor maps. Either turbo should see positive boost around 2000 RPMs and full boost by 3500 RPMs. The EFR 6758 will be laggier than the G25-550 but still produce about the same maximum output. The G25-660 and EFR 7163 are pretty closely matched IMO if using a single scroll turbine housing. I wouldn't expect to see positive boost on the EFR 7163 with a single scroll housing until 2500 RPMs on 1.8L and full boost perhaps by 4000 RPMs. As far as what A/R turbine housing to choose, I'm not sure about that. Go smaller if you want quicker spoolup. The best option would be to go with a twin scroll turbine housing where possible. That will give you the best spoolup possible while not compromising your top end. So, my recommendation would be to go with the EFR 7163 with 0.80 A/R twin scroll turbine housing. That will give positive boost before 2000 RPMs while still being able to produce up to 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas.


----------



## Nvy (Jun 28, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I think for a single scroll turbo you will see the best boost response from either the G25-550 or the EFR 6258 according to the compressor maps. Either turbo should see positive boost around 2000 RPMs and full boost by 3500 RPMs. The EFR 6758 will be laggier than the G25-550 but still produce about the same maximum output. The G25-660 and EFR 7163 are pretty closely matched IMO if using a single scroll turbine housing. I wouldn't expect to see positive boost on the EFR 7163 with a single scroll housing until 2500 RPMs on 1.8L and full boost perhaps by 4000 RPMs. As far as what A/R turbine housing to choose, I'm not sure about that. Go smaller if you want quicker spoolup. The best option would be to go with a twin scroll turbine housing where possible. That will give you the best spoolup possible while not compromising your top end. So, my recommendation would be to go with the EFR 7163 with 0.80 A/R twin scroll turbine housing. That will give positive boost before 2000 RPMs while still being able to produce up to 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas.


Thanks! I will check my options for custom manifold then and will sell the current one that i have, i didnt like the bottom mount turbo position anyways. Once im done with the build which will not be this year, i will post some pictures and thoughts on it i hope you will be still around. Keep up the good work, you are awesome!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nvy said:


> Thanks! I will check my options for custom manifold then and will sell the current one that i have, i didnt like the bottom mount turbo position anyways. Once im done with the build which will not be this year, i will post some pictures and thoughts on it i hope you will be still around. Keep up the good work, you are awesome!


Looking forward to seeing some pictures.:thumbup:


----------



## Guest (Jul 18, 2018)

*2.5 TFSI Turbo displacement*









This is an original Borg Warner K16 Compressor map of the turbo that is factory installed on 2.5 TFSI Engine (RS3, TTRS, RSQ3) with 82.5 Bores + 92.8 Stroke - 2480cc capacity. 
I could reach 430+hp. on 22-24 Psi (1.55-1.65 Bar) on that turbo on 100 Ron (Equal 95 PON)
Could someone kindly add a Garret G25-660 compressor map on that map or what Garret Turbo could achieve 550 hp. (+100-120 hp from OEM) on the same or lower boost with the same efficiency ? 
Want to keep engine stock with lower temps and EGT on more efficient turbo an welded manifold.

Alex


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> This is an original Borg Warner K16 Compressor map of the turbo that is factory installed on 2.5 TFSI Engine (RS3, TTRS, RSQ3) with 82.5 Bores + 92.8 Stroke - 2480cc capacity.
> I could reach 430+hp. on 22-24 Psi (1.55-1.65 Bar) on that turbo on 100 Ron (Equal 95 PON)
> Could someone kindly add a Garret G25-660 compressor map on that map or what Garret Turbo could achieve 550 hp. (+100-120 hp from OEM) on the same or lower boost with the same efficiency ?
> Want to keep engine stock with lower temps and EGT on more efficient turbo an welded manifold.
> ...


I'll check into that and post some comparison(s).

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> This is an original Borg Warner K16 Compressor map of the turbo that is factory installed on 2.5 TFSI Engine (RS3, TTRS, RSQ3) with 82.5 Bores + 92.8 Stroke - 2480cc capacity.
> I could reach 430+hp. on 22-24 Psi (1.55-1.65 Bar) on that turbo on 100 Ron (Equal 95 PON)
> Could someone kindly add a Garret G25-660 compressor map on that map or what Garret Turbo could achieve 550 hp. (+100-120 hp from OEM) on the same or lower boost with the same efficiency ?
> Want to keep engine stock with lower temps and EGT on more efficient turbo an welded manifold.
> ...


Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW K16 map you provided. I converted the K16 map from M^3/sec to lbs. of air per minute for comparison. The BW K16 is able to produce just over 45 lbs. of air per minute or 450 HP on a well tuned setup with good intercooling. However, that would be pushing the turbo to it's absolute limit as the choke line goes vertical at that point (right side of map). The G25-660, on the other hand, is able to produce 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP at its maximum point. The surge line (left side of map) comes in at about 1500 RPMs on 2480CCs or about 200 RPMs later than the smaller K16.

I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi (1.5 bar) at 6300 RPMs on 2480 CCs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP. This turbo would be a very nice fit for 2480CCs giving you stock-like spoolup and 600 HP capable. It will also be much more efficient above 4500 RPMs and will allow you to lower your EGT's significantly above that point.


----------



## Guest (Jul 18, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW K16 map you provided. I converted the K16 map from M^3/sec to lbs. of air per minute for comparison. The BW K16 is able to produce just over 45 lbs. of air per minute or 450 HP on a well tuned setup with good intercooling. However, that would be pushing the turbo to it's absolute limit as the choke line goes vertical at that point (right side of map). The G25-660, on the other hand, is able to produce 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP at its maximum point. The surge line (left side of map) comes in at about 1500 RPMs on 2480CCs or about 200 RPMs later than the smaller K16.
> 
> I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi (1.5 bar) at 6300 RPMs on 2480 CCs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP. This turbo would be a very nice fit for 2480CCs giving you stock-like spoolup and 600 HP capable. It will also be much more efficient above 4500 RPMs and will allow you to lower your EGT's significantly above that point.


Many thanks for such an open answer and consultaion!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Turbo4Ever said:


> Hi John,
> 
> Can you please make a comparison regarding my 2.0 tfsi between EFR7163 .83 AR on a tubular long runner manifold vs GTX3071 t3 divided .83 ar on a twin scroll short runner cast manifold?
> 
> ...


I only have a compressor map for a twin-scroll EFR 7163 and a single-scroll GTX3071R. So, I can't make an accurate comparison between the 0.83 A/R single-scroll EFR and the 0.83 A/R twin-scroll (Ni-Resist) Garrett housings. However, I can make a few comments as to how I think these setups will compare. Firstly, both turbos have a 71mm compressor exducer and are capable of producing about 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on a well-tuned setup. The single-scroll EFR on a long runner tubular manifold will obviously spool slower than the twin-scroll Garrett on a short runner cast manifold. As far as how much faster the twin-scroll Garrett will spoolup as compared to the EFR, I am not sure. I would estimate somewhere between 400 and 800 RPMs. Of course, that depends on the length of the primaries on the long runner tubular manifold. It also depends on the quality of the casting of the twin-scroll manifold. SPA makes a nice cast twin-scroll manifold for the 1.8T that I am eyeing up should my ATP log manifold/first generation GTX2867R decide to blow up on my MK4 daily driver. In that case, I would probably upgrade to the SPA twin-scroll manifold and the second generation GTX3071R for quick-spooling, 600 HP capable street car.

I am using the 1.01 A/R twin-scroll Garrett turbine housing on my 2.1L MK1 project which is the bigger brother to the 0.83 A/R housing you mentioned above. There is also a smaller 0.61 A/R twin-scroll housing but I think that's too small for 2.0L displacement. So, in conclusion, if I had to choose between the two options you presented above, I would definitely go with the twin-scroll housing on a short runner cast manifold over the single-scroll housing on a tubular long runner manifold. Others may have a different opinion about this.


----------



## Turbo4Ever (Jul 31, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I only have a compressor map for a twin-scroll EFR 7163 and a single-scroll GTX3071R. So, I can't make an accurate comparison between the 0.83 A/R single-scroll EFR and the 0.83 A/R twin-scroll (Ni-Resist) Garrett housings. However, I can make a few comments as to how I think these setups will compare. Firstly, both turbos have a 71mm compressor exducer and are capable of producing about 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on a well-tuned setup. The single-scroll EFR on a long runner tubular manifold will obviously spool slower than the twin-scroll Garrett on a short runner cast manifold. As far as how much faster the twin-scroll Garrett will spoolup as compared to the EFR, I am not sure. I would estimate somewhere between 400 and 800 RPMs. Of course, that depends on the length of the primaries on the long runner tubular manifold. It also depends on the quality of the casting of the twin-scroll manifold. SPA makes a nice cast twin-scroll manifold for the 1.8T that I am eyeing up should my ATP log manifold/first generation GTX2867R decide to blow up on my MK4 daily driver. In that case, I would probably upgrade to the SPA twin-scroll manifold and the second generation GTX3071R for quick-spooling, 600 HP capable street car.
> 
> I am using the 1.01 A/R twin-scroll Garrett turbine housing on my 2.1L MK1 project which is the bigger brother to the 0.83 A/R housing you mentioned above. There is also a smaller 0.61 A/R twin-scroll housing but I think that's too small for 2.0L displacement. So, in conclusion, if I had to choose between the two options you presented above, I would definitely go with the twin-scroll housing on a short runner cast manifold over the single-scroll housing on a tubular long runner manifold. Others may have a different opinion about this.



Thank you so much Turbo Guru 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Turbo4Ever said:


> Thank you so much Turbo Guru
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## Bad Rabbit Habit (May 5, 2005)

New to reading turbo maps, but comparing two turbos that probably should have no business being compared. GT2860RS vs BW S200SXE. I am putting it on a 2.0 ABA, replacing a T04E 57 trim. Street car, 80 rabbit. Power goal of 300 whp. 

It appears to me, that the BW will spool very similarly to the smaller Garrett. I am sure that the s200sxe mapped with a twin scroll housing, but I will have to go open, which will change spool. It would be nice to save the $200 price difference, and not have to plumb water. 

I made a terrible overlay, sorry if your eyes start bleeding.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

monoaural said:


> New to reading turbo maps, but comparing two turbos that probably should have no business being compared. GT2860RS vs BW S200SXE. I am putting it on a 2.0 ABA, replacing a T04E 57 trim. Street car, 80 rabbit. Power goal of 300 whp.
> 
> It appears to me, that the BW will spool very similarly to the smaller Garrett. I am sure that the s200sxe mapped with a twin scroll housing, but I will have to go open, which will change spool. It would be nice to save the $200 price difference, and not have to plumb water.
> 
> I made a terrible overlay, sorry if your eyes start bleeding.


That sounds like a very nice project. The BW S200SXE will have no problem achieving your 300 WHP power goal. I think you are right about the BW S200SXE compressor map being a twin-scroll map. I double-checked your overlay and it looks like you are spot on. According to my calculations, the BW will spool 250 to 750 RPMs later than the GT2860RS. And, as you pointed out, that is comparing a twin-scroll with a single scroll. I would add another 500 to 750 RPM penalty to the BW if you are going single scroll. So, you can expect a 750 to 1500 RPMs later spool with the BW as compared to the Garrett in a single-scroll setup. I would expect the BW to reach full spool roughly between 4250 and 4750 RPMs on 2.0L with a single-scroll turbine.

I would recommend the GT2860RS in this case if you don't plan to exceed the 300 WHP (350 HP) goal with your rabbit. The BW S200SXE is capable of almost 650 HP (565 WHP). There are, of course, other turbos that I would recommend over the GT2860RS if you are looking for quick spool and nice top end in the GTX or G25 line. But it sounds like you are on a budget with your turbo upgrade.

Check out my MK1 turbo rabbit project.


----------



## Bad Rabbit Habit (May 5, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> That sounds like a very nice project. The BW S200SXE will have no problem achieving your 300 WHP power goal. I think you are right about the BW S200SXE compressor map being a twin-scroll map. I double-checked your overlay and it looks like you are spot on. According to my calculations, the BW will spool 250 to 750 RPMs later than the GT2860RS. And, as you pointed out, that is comparing a twin-scroll with a single scroll. I would add another 500 to 750 RPM penalty to the BW if you are going single scroll. So, you can expect a 750 to 1500 RPMs later spool with the BW as compared to the Garrett in a single-scroll setup. I would expect the BW to reach full spool roughly between 4250 and 4750 RPMs on 2.0L with a single-scroll turbine.
> 
> I would recommend the GT2860RS in this case if you don't plan to exceed the 300 WHP (350 HP) goal with your rabbit. The BW S200SXE is capable of almost 650 HP (565 WHP). There are, of course, other turbos that I would recommend over the GT2860RS if you are looking for quick spool and nice top end in the GTX or G25 line. But it sounds like you are on a budget with your turbo upgrade.
> 
> Check out my MK1 turbo rabbit project.


Yah, trying to keep the budget under control. I swapped the Aba 4 years ago, when 1.8ts were still expensive. The t04e was a used deal, and so on. I don’t want to do rods, so that is setting my power level. At this moment, I am leaning towards the gt28rs. Though I now realize, I used the map of the bigger 200sxe.

And, yah, turbo rabbits are the best. Mine is a base model, so it ended up weighing 1990 with a full tank and spare after the swap. Best run so far is 14.08 @ 100 mph. I need to work on my 60’. 
Yours looks like a monster.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

monoaural said:


> Yah, trying to keep the budget under control. I swapped the Aba 4 years ago, when 1.8ts were still expensive. The t04e was a used deal, and so on. I don’t want to do rods, so that is setting my power level. At this moment, *I am leaning towards the gt28rs*. Though I now realize, I used the map of the bigger 200sxe.
> 
> And, yah, turbo rabbits are the best. Mine is a base model, so it ended up weighing 1990 with a full tank and spare after the swap. Best run so far is 14.08 @ 100 mph. I need to work on my 60’.
> Yours looks like a monster.


Nice! The light blue reminds me of my dad's 1980 diesel rabbit he bought new back in the day.


----------



## NEDD (Aug 28, 2018)

Hello mainstayinc , I have read all 22 pages of this thread and your knowledge and wiling to share information is just impressive. I'm so glad people like you exist!

Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice. The car is BMW E30 with 1JZ non VVTi swap, running full standalone, DBW, fuel and ignition upgrades, stock bottom end 8.5:1 and 272 cams. It will be running flex fuel setup also so 100oct. ron gas and pure ethanol E100. It is a drift car setup and I will be looking for fastest spooling 500whp possible. So far I have Holset HX35 8blade 12cm, but would like to step in to modern turbo technology, so here are my choices:

EFR7670 T4 0.92 or 1.05 hot side (I think it will be somehow lazy on 2.5 low comp engine)

EFR7064 T4 1.05

EFR7163 T4 0.80

G25-660 ... biggest hot side, not too familiar with Garrett

or some more budged friendly S200SX-e 52mm or 57mm with 0.83 hot side

Any other turbo worth looking at, matching some of my requirments..?

Oh, almost forgot - I will use anti-lag and some 50 shot N2O to mix things up, in case they are needed.

Thank you in advance for your time and help, any input will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NEDD said:


> Hello mainstayinc , I have read all 22 pages of this thread and your knowledge and wiling to share information is just impressive. I'm so glad people like you exist!
> 
> Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice. The car is BMW E30 with 1JZ non VVTi swap, running full standalone, DBW, fuel and ignition upgrades, stock bottom end 8.5:1 and 272 cams. It will be running flex fuel setup also so 100oct. ron gas and pure ethanol E100. It is a drift car setup and I will be looking for fastest spooling 500whp possible. So far I have Holset HX35 8blade 12cm, but would like to step in to modern turbo technology, so here are my choices:
> 
> ...


Cool. I'll look into that and post my opinion and analysis in the next day or so. Thanks for your interest.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NEDD said:


> Hello mainstayinc , I have read all 22 pages of this thread and your knowledge and wiling to share information is just impressive. I'm so glad people like you exist!
> 
> Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice. The car is BMW E30 with 1JZ non VVTi swap, running full standalone, DBW, fuel and ignition upgrades, stock bottom end 8.5:1 and 272 cams. It will be running flex fuel setup also so 100oct. ron gas and pure ethanol E100. *It is a drift car setup and I will be looking for fastest spooling 500whp possible.* So far I have Holset HX35 8blade 12cm, but would like to step in to modern turbo technology, so here are my choices:
> 
> ...


That sounds like a really nice setup. For 500 WHP you will have to make 575 HP to the crank and a turbo capable of at least 57.5 lbs. of air per minute on pump/race gas or 50 lbs. of air on E85/E100. Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW EFR 7064 on 2.5L displacement (86mm bore x 71.5mm stroke x 6 cylinders = 2492 CCs). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) for the G25-660 and EFR 7064 are closely matched with the Garrett having a slight advantage above P2/P1=2.2 or about 17 psi. Expect these turbos to start to spoolup between 1500 and 1800 RPMs on 2.5L with full spool coming on around 3200 to 3500 RPMs. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi and 6500 RPMs producing 57.5 lbs. of air per minute. As you can see, this point is outside the efficiency range of the BW turbo which goes vertical at 55 lbs. of air per minute. Therefore, I do not recommend the BW EFR 7064 for your power goals as you will fall short by about 25 to 50 HP. The Garrett, on the other hand, is able to produce up to 60 lbs. of air per minute and is better suited to your goals.










Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW EFR 7163 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the BW with twin-scroll turbine housing has a surge line that comes in at 1300 RPMs on 2.5L displacement which is about 400 RPMs better than the single-scroll Garrett. Expect full spool to come in below 3000 RPMs. I marked the same point as above corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi and 6500 RPMs producing 57.5 lbs. of air per minute. Both the Garrett and the BW are able to produce 60 lbs. of air per minute and are well suited for your power goals. I highly recommend the BW EFR 7163 in this case due to the better surge line.










Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW EFR 7670 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the single-scroll Garrett has a better surge line with the BW coming in at 1500 to 2300 RPMs. Expect full spool on the BW around 3750 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. I marked the same point as above corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi and 6500 RPMs producing 57.5 lbs. of air per minute. The BW EFR 7670 is able to produce almost 65 lbs. of air per minute and will achieve your power goals. I do not recommend this turbo, however, due to the higher surge line as compared to the Garrett.










Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the 57mm BW S200 SXE on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the Garrett has a slightly better surge line above P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi. Expect the BW to spoolup 200 to 300 RPMs later than the Garrett with full spool coming in at about 3500 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. The BW is able to produce about 62.5 lbs. of air per minute and is well suited for your power goals. I would recommend the BW in this case if you are looking for a budget-friendly option and are willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup.










The only other turbo I would mentioned here is the second generation GTX3071R with a twin-scroll turbine housing. That turbo is able to produce 60 lbs. of air per minute and should begin to spoolup between 1500 and 1750 RPMs due to the twin-scroll housing. Also, please keep in mind that your choice of turbine A/R will obviously effect how fast the turbo spools up. Unfortunately, I am not able to show these effect since most turbo manufacturers only provide a single map for each turbo.


----------



## NEDD (Aug 28, 2018)

This is some information, thank you for your time and effort, really appreciate it.

So far I have read you post 3 or 4 times to soak all the info, so your recommendation is to narrow my choice to EFR 7163 T4 0.80 and G25-600. I have looked at Garrett site and there is G25 T4 IWG version coming soon, wich is interesting and if I go with them that will be my choice for hot side.
Anyway, 7163 was my ultimate turbo, but have done some more research and kind a think it will choke the engine and not be able to acheave my goal even on E100. On the dyno below they made 420whp at 23psi. I'm kind a worry to not overspin the turbo. Fullrace also sudgested me to go B2 frame 7670.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTnKQo0m8gY&t=77s

On the other side I have talked to a guy with 1J and EFR 7670 and he showed me this dyno sheet witch is dissapointing for me. Never thought that turbo will be so lazy on this engine...
The dyno is 1J with EFR7670 1.05vs old S300SX 










About S257SX-E - really like it, but wander how it will spool fater than EFR7670... Maybe because smaller 0.83 hot side? For the money it is really tempting choice.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NEDD said:


> This is some information, thank you for your time and effort, really appreciate it.
> 
> So far I have read you post 3 or 4 times to soak all the info, *so your recommendation is to narrow my choice to EFR 7163 T4 0.80 and G25-600*. I have looked at Garrett site and there is G25 T4 IWG version coming soon, with is interesting and if I go with them that will be my choice for hot side.
> Anyway, 7163 was my ultimate turbo, but have done some more research and kind a think it will choke the engine and not be able to acheave my goal even on E100. On the dyno below they made 420whp at 23psi. I'm kind a worry to not overspin the turbo. Fullrace also sudgested me to go B2 frame 7670.
> ...


Yes, I recommend either the EFR 7163 or G25-660. 420 WHP seems low for the EFR 7163. Below is a 2006 Subaru STI which is also 2.5L making 540 HP which is more consistent with what the EFR 7163 should be making.






I agree that the EFR 7670 will be a little lazy for your needs.


----------



## obnoxious2 (Sep 8, 2018)

*EA888 and G25-550 Question*

Hi mainstayinc, I'm looking to upgrade my turbo for my mk7 gti but was wondering if you had a turbo recommendation. I would like to ideally make 400whp+ on pump gas while maintaining the quick spool time that the is20 provides. Would the G25-550 theoretically be able to do that?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

obnoxious2 said:


> Hi mainstayinc, I'm looking to upgrade my turbo for my mk7 gti but was wondering if you had a turbo recommendation. I would like to ideally make 400whp+ on pump gas while maintaining the quick spool time that the is20 provides. Would the G25-550 theoretically be able to do that?


The MK7 GTI is 2.0L correct? I would say, without looking at the maps, that the G25-550 is a great choice on 2.0L for quick spool and 400+ WHP.


----------



## obnoxious2 (Sep 8, 2018)

Thanks! And yes 2.0 liter. Which A/R?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

obnoxious2 said:


> Thanks! And yes 2.0 liter. *Which A/R?*


I'm not sure. It depends on whether you are willing to trade off some spoolup for top end power. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with the 2.0L engine found in the MK7 GTI (1984CC's). As you can see, you should start to see positive boost between 1600 and 1800 RPMs on 2.0L with full spool between 3200 and 3500 RPMs. That's with the turbine housing used to create the compressor map (not sure but probably the larger 0.92 A/R v-band housing). A larger A/R will shift these numbers to the right whereas a smaller A/R will have the opposite effect. The best advice I can give is to see which turbine housing other people are using who have 2.0L or similar displacement.


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes. Please post back here and let us know which direction you decide to go. There is an excel spreadsheet but I don't want to give that out at this time.


waiting for SEMA this year to see if they are going to bring out any other G series turbos. I shall decide then !!!:biggrinsanta:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> waiting for SEMA this year to see if they are going to bring out any other G series turbos. I shall decide then !!!:biggrinsanta:


:thumbup:According to atpturbo, Garrett is suppose to release more G-series turbos. Haven't seen anything yet. It would be nice if Garrett or atpturbo made a twin-scroll version (non v-band).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here is a PM I received from Ruiz:



ruiz said:


> Hey I just read through a lot of your compressor map thread and was wondering *what you thought of using the G25-660 as a single on the B5 S4 2.7 V6?* I think I will definitely get one for my mk4 GTI but it seems like it might not be a bad choice for the 2.7 either got the quick spool and close to 600 hp. Thoughts?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk





mainstayinc said:


> Hello:
> 
> Let me check into that and get back to you.
> 
> -John (mainstayinc)


I love the B5 S4, especially in the Avant Model. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2.7L (2671.3 CC) displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is around 1600 RPMs which means that you should start to see positive boost at that engine speed. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6300 RPMs for 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas or 700+ HP on E85. This turbo would make for a quick spooling, nice mid-range setup with over 4500 RPMs of usable boost and capable of an easy 600 HP on pump/race gas.












ruiz said:


> I appreciate it brother. *Another idea I snagged from a BMW forum would be two of the G25-550s to keep it twin?* Thanks a ton John.
> 
> Ruiz
> 
> Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk


Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1.3L (1336 CC) displacement for a twin-turbo setup. The surge line (left side of map) is between 2000 and 2600 RPMs which is 400 to 1000 RPMs later than the G25-660 in a single-turbo setup. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7900 RPMs for 45 lbs. of air per minute or 900 HP on pump/race gas or 1080 HP on E85. If you are willing to give up some spoolup for a 900+ HP on a twin-turbo setup, then this turbo would make a nice fit with over 5300 RPMs of usable boost.










Please feel free to post some pictures of your car.


----------



## ruiz (Apr 23, 2009)

Thanks for the reply John! Here are a couple shots. The S4 is going under the knife tomorrow. Only the Audi's are mine.










Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk


----------



## ruiz (Apr 23, 2009)

Seems like the single G25-660 is a better choice for my goals on another S4. The twin setup would be wayy overkill and out of my budget.

How would the G25-660 compare to say a Precision 5858 or a 6266? I'm looking for something streetable but also retarded fast and good spool. I know the different Precision turbos have been done but idk how they compare to the G25-660, which seems like the perfect candidate for when I single an S4.

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ruiz said:


> Seems like the single G25-660 is a better choice for my goals on another S4. The twin setup would be wayy overkill and out of my budget.
> 
> How would the G25-660 compare to say a Precision 5858 or a 6266? I'm looking for something streetable but also retarded fast and good spool. I know the different Precision turbos have been done but idk how they compare to the G25-660, *which seems like the perfect candidate for when I single an S4.
> *
> Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk


Love those Audis! I think the G25-660 is the perfect fit for your needs. As far as the 5858 or 6266, Precision does not publish compressor maps for their turbos as far as I can tell. So, I can't make any detailed comparison between those turbos and the G25-660. The 6266 will make more horsepower than the G25-660, but you will probably lose some spoolup and early mid-range power.


----------



## Cjtaylor1985 (Nov 9, 2018)

I've just received my rebuilt 1.8 20v engine with forged rods, arp hardware and rebuilt head, with uprated valve springs and inconel exhaust valves. I'm really tempted by one of new G25-550/660 vs Gtx3076r gen 2, but curious as to what to expect from either on the stock displacement and a slightly higher red line. Could you possibly help? Thanks in advance!


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Love those Audis! I think the G25-660 is the perfect fit for your needs. As far as the 5858 or 6266, Precision does not publish compressor maps for their turbos as far as I can tell. So, I can't make any detailed comparison between those turbos and the G25-660. The 6266 will make more horsepower than the G25-660, but you will probably lose some spoolup and early mid-range power.











EFR 8474

What would this look like on a 2JZ amigo?

also for reference
9280


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Cjtaylor1985 said:


> I've just received my rebuilt 1.8 20v engine with forged rods, arp hardware and rebuilt head, with uprated valve springs and inconel exhaust valves. I'm really tempted by one of new G25-550/660 vs Gtx3076r gen 2, but curious as to what to expect from either on the stock displacement and a slightly higher red line. Could you possibly help? Thanks in advance!



Click this link to see post# 377. It shows the G25-550 on stock displacement. Here is a re-post of the graph:










Click this link to see post# 453. It shows the G25-660 on stock displacement. Here is a re-post of the graph:










Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the second generation GTX3076R with 1.8L (1781 CCs displacement). As you can see, the G25-660 will spool about 800 to 1000 RPMs sooner than the second generation GTX3076R. I marked three (3) points corresponding to 7000 RPMs and the following pressure ratios:

P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi for 445 HP
P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi for 530 HP
P2/P1=3.45 or about 35 psi for 615 HP (GTX3076R only)










I recommend the G25-660 over the second generation GTX3076R for anything below 580 HP at 7000 RPMs on stock displacement since it has a much better surge line (left side of map). It will spoolup 800 to 1000 RPMs quicker on stock displacement. If you are willing to give up 800 to 1000 RPMs spoolup for an additional 35 HP up top, then the GTX3076R might make sense. But I would not choose that option using the GTX3076R with a single scroll turbine housing.

You can narrow the difference in spoolup by using the GTX3076R with a twin scroll turbine housing. That could theoretically give you 300 to 800 RPMs better spoolup (or more!) depending on the design of the manifold. That would make the second generation GTX3076R more attractive since it is capable of almost 650 HP at 8000 RPMs on stock displacement at P2/P1=3.2 or about 32 psi. That's 70 HP more than the G25-660.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> EFR 8474
> 
> What would this look like on a 2JZ amigo?
> 
> ...


Any chance you can scan those compressor maps using a flat-bed scanner and post here or send them to my vortex PM? The EFR8474 was just release in mid-October and there is very little information available on the web. I would love to get a hold of a good compressor map for both those turbos. Maybe there is a link to a good compressor map on the web? Not sure. I was not able to find.


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hNzq3BWLR2YrB7yRPK2Ubr3LL4Nhj--m/view?usp=sharing

EFR 8474 map

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-gCHbCt-MMue56E4UZqjYP-GGC8cl-P_/view?usp=sharing

EFR 9280


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hNzq3BWLR2YrB7yRPK2Ubr3LL4Nhj--m/view?usp=sharing
> 
> EFR 8474 map
> 
> ...


Thanks. Looking into that now.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> EFR 8474
> 
> What would this look like on a 2JZ amigo?
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the EFR 8474 with 3.0L (2997 CCs) displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in around 2800 to 2900 RPMs. You can expect to see positive boost on 3.0L displacement before 3000 RPMs and maximum boost perhaps around 3800 to 4200 RPMs. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.2 or about 32 psi at 6900 RPMs for 95 lbs. of air per minute or 950 HP on pump/race gas or 1140 HP on E85/Ethanol.










For comparison, below I overlaid the EFR 8474 with the Garrett GTX3584RS on 3.0L (2997 CC) displacement. Both of these are 84mm compressor exducer turbos. As you can see, the Garrett will spoolup about 300 to 500 RPMs quicker than the BW. However, the BW is able to produce 95 lbs. of air per minutes as compared to 90 lbs. for the Garrett. So, if you are willing to give up some spoolup for an additional 50 HP up top, then the EFR 8474 is the way to go. Please note that the Garrett has T3 and T4 twin scroll turbine housing options. That could further improve spoolup on the GTX3584RS depending on the exhaust manifold design.










The EFR 8474 seems to be slightly better than the older-tech EFR9174. Below I overlaid these turbos on 3.0L (2997 CC) displacement. Both turbos can produce about 95 lbs. of air per minute. However, you can expect the EFR 8474 to spoolup 250 to 300 RPMs sooner on 3.0L displacement.










Hope that helps!


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

Dude , very awesome!!

BW's new stuff is going to kick ass, throw in a Quick spool valve and some cams, it'll be easy sailing at 24lbs on 93 oct, maybe 650whp?
'
Thanks bud.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> Dude , very awesome!!
> 
> BW's new stuff is going to kick ass, throw in a *Quick spool valve and some cams*, it'll be easy sailing at 24lbs on 93 oct, maybe 650whp?
> '
> Thanks bud.


:thumbup:Glad you like. Love the Quick Spool valve idea. Yes, you can make an easy 650 WHP on the EFR 8474 at 24 lbs. of boost.


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

https://www.evoxforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=273897


















I'd love for it to be integrated but we'll have to wait and see. turblown is currently developing a QSV for the turbine housing, same as this.



currently we just have this
https://www.suprastore.com/spquspva.html


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

supergoji said:


> https://www.evoxforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=273897
> 
> I'd love for it to be integrated but we'll have to wait and see. turblown is currently developing a QSV for the turbine housing, same as this.
> 
> ...


That's nuts. I never expected to see an OEM supplier integrate a quick spool valve into their product line. I guess that just proves that they work. Very cool and thanks for sharing.


----------



## Butcher (Jan 31, 2001)

Sadly, that was about 4 years ago and they have not put it into production. So, there still is not an OEM manufacturer that has jumped on that band wagon.


----------



## supergoji (Jun 1, 2018)

Butcher said:


> Sadly, that was about 4 years ago and they have not put it into production. So, there still is not an OEM manufacturer that has jumped on that band wagon.


yea that was PRI 2014.

Borgwaner gave turblown their blessing to develop this exact kit.


----------



## calder (Jun 8, 2003)

Mainstay, what are you thoughts on a twin scroll 3071r vs t31 2867r on a built 1.8t (stock displacement) ?
This SPA manifold you mentioned looks interesting. Cheers.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

calder said:


> Mainstay, what are you thoughts on a twin scroll 3071r vs t31 2867r on a built 1.8t (stock displacement) ?
> This SPA manifold you mentioned looks interesting. Cheers.


If I were to upgrade my daily driver (currently first generation GTX2867R), I would go with the second generation GTX3071R on the SPA divided manifold over the second generation GTX2867R on a single scroll manifold. But let me say firstly that I am very happy with my first generation GTX2867R on my ATP single scroll T31 chinafold. That thing is nuts on 2.1L displacement (83mm x 95.5mm = 2067CCs). I can't imagine having any more power above stock redline. However, based on how the maps line up, there is plenty more power to be had above 6500 RPMs. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX2867R and GTX3071R.

The first thing you'll notice is that these maps are identical in shape but scaled differently. I think Garrett was a little lazy (or, perhaps, cheap) in creating two separate maps for the 67mm and 71mm version of the second generation GTX turbos and just decided to scale one based on the other. Based on my analysis, the second generation GTX2867R will spool about 500 RPMs quicker than the second generation GTX3071R at P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi if both were on a single scroll manifold. Expect the GTX2867R to start to create positive boost around 2000 to 2250 RPMs on stock displacement. The second generation GTX3071R will create positive boost in the 2500 to 2750 RPM range.

For the second generation GTX2867R, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7200 RPMs creating a healthy 450 HP. If you were to upgrade to the second generation GTX3071R, your pressure ratio (i.e.: boost) would have to increase in order to make any more horsepower. For the second generation GTX3071R, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 7300 RPMs for 550 HP. 










However, if you were to go with the second generation GTX3071R with a proper twin-scroll manifold, I think that spoolup could be identical or even better than the second generation GTX2867R on a single scroll manifold at stock displacement; while, at the same time, you could gain an additional 100 HP up top. I don't have personal experience with the SPA divided manifold, but based on the fact that it has short runners and is a properly divided 4+1, 2+3 manifold, you can expect to see great results with the manifold.

Below is stock picture of the TMA 05 SPA manifold:










Here is a short video:






Oh, I forgot to mention, a good twin scroll manifold will also give you more midrange and slightly better top end as compared to a single scroll setup.

Here is a screen shot of the dyno in the video:










Just in case you meant the first generation GTX2867R and GTX3071R, below I provided an overlay on stock displacement for reference:


----------



## calder (Jun 8, 2003)

Very cool! Yes this twin scroll SPA manifold looks very interesting. Just not sure of the quality ?
Also don’t think I could get to 29 psi on our 92 octane without meth. 

Another interesting comparison would be the g25-660 VS twin scroll 3071r Gen 2. Does anyone know any good vband flange manifolds for the transverse 1.8t?

So many good turbos out there now, ultimately it seems there is no bad choice. :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

calder said:


> Very cool! Yes this twin scroll SPA manifold looks very interesting. Just not sure of the quality ?
> Also don’t think I could get to 29 psi on our 92 octane without meth.
> 
> *Another interesting comparison would be the g25-660 VS twin scroll 3071r Gen 2. *Does anyone know any good vband flange manifolds for the transverse 1.8t?
> ...


The G25-660 would be slightly better if using a single-scroll turbine housing. However, I would go for the second generation GTX3071R on a twin-scroll manifold over the G25-660 single-scroll. Here's a quick comparison on stock displacement (both single scroll):


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

Same cars mine 2867 gen 2 without methanol at 2,35 bar it's the same on the road That 3071 Gen 2 without methanol at 1,55 bar 

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

Me without methanol at 2,3 bar 
https://youtu.be/2xpNQ9zcOzc


Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

djpadelis said:


> Me without methanol at 2,3 bar
> https://youtu.be/2xpNQ9zcOzc
> 
> 
> Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


Nice! Thanks for posting.:thumbup:


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

Hi john! Can you tell me your opion for something i am building!

I am building a 1.8t 20v...

Spa manifold t25 
Ferrea exhaust valves cat cams springs
2.75 inches full exhaust and DP

I am thinking for gtx2967 turbo with gen2 compressor wheel and 30psi of boost with 100 octane gas! (A/R 0.64)

Can you tell me where spool up that turbo?? 

I am not going with gt28 turbine wheel because its so small turbine and i think its restriction for my setup!

Greetings from greece! Thanks for the help my friend!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> Hi john! Can you tell me your opion for something i am building!
> 
> I am building a 1.8t 20v...
> 
> ...


No problem! I will take a look at that tomorrow afternoon. I have to travel to NJ tomorrow morning to check out a used Audi Q7 3.6 Premium for my wife. Our 2004 Audi A4 Avant 1.8t quattro wagon can no longer accommodate my growing family. Three (3) car seats across in the back seat is doable in a B6 A4 but not ideal. The third row seat in the Q7 should alleviate things.

Check it out:










Hopefully, the Q7 is as nice in person as in the pictures.


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

I had a Q7 for 2 weeks from a cousin of me...
Its a nice car and heavy! Its traveling awesome in highways!!

May be good and buy my friend!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> I had a Q7 for 2 weeks from a cousin of me...
> *Its a nice car and heavy! *Its traveling awesome in highways!!
> 
> May be good and buy my friend!


Yeah. 5000+ lbs. (2270+ kg) is quite heavy for a vehicle. It will take all of the 3.6 liters to get it moving. Maybe later I will add a nice 500 to 600 HP turbo to increase output. It looks like there is a lot of room in the engine bay to add a turbo to the longitudinally-mounted VR6. Of course, I won't tell my wife about that. My engine builder, Bill Schimmel, specialized in VR6 turbo stuff. He's the man for the job.


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

Is it so heavy? I did not do it with anything to be so!
Do you intend to put a turbine on it too? You are a cool guy! As long as I was very nice to drive it! Just for Greece I would say it is not economical ... It burns a lot of gas!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> Is it so heavy? I did not do it with anything to be so!
> Do you intend to put a turbine on it too? You are a cool guy! As long as I was very nice to drive it! Just for Greece I would say it is not economical ...* It burns a lot of gas*!


Gas is cheap in the US so I am not too concerned about fuel economy. I did, if fact, purchase the Q7 today. After test driving it, I realized that the 3.6L VR6 has no problem accelerating the 5000+ lb. chassis. The car is fun to drive as it is. However, it would be nice to make **upgrades** in the future.:laugh:


----------



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

an HX60 would be a right proper fit on a vehicle like that 76mm I think compressor inducer.


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Gas is cheap in the US so I am not too concerned about fuel economy. I did, if fact, purchase the Q7 today. After test driving it, I realized that the 3.6L VR6 has no problem accelerating the 5000+ lb. chassis. The car is fun to drive as it is. However, it would be nice to make **upgrades** in the future.:laugh:



I know this about gasoline at us ... I have a family in boston and I want to visit them in a short time because so far only by the phone we talk!

I'm very glad you got a new car and I wish you enjoyed it!

Today I got the turbine and now I want to go on the car to start the work so I can put it on! I'll send you a photo to update the project ... I just want you to see the map and give me your opinion!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> I know this about gasoline at us ... I have a family in boston and I want to visit them in a short time because so far only by the phone we talk!
> 
> *I'm very glad you got a new car and I wish you enjoyed it!*
> 
> Today I got the turbine and now I want to go on the car to start the work so I can put it on! I'll send you a photo to update the project ... *I just want you to see the map and give me your opinion! *


Thanks. I'll try to post something by the end of the day. Yes, please post a photo when you get a chance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> Hi john! Can you tell me your opion for something i am building!
> 
> I am building a 1.8t 20v...
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, I couldn't find a compressor map for the second generation GTX2867R with the GT29 turbine housing. I found a compressor map for the first generation GTX2967R but that was identical to the GT2867R. So, nothing useful can be interpolated from that map as far as any differences between the GT28 and GT29 turbine housings. The GT29 turbine housing will, naturally, delay spool by some amount. Perhaps 100 to 200 RPMs. Not sure. 

Here is a link to post# 337 which compares the second generation GTX2867R and the EFR6758 at 29 psi on stock displacement. And here is a repost of the compressor map:










You can read the surge line on the left side of the map which indicates about where you can expect to start to see positive boost on stock 1.8L displacement. Full boost will occur 1000 to 1500 RPMs after the surge line, but is setup dependent. Things such as camshafts, tune, wastegate control etc. can greatly effect when full spool will occur.

User brwmogazos also from Greece ran or runs a GTX3067R. He might be a good resource for you as far as running larger turbine housings on the GTX 67mm turbo. Here is some feedback he posted earlier this year. And a short video:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> an HX60 would be a right proper fit on a vehicle like that 76mm I think compressor inducer.


Sorry I missed your post. Yeah, I like the sound of that! At 0.95 kg/sec, that's about 126 lbs. of air per minute or 1200+ HP. That works for me.:thumbup:


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Unfortunately, I couldn't find a compressor map for the second generation GTX2867R with the GT29 turbine housing. I found a compressor map for the first generation GTX2967R but that was identical to the GT2867R. So, nothing useful can be interpolated from that map as far as any differences between the GT28 and GT29 turbine housings. The GT29 turbine housing will, naturally, delay spool by some amount. Perhaps 100 to 200 RPMs. Not sure.


Thank you for your help and my friend!
The compressor I've used is KTS and it's billet with point miling 67mm with extended tip at 70mm and my goal is to work 480-500hp and 7.800rpm limit ... That's why I chose to put GT29 on with it 28 surely it would be a limitation !!!

I have a camshaft intake from the atmospheric engine (ADR)

Before I switched turbo I had a 2860rs and had a 26psi pressure and had shown in a well-known dynamometer here in Athens Greece 370 horsepower with 34 ft / lbs torque !! I enjoyed this turbo for this engine with nice power at high rpm!

So what do you think?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> Thank you for your help and my friend!
> The compressor I've used is KTS and it's billet with point miling 67mm with extended tip at 70mm and my goal is to work 480-500hp and 7.800rpm limit ... That's why I chose to put GT29 on with it 28 surely it would be a limitation !!!
> 
> I have a camshaft intake from the atmospheric engine (ADR)
> ...


That's a very nice setup. I especially like the fact that you are using ADR cams. That's the way to go. I think the T25 turbine housing will become restrictive on your setup. Also, assuming you are using a small port head, that will become somewhat restrictive above stock redline.


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> That's a very nice setup. I especially like the fact that you are using ADR cams. That's the way to go. I think the T25 turbine housing will become restrictive on your setup. Also, assuming you are using a small port head, that will become somewhat restrictive above stock redline.


:heart::heart::heart:



As a beginning I just put one camshaft to see how it works and then I will put on the side of the exhaust!

It's in my direct plans to make an exhaust manifold I've already bought a collector ... But I'm afraid I do not waste enough on the spool ...

What's the difference between T25 0.86 and T3 0.64 ??? Now I have t25 0.64!

Maybe I would have a t25 0.64??


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Psilos1.8t said:


> :heart::heart::heart:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not sure. However, I would recommend the T3 (with external wastegate) over the T25 for anything over stock redline. Also, you will probably have better wastegate control using an external wastegate versus internal. Also, I would stick with stock exhaust cam as the ADR exhaust cam has longer duration and will give you more valve overlap. That's ok *off boost* but might hurt performance *on boost*. So, I recommend the ADR intake cam with the stock exhaust cam. Also, I think there are different versions of the ADR camshaft. IIRC the "f" cam is best.


----------



## djpadelis (Nov 29, 2016)

Put g550 its better than your turbo that you speaking 

Στάλθηκε από το LG-H850 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk


----------



## Psilos1.8t (Nov 25, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I'm not sure. However, I would recommend the T3 (with external wastegate) over the T25 for anything over stock redline. Also, you will probably have better wastegate control using an external wastegate versus internal. Also, I would stick with stock exhaust cam as the ADR exhaust cam has longer duration and will give you more valve overlap. That's ok *off boost* but might hurt performance *on boost*. So, I recommend the ADR intake cam with the stock exhaust cam. Also, I think there are different versions of the ADR camshaft. IIRC the "f" cam is best.



I have an external 40mm wastegate and exactly the same think about exhaust ...
Hmmm then i have to buy t3 0.64 to work better !!!

My djpantelis friend can not buy a G25 because they want all the change and that's how much the cost goes up!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received the following PM from Junietob



Junietob said:


> hello mainstayinc(john), ive been following a lot of the compressor maps you've done over the years and they have been helpful in understand pressure ratios and how to read compressor maps. i still get lost sometimes and it's the reason for the private message.
> 
> -btw, i love the build your doing on your vw rabbit! it's badass!
> 
> ...





mainstayinc said:


> Hello. That sounds like an interesting project. Please confirm that the bore and stroke is 88mm x 86mm. Also, I don't have a compressor map that is specific to the journal bearing GTX3582R. The closest I have is a first generation dual ball bearing GTX3582R. The journal bearing will change the surge line a bit. Also, I couldn't find any details on the BNRSupercars website on the S6 turbo as far as the turbine housing. Is the turbine housing single scroll or twin-scroll? What A/R? Any additional information on this turbo would be helpful.
> 
> -John (mainstayinc).





Junietob said:


> Yes the bore is 88mm wiseco pistons, as for stroke that stayed at 86mm because of 2.0 crankshaft and 2.0 head.
> 
> Stock Cobalt SS "lnf" configuration is 86mm x 86mm.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3582R ball bearing turbo with 2092CC displacement (88mm bore x 86mm stroke). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 3000 to 4400 RPMs. I estimate that the journal bearing version of this turbo will spool 200 to 400 RPMs later than the dual ball bearing version but will not lose anything up top. Therefore, you can expect so see positive boost around 3200 to 4800 RPMs at 2.1L displacement. Most likely between 4000 and 4200 RPMs. You can expect to see full spool by 5000 to 5400 RPMs.

As you can see, I placed a line at 7400 RPMs which represents your maximum redline. I marked three (3) points corresponding to the following pressure ratios:

1. P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi
2. P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi
3. P2/P1=3.4 or about 35 psi

These point correspond to 55, 66.5 and 75 lbs. for air per minute or 550, 665 and 750 HP respectively on pump/race gas with good intercooling. This setup will be somewhat laggy on 2.1L displacement. I strongly recommend a twin-scroll setup to improve your surge line and volumetric efficiency throughout your engine operating range.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a PM from Jordan in the UK:



Jordysport said:


> Good Evening,
> 
> I am really hoping you can help me as i am going round and round in circles on turbo choice. just a bit of background. I am circuit racing here in the UK at a circuit called Castle combe, the car is a Mk1 Focus RS (think over the pond you call it an SVT?) it is a fully forged engine with standard displacement 1988cc. the debate goes on as to whether to use UK 99 RON or 102 Race fuel but that is a separate matter. We run Yokohama AD08R (255/35/18) so traction is somewhat limited. I have come from a N/A background and turbo's are a new thing for me. *I am considering the GTX3071 Gen 2 but also on the table is both the new G series turbo's (550 and 660)
> *
> ...


About the MK1 Focus RS:



NMS said:


> *Ford Focus RS Mk1*
> 
> Launched in 2003, this very special Focus featured a unique wide arched body shell, 8x18” OZ alloys, uprated Sachs suspension, Brembo 320mm 4 pot brakes, Quaife ATB equipped MTX75 gearbox, uprated AP clutch, and a turbocharged zetec engine (labelled Duratec) featuring sodium cooled exhaust valves with uprated valve springs, low compression Mahle pistons, uprated water pump and a Garrett Gt2560 turbocharger. As standard the car features a water cooled charge cooler, and running 0.8bar boost makes around 220bhp running on Ford’s own EEC V engine management.


Any of those turbos would make a great choice for 2.0L displacement with the G25-660 and second generation GTX3071R giving you the highest output. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 2.0L displacement (84.8mm bore x 88mm stroke = 1988CC's). The surge line (left side of map) comes in between 1600 and 2000 RPMs. You can expect to see positive boost by 2000 RPMs on 2.0L displacement with full spool no later than 3500 to 3800 RPMs but is setup dependent. Things such as camshafts, tune, wastegate control etc. can greatly effect when full spool will occur.

I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi and 6900 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 crank HP on pump/race gas with good intercooling. If intercooling is less-than-ideal, then you can calculate your adjusted boost pressure or adjusted engine speed using the formula in this post.










Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2.0L displacement (1988CC's). The surge line (left side of map) comes in between 2000 and 2200 RPMs. If you are willing to give up a couple of hundred RPMs in spoolup for an additional 100 HP up top, then the G25-660 is a great choice. You can expect to see full spool by 3700 to 4000 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi producing 59 lbs. of air per minute on pump/race gas with good intercooling. The G25-660 will allow you to get the most out of your setup with a 7500 RPM redline using a single scroll turbine housing.










Below I overlaid the G25-660 [BLUE] with the second generation GTX3071R [RED] on 2.0L displacement (1988CC's). The second generation GTX3071R is not quite as good at the G25-660 with the surge line coming in 200 RPMs later at 2400 RPMs versus 2200 RPMs. Maximum output is about the same as the G25-660 but at a higher engine speed and lower pressure ratio (boost level). I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi at 8000 RPMs producing just under 590 HP on pump/race gas with good intercooling.










If you want the ultimate setup, then I would consider the second generation GTX3071R with a twin-scroll turbine housing such as Garrett's new T3 Ni-Resist twin scroll housing or their older-style T3 divided housing. If you mate that with a properly divided (4+1, 2+3) short-runner exhaust manifold, you could potentially see a 400 to 800+ RPM gain in your surge line while having a slight increase in top end. This setup would also increase your mid-range torque. Here is an example of a properly divided short-runner exhaust manifold (taken from my MK1 2.1L GTX3584RS build):










Here is a dyno comparing the GTX3076R using a single-scroll turbine housing on a cast manifold versus a twin-scroll housing on a short-runner divided manifold (see below). Check out this page for more information.










This setup would give you the widest powerband with 600+HP potential top end. Please note that you would lose this effect if you were to use a long-runner "race-style" divided manifold as the longer exhaust runners would add more volume to your exhaust system and delay spoolup.

So, in summary:

1. For the quickest spool and 500HP: G25-550
2. For quick spool with 600HP on single-scroll turbine housing: G25-660
3. For the ultimate setup (quick spool with 600HP and fatter mid-range): second generation GTX3071R with twin-scroll turbine housing on properly divided short-runner exhaust manifold.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## B20b_CRX (Dec 30, 2018)

this is completely unrelated to any audi engine but i have a honda crx with a swapped b20b which is a 2.0 and i just recently picked up a holset hy35 i was wondering if you could make me up a compressor map that would show me how efficient it would be on my little 2.0L engine the bore is 84mm and the stroke is 89mm thanks in advance


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

B20b_CRX said:


> this is completely unrelated to any audi engine but i have a honda crx with a swapped b20b which is a 2.0 and i just recently picked up a holset hy35 i was wondering if you could make me up a compressor map that would show me how efficient it would be on my little 2.0L engine the bore is 84mm and the stroke is 89mm thanks in advance


No problem. I'll check into that tomorrow.:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

B20b_CRX said:


> this is completely unrelated to any audi engine but i have a honda crx with a swapped b20b which is a 2.0 and i just recently picked up a holset hy35 i was wondering if you could make me up a compressor map that would show me how efficient it would be on my little 2.0L engine the bore is 84mm and the stroke is 89mm thanks in advance


Below I overlaid the HY-35 with 2.0L displacement (84mm bore x 89mm stroke = 1973CC's). The surge line (left side of map) comes in between 2600 and 3600 RPMs depending on your pressure ratio. This means that you can expect to see positive boost somewhere between 2600 and 3600 RPMs but is setup dependent. You can expect to see full spool between 4000 and 5000 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. Your maximum compressor efficiency ranges from 5000 to 5500 RPMs. That is represented by the efficiency islands in the middle of the map and is where you can expect to see maximum torque on your setup. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi at 7300 RPMs producing about 57 lbs. of air per minute or 570 HP on pump/race gas with good intercooling or 680 HP on a well-tuned E85/ethanol setup. Overall, I think this is a pretty nice match with 2.0L displacement if you don't mind **waiting for the turbo to spoolup**. A twin-scroll turbine housing matched to a proper divided manifold would be even better. I'm not sure if Holset sells twin-scroll turbine housings for the HY-35.










EDIT: Just in case anyone is interested, I posted a comparison of the HY-35 with the Garrett G25-660 below. The newer-technology Garrett is significantly better on **both sides of the map**.










EDIT: Below is a comparison of the HY-35 with the second generation GTX3071R. The Garrett has a significantly better surge line and slightly better top end as compared to the Holset.


----------



## _OVERBOOST_ (Dec 31, 2018)

*Hi*

Mainstayinc Hello to you from Russia! I apologize for my English)))) I am very impressed with your answers on this forum! You are very clear and clearly explain! Help please with the choice of the hot part of A / R (0.83 or 1.01 garret v-band) for the GTX3584RS for the 1JZ-GTE VVTi. Our goal this year is to get 550WHP AT on the rear wheel drive, and a year later we plan to swap 4WD AT and get 750WHP. The fuel will be pump gas (100) methanol injection. The car is not only for racing, sometimes a ride around the city)))) You can apply graphics with different hot parts GTX3584RS 0.83 1.01 1.21 so that you can understand the difference in the spool between them and the power received. Thank!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

_OVERBOOST_ said:


> Mainstayinc Hello to you from Russia! I apologize for my English)))) I am very impressed with your answers on this forum! You are very clear and clearly explain! Help please with the choice of the hot part of A / R (0.83 or 1.01 garret v-band) for the GTX3584RS for the 1JZ-GTE VVTi. Our goal this year is to get 550WHP AT on the rear wheel drive, and a year later we plan to swap 4WD AT and get 750WHP. The fuel will be pump gas (100) methanol injection. The car is not only for racing, sometimes a ride around the city)))) You can apply graphics with different hot parts GTX3584RS 0.83 1.01 1.21 so that you can understand the difference in the spool between them and the power received. Thank!


Hello! Thanks for your interest. That sounds like an interesting project. I don't have a separate compressor map for the different hot sides for the GTX3584RS. So, I won't be able to make any comparisons. However, I can post a generic compressor map with your engine displacement with some opinions about the hot side. The 1JZ-GTE is 2.5 liters, correct?


----------



## _OVERBOOST_ (Dec 31, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Hello! Thanks for your interest. That sounds like an interesting project. I don't have a separate compressor map for the different hot sides for the GTX3584RS. So, I won't be able to make any comparisons. However, I can post a generic compressor map with your engine displacement with some opinions about the hot side. The 1JZ-GTE is 2.5 liters, correct?


Yes 2,5 liters
It is a pity that there are no cards with different hot parts, and what is the difference in the spool between these hot parts (0.83 1.01 1.21)? What would you choose according to my tasks? at what engine speed can you get 200kpa?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

_OVERBOOST_ said:


> Yes 2,5 liters
> *It is a pity that there are no cards with different hot parts*, and what is the difference in the spool between these hot parts (0.83 1.01 1.21)? What would you choose according to my tasks? at what engine speed can you get 200kpa?


I agree. Also, the manufacturer doesn't publish which hot side is used to create the compressor map. I assume, in most cases, that they use the largest hot side to create a particular map but I could be wrong. Give me a few minutes and I'll post up some results.


----------



## _OVERBOOST_ (Dec 31, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> I agree. Also, the manufacturer doesn't publish which hot side is used to create the compressor map. I assume, in most cases, that they use the largest hot side to create a particular map but I could be wrong. Give me a few minutes and I'll post up some results.


Yes, I think so too! Thank you so much for answering so quickly. waiting ....


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

_OVERBOOST_ said:


> Yes, I think so too! Thank you so much for answering so quickly. waiting ....


Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS with 2.5L displacement (86mm bore x 71.5mm stroke = 2492CC's). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 2000 to 3200 RPMs at this displacement using the turbine housing that the manufacturer used to create the map (not sure, but probably the 1.21 A/R hotside). You can expect full spool anywhere between 3500 and 4500 RPMs at this displacement. A smaller hot side (0.83, 1.01 A/R for example) will get you there sooner. A properly setup twin-scroll hot side with relatively short runners will also get you there sooner. See my build thread here. A twin-scroll setup would be a lot easier to implement on an inline six cylinder as compared to a four cylinder as you can simply pair cylinders 1+2+3 and 4+5+6. In other words, the exhaust manifold would be a lot easier to construct.

To achieve 550 rear WHP, you would have to produce about 63 lbs. of air per minute (550 x 1.15) or 630 HP at the crank. Below I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 7250 RPMs (stock rev limiter for the 1JZ-GTE) producing 63 lbs. of air per minute. To achieve 750 rear WHP, you would have to produce about 86 lbs. of air per minute (750 x 1.15) or 860 HP at the crank. A marked a second point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi (200 kpa) at 8250 RPMs producing 86 lbs. of air per minute. You would have to increase your stock rev limiter by 1000 RPMs to achieve this output on 2.5L displacement using the GTX3584RS.


----------



## _OVERBOOST_ (Dec 31, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS with 2.5L displacement (86mm bore x 71.5mm stroke = 2492CC's). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 2000 to 3200 RPMs at this displacement using the turbine housing that the manufacturer used to create the map (not sure, but probably the 1.21 A/R hotside). You can expect full spool anywhere between 3500 and 4500 RPMs at this displacement. A smaller hot side (0.83, 1.01 A/R for example) will get you there sooner. A properly setup twin-scroll hot side with relatively short runners will also get you there sooner. See my build thread here. A twin-scroll setup would be a lot easier to implement on an inline six cylinder as compared to a four cylinder as you can simply pair cylinders 1+2+3 and 4+5+6. In other words, the exhaust manifold would be a lot easier to construct.
> 
> To achieve 550 rear WHP, you would have to produce about 63 lbs. of air per minute (550 x 1.15) or 630 HP at the crank. Below I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 7250 RPMs (stock rev limiter for the 1JZ-GTE) producing 63 lbs. of air per minute. To achieve 750 rear WHP, you would have to produce about 86 lbs. of air per minute (750 x 1.15) or 860 HP at the crank. A marked a second point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi (200 kpa) at 8250 RPMs producing 86 lbs. of air per minute. You would have to increase your stock rev limiter by 1000 RPMs to achieve this output on 2.5L displacement using the GTX3584RS.


Thank you very much for such a detailed answer! I understand correctly if I choose the hot part 1.01 will it be what you need? I will get a normal spool, and I will get the necessary power a little earlier in terms of engine speed than at 1.21? By the way, the standard speed limit engine 1JZGTE 7800RPM, we will limit to 8200RPM ...
PS: check out our Toyota Celica gtx3076
https://youtu.be/HWxIWM6fANo

Now it is already on gtx3076 gen2 and it has become even faster, 100-200 km / h 5.1 seconds


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

_OVERBOOST_ said:


> Thank you very much for such a detailed answer! *I understand correctly if I choose the hot part 1.01 will it be what you need? *I will get a normal spool, and I will get the necessary power a little earlier in terms of engine speed than at 1.21? By the way, the standard speed limit engine 1JZGTE 7800RPM, we will limit to 8200RPM ...
> PS: check out our Toyota Celica gtx3076
> https://youtu.be/HWxIWM6fANo
> 
> Now it is already on gtx3076 gen2 and it has become even faster, 100-200 km / h 5.1 seconds


If you decide to go with a single scroll setup, then I would choose either the 1.01 or 1.21 A/R V-Band turbine housing. However, I would go with the 1.01 A/R T3 twin scroll or the 1.06 T4 twin scroll. Do *not *get the V-Band twin scroll as that housing will be too restrictive. It must be a T3 or T4 twin scroll housing. As long as the runners are kept relatively short, you should see better-than-normal spool as compared to the single scroll and better mid-range and slightly better top end. See the graphic below for a basic idea of a short-runner twin scroll manifold on an inline six cylinder.

Nice Celica BTW!:thumbup:


----------



## _OVERBOOST_ (Dec 31, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> If you decide to go with a single scroll setup, then I would choose either the 1.01 or 1.21 A/R V-Band turbine housing. However, I would go with the 1.01 A/R T3 twin scroll or the 1.06 T4 twin scroll. Do *not *get the V-Band twin scroll as that housing will be too restrictive. It must be a T3 or T4 twin scroll housing. As long as the runners are kept relatively short, you should see better-than-normal spool as compared to the single scroll and better mid-range and slightly better top end. See the graphic below for a basic idea of a short-runner twin scroll manifold on an inline six cylinder.
> 
> Nice Celica BTW!:thumbup:


Thank you very much for the quick and very multi-information answers! The exhaust manifold is already welded to single scroll, so I’ll choose the hot part 1.01 v-band. if you ever need help in Russia let me know! I will be glad to help you! Merry Christmas!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

_OVERBOOST_ said:


> Thank you very much for the quick and very multi-information answers! The exhaust manifold is already welded to single scroll, *so I’ll choose the hot part 1.01 v-band*. if you ever need help in Russia let me know! I will be glad to help you! Merry Christmas!


I think that's a good choice.:thumbup: Feel free to post any pictures of your project here.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## B20b_CRX (Dec 30, 2018)

luckily for me the hy-35 is a t3-t4 manifold its the hx-35 and larger Holset turbos that are twin scrolls


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

B20b_CRX said:


> luckily for me the hy-35 is a t3-t4 manifold its the hx-35 and larger Holset turbos *that are twin scrolls*


Nice!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a PM from Jayme:



J'sWorld said:


> Hey there,
> 
> My name is Jayme. I have run across/read a bunch of your postings and turbo data. I actually joined the forum just so that I could message you and hope that you may be willing to do a plot for me on my build/ turbo selection. I think you are more knowledgable than I in this area and I'm always looking to expand my thinking and learn. I would value your opinion very much!
> 
> ...


That is a very cool project! Below I reposted the video from you link you provided. I love the custom Swain Tech'd manifold.






Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 with 2.3L displacement (93.5mm bore x 84mm stroke x 8 cylinders = 4614 CC's / 2 = 2307 CC's). I over-bored the stock cylinder by .02" or about 0.5mm to bring you to 4.6L as per the video. As you can see from the compressor map below, the surge line (left side of map) comes in around 1500 RPMs on 2.3L displacement. However, it appears that Borg Warner used a twin-scroll turbine housing when creating this map. That would explain why the surge line is ridiculously better than any other 71mm turbo on the market. For a single-scroll application like yours, I think it's best to subtract 500 to 800 RPMs from the surge line to get a more accurate result. So, my best estimate is that you can expect this turbo to begin to spoolup around 2000 to 2300 RPMs on 2.3L displacement. You can expect full boost between 3000 and 3800 RPMs.

As you can see, I marked three points corresponding to the following boost targets:

1. P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi producing 47 lbs. of air per minute or 95 lbs. on a twin-turbo setup at 7200 RPMs good for 950 HP on pump/race gas or 1134 HP on a well-tuned E85/Ethanol setup.
2. P2/P1=2.5 or about 22.0 psi producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 120 lbs. on a twin-turbo setup at 7300 RPMs good for 1200 HP on pump/race gas or 1440 HP on a well-tuned E85/Ethanol setup.
3. P2/P1=3.0 or about 29.0 psi producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 120 lbs. on a twin-turbo setup at 6100 RPMs good for 1200 HP on pump/race gas or 1440 HP on a well-tuned E85/Ethanol setup.










Overall, I think this turbo is very well matched to your displacement. It will give you quick spool with 1000+ HP potential in a twin-turbo application. If you want to take this setup to the next level, then consider a twin-scroll setup which, to my knowledge, has never been done on a Porsche V8 before. You would have to custom fabricate a new divided header based on the following Porsche V8 firing order:










For cylinder bank 1: 1+2, 3+4
For cylinder bank 2: 5+7, 6+8

The result would be an asymmetrical setup as follows:










That will give you 270 degrees separation between exhaust events. That is enough to keep exhaust events separate and prevent contamination (back flow) of exhaust gas from one cylinder to another. The benefit of this arrangement is:

Cooler combustion temperatures
Ability to run higher boost
Ability to run higher engine compression
Less fuel octane required
Quicker spoolup
Ability to run bigger turbo without sacrificing spoolup
Better mid-range
Etc.

I know you fabricated your own exhaust manifold(s) so you are probably not inclined to go this route. But I thought I would throw this option out there. Also, did you keep stock 11.5:1 engine compressor or did you drop compression with CP pistons?

For comparison, below I overlaid the twin-scroll EFR 7670 with 2.3L displacement. As you can see, the surge line comes in between 2000 and 2300 RPMs. That's about the same as the EFR 7163 on a single-scroll. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi producing about 64.5 lbs. of air per minute or 1286 HP on a twin-turbo setup with pump/race gas or 1543 HP on a well tuned E85/Ethanol setup. So, the net result of this setup is 100 more HP with the same spoolup as compared to the EFR 7163 on a single-scroll. Also, it opens the door to running larger turbos with the most efficient engine arrangement possible.


----------



## Jordysport (Aug 20, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> I received a PM from Jordan in the UK:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


John, many thanks for this, this has really helped me get my head around analysing the maps. one final request. i've been offered a twin scroll manifold (peron tuning / Nortech) with EFR 6758 how would that compare over the above.

Many thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jordysport said:


> John, many thanks for this, this has really helped me get my head around analysing the maps. one final request. i've been offered a twin scroll manifold (peron tuning / Nortech) with EFR 6758 how would that compare over the above.
> 
> Many thanks


NP. I'll check into tomorrow (Monday).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jordysport said:


> John, many thanks for this, this has really helped me get my head around analysing the maps. one final request. *i've been offered a twin scroll manifold *(peron tuning / Nortech) *with EFR 6758 how would that compare over the above.
> *
> Many thanks


Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 and the G25-550 with 2.0L displacement (1988 CC's). The choke line (right side of map) for both turbos is at 50 lbs. of air per minute producing about 500 crank HP on pump/race gas. What's impressive is that the G25-550 achieves this output with a smaller 60mm compressor wheel. Whereas the BW needs 67mm's of compressor wheel to achieve this same output. The smaller compressor wheel of the Garrett allows for a better surge line (left side of map). Therefore, you can expect the Garrett to spool quicker (about +200 RPMs) while having the same top end.

However, it is unclear whether the EFR 6758 map is for single-scroll or twin-scroll turbine housing. If you compare the EFR 6758 with the larger EFR 7163 (not shown), the latter turbo has a better surge line. This leads me to believe that the EFR 6758 map is for a single scroll turbine. If that's the case, then you can expect a 500 to 800 RPM improvement in the surge line using a twin-scroll setup. That would make it a quicker spooling turbo than the G25-550.










Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 and the G25-660 with 2.0L displacement. Both turbos have a 67mm compressor wheel. As you can see, the Garrett is way better in terms of choke line and overall output. You can expect to make an additional 100 HP with this turbo as compared to the BW. The surge line for both turbos is about the same with the BW being just slightly better. In a twin-scroll setup, the BW would spool quicker as mentioned above.


----------



## Jordysport (Aug 20, 2010)

Thank you John, what i find amazing about it all is this all new all singing all dancing G25-660 to be so similar to the current G3071R Gen 2 (granted being 1 size up) but with little effect of spool time (200RPM) For me I think it is a weigh up with the 3071R gen 2 and the G25-660 but with the 3071 having a lot more proven history seems the safer bet. especially with a target boost lower than the G series. I shall post back in next couple of months with the result for comparison. Many thanks again.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jordysport said:


> Thank you John, what i find amazing about it all is this all new all singing all dancing G25-660 to be so similar to the current G3071R Gen 2 (granted being 1 size up) but with little effect of spool time (200RPM) For me I think it is a weigh up with the 3071R gen 2 and the G25-660 but with the 3071 having a lot more proven history seems the safer bet. especially with a target boost lower than the G series. I shall post back in next couple of months with the result for comparison. Many thanks again.


You're welcome. I look forward to any updates you might post here.


----------



## barsch (Jan 28, 2019)

*VW Scirocco MK3 build*

Hi John,

I've been reading this thread and hoping you can help us?
We are building a VW Scirocco with a 2.1L 16V.
83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke CR 9.25:1.
The car is used for autocross, so we are looking for midrange en top-end power with good throttle response.
The car is running on E85 and we are going to use a twinscroll manifold.

We are considering the following turbos:

G25-660
GTX3076R gen II
BW S200SX-e 
BW 7670

Could you do some recommendations, based on your knowledge?


----------



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

John can give you the compressor maps but I can tell you from experience those are all way too big. Your going to want to stick to something in the gt2860 size range. Even with 2.1 and twin scroll you won't have the exhaust energy to spin any of those turbos up to make a useable power band on the autox circuit.

The smallest efr would be the best option. 6258. Or even the 5951 if it's every officially released. A gt2560rs-bb would be great as well. 

The difference between a 1.8l and 2.1l is significant on big turbo spool up, but still not enough for turbos THAT big. Not without compounding, at least.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

barsch said:


> Hi John,
> 
> I've been reading this thread and hoping you can help us?
> We are building a VW Scirocco with a 2.1L 16V.
> ...


^^I tend to agree with Pat. For autocross, you want a quick spooling setup with a nice usable powerband. I'll post a couple of different options tomorrow. What kind of top-end power are you looking for?


----------



## barsch (Jan 28, 2019)

Hi John,

At this moment we are running about 500HP, but with a Rotrex centrifugal compressor.
This is on 102 pump gas.
Our target is 550-600HP.

Regards.


----------



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

Have you considered trading the rotrex out for a positive displacement blower like a tvs r1320? Or even a 5th gen m90? Those will make that power with better down low torque. I literally just purchased a tvs r1900 off ebay for $575


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

barsch said:


> Hi John,
> 
> I've been reading this thread and hoping you can help us?
> We are building a VW Scirocco with a 2.1L 16V.
> ...




I’ve never done any autocross, just HPDE, but I’ve seen a few good results with the G25-660. This is a dyno on 1.9L. Spool starts mid-later 3K, and is full on low 4K. Yours should spool sooner. That gives a good power band. The 550 should spool even earlier depending on your top end goals.


----------



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

That's well and good for a street car. For auto-x, that power band needs to be shifted about 1500rpm or more to the left. peak torque being at 4500 is no good. There's often no shifting due to course design, so you'll be in second the entire course.


----------



## barsch (Jan 28, 2019)

Hi Pat,

In our situation we do shift, we use a sequential gearbox with about 1000-1500rpm between gears.
Depending on the length of the course we use the 4th, 5th or 6th gear.

Regards


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

barsch said:


> Hi John,
> At this moment we are running about 500HP, but with a Rotrex centrifugal compressor.
> This is on 102 pump gas.
> Our target is 550-600HP.
> ...


Here are my recommendations for 2.1L displacement:

*Twin-scroll options*:*

For super quick spool and 450 HP
1. First generation GTX2863R
2. Second generation GTX2860R
3. EFR 6258

For quick spool and 500 HP
1. Second generation GTX2867R
2. EFR 6758

For good spool and 600 HP
1. Second generation GTX3071R
2. EFR 7163

For later spool and 650 HP
1. Second generation GTX3076R
2. EFR 7670
3. BW S200SX-e 

*Single-scroll options**:*

For quick spool and 450 HP
1. First generation GTX2863R
2. Second generation GTX2860R
3. EFR 6258

For quick spool and 500 HP
1. G25-550

For good spool and 500 HP
1. Second generation GTX2867R
2. EFR 6758

For good spool and 600 HP
1. G25-660

For later spool and 600 HP
1. Second generation GTX3071R
2. EFR 7163

For late spool and 650 HP
1. Second generation GTX3076R
2. EFR 7670
3. BW S200SX-e 

*Twin-scroll recommendations assume that you are building a relatively tight, short runner exhaust manifold. Longer runner manifolds will delay spoolup to some extent.
**Garrett G25 series turbos only come in single-scroll as of now.

Let me know what turbos you want to see compared and I will post up some analysis and comments.


----------



## barsch (Jan 28, 2019)

Thanks John,

I will check and let you know what we wan't, I think we have to go to somewhere around 550-600HP with good spool.
The EFR turbos are nice but what i've been told they cannot be used with antilag.
We wan't to have the possibility to implement antilag if we have problems with spool.

Regards


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

barsch said:


> Thanks John,
> 
> I will check and let you know what we wan't, I think we have to go to somewhere around 550-600HP with good spool.
> The EFR turbos are nice but what i've been told they cannot be used with antilag.
> ...


:thumbup: Cool.


----------



## J'sWorld (Jan 9, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I received a PM from Jayme:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks a million John! Great analysis. 
Tuning as we speak so I can post up some real world results soon. Running about 22 psi on 93 right now. It's quick. As soon as we finish up a pump tune I will get a dyno pull or two for numbers. 

No way on the twin scroll! I was lucky to fit what I did and if it wasn't for the 90degree covers it would have gotten even more ugly. She's running good, spool is almost instant with full boost right where you predicted. I may be battling some compressor surge now. Either that or the funky exhaust cams Porsche put in there. 4 cylinders have 8.0mm lift, 4 have 9.85mm. We believe this is causing some boost oscillations after the gates open. 4 of the cylinders appear to be more prone to knock as well. I'm working on that now but expect some updates soon. 

You rock


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

J'sWorld said:


> Thanks a million John! Great analysis.
> Tuning as we speak so I can post up some real world results soon. Running about 22 psi on 93 right now. It's quick. As soon as we finish up a pump tune I will get a dyno pull or two for numbers.
> 
> No way on the twin scroll! I was lucky to fit what I did and if it wasn't for the 90degree covers it would have gotten even more ugly. She's running good, spool is almost instant with full boost right where you predicted. I may be battling some compressor surge now. Either that or the funky exhaust cams Porsche put in there. 4 cylinders have 8.0mm lift, 4 have 9.85mm. We believe this is causing some boost oscillations after the gates open. 4 of the cylinders appear to be more prone to knock as well. I'm working on that now but expect some updates soon.
> ...


:thumbup:Looking forward to any results you might post here.


----------



## MikeSAABt (Jan 23, 2004)

Hi John,

Like others I think, I have a case of 'analysis paralysis' and could use a second opinion if you are inclined.

Car is a Volvo 242 with a Volvo b230ft engine
2.3l 8 valve, 96.5mm bore, 80mm stroke
8.5:1 SCR, built bottom end and a high flowing head, 7200rpm rev limit
twin scroll tube header flanged for t3
I have been running a 12cm HX35 for a few years
goal of ~450bhp on 93pump

It's a street driven car with an occasional track day. Looking to improve overall power output and transient response over the HX35. A slight improvement in spool would be nice but not necessarily the primary objective, currently seeing 23psi around 3900rpm. I am mostly looking for better on-off throttle response without sacrificing top end.

Currently cosidering:

EFR 7670, 1.05 twin scroll t4 EWG (will require an adapter flange)
GTX3071r gen 2, twin scroll t3 housing EWG, either .83 or 1.01 a/r
GTX3576r gen 2, twin scroll t3 housing EWG, either .83 or 1.01 a/r

The Garrett would be a small bit easier to convert to, but the EFR seems like it may be the winner on the road. Interested to hear your thoughts or maybe another option I'm not considering?

https://www.full-race.com/store/borg-warner-efr/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-7670-turbo-2/
https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/mercha...=GRT-TBO-779&Category_Code=GG2-3071-T3DIVIDED
https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/mercha...=GRT-TBO-780&Category_Code=GG2-3071-T3DIVIDED
https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/mercha...=GRT-TBO-827&Category_Code=GG2-3576-T3DIVIDED
https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/mercha...=GRT-TBO-828&Category_Code=GG2-3576-T3DIVIDED


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MikeSAABt said:


> Hi John,
> 
> Like others I think, I have a case of 'analysis paralysis' and could use a second opinion if you are inclined.
> 
> ...


That is a very cool setup! Let me look into that and get back to you.


----------



## MikeSAABt (Jan 23, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> That is a very cool setup! Let me look into that and get back to you.


thanks!

Also I'd be interested in any anecdotal input from the board at large around this thought I had yesterday: is there really a reason to buy a 7670 when an S257sx-e could keep a grand in my pocket.


----------



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

If you're considering a s257, you might as well keep the hx35.

The efr is the king of transient response. The g-550 is he next best thing, but until they offer a divided or t-based housing, I don't think they're the ticket just yet.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MikeSAABt said:


> thanks!
> 
> Also I'd be interested in any anecdotal input from the board at large around this thought I had yesterday: is there really a reason to buy a 7670 when an S257sx-e could keep a grand in my pocket.


Apparently there are over 650 variants of the Holset HX35. I tried to contact various distributers and get the specs on this turbocharger, but nobody could give me any clear answers. From my research, there are at least two (2) main types of HX35 turbochargers. The seven (7) blade and eight (8) blade. I assume you have the more popular seven blade (HX30E-7765AX compressor type). This turbocharger has a 56mm compressor inducer and unknown compressor exducer. Some people say 71mm. Others have quoted: 74mm, 76.2mm, 76.5mm, 78mm and 83mm. I think it's safe to say that the compressor exducer is somewhere between 76.5 and 78mm. This turbocharger is capable of 58 lbs. of air per minute. While the less powerful 8 blade (HX30E-7755AX compressor type) is capable of about 53 lbs. of air per minute.

I painstakingly retraced the 8 blade version below since I have not yet published anything on that turbocharger. Even with this less powerful HX35, 450 HP is easily attainable at P2/P1=2.2 or about 17.5 psi at 6200 RPMs on 2.3L displacement (see below).










Below I overlaid the seven [BLUE) and eight blade [RED] version of the HX35 for comparison on 2.3L displacement.










Below I overlaid the seven [RED] blade HX35 with the second generation GTX3071R [PURPLE]. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is about 200 to 400 RPMs better for the smaller Garrett. You also can gain an additional 20 HP at P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi at about 7000 RPMs.










Below I overlaid the seven [RED] blade HX35 with the second generation GTX3076R [PURPLE]. As you can see, the surge line is about the same for both of these turbochargers below P2/P1 = 2.3 or about 19 psi. However, the Garrett is capable of an additional 100 HP up top at P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi if you care to rev you engine to 8000 RPMs.










More to come on EFR7163, EFR7670 and BW S257SX-E turbochargers tomorrow...


----------



## MikeSAABt (Jan 23, 2004)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> If you're considering a s257, you might as well keep the hx35.
> 
> The efr is the king of transient response. The g-550 is he next best thing, but until they offer a divided or t-based housing, I don't think they're the ticket just yet.


that's pretty much my thoughts at the moment on both the SXE and the G series. I guess I know what I want in terms of an upgrade, just wishing it wasn't so expensive.



mainstayinc said:


> More to come on EFR7163, EFR7670 and BW S257SX-E turbochargers tomorrow...


exciting! thanks for your time. The HX35 is a 7 blade though I admit I don't know what the size is offhand. Only know that it came from a '99 Ram. Seeing the overlaid maps is very helpful.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MikeSAABt said:


> that's pretty much my thoughts at the moment on both the SXE and the G series. I guess I know what I want in terms of an upgrade, just wishing it wasn't so expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> exciting! thanks for your time. The HX35 is a 7 blade though I admit I don't know what the size is offhand. Only know that it came from a '99 Ram. *Seeing the overlaid maps is very helpful*.


I had some time this evening to post a few more comparisons. Below is the 7 blade [BLUE] HX35 overlaid with the EFR7163 [RED] on 2.3L displacement. As you can see, the smaller EFR has a surge line that is about 1000 RPMs better than the Holset. However, this is not a fair comparison as I think the EFR map is for a twin-scroll turbine housing whereas the Holset is for single-scroll. Therefore, I would subtract about 500 to 800 RPMs from the EFR's surge line to make it a fair comparison. Even with this correction, the EFR is going to have a better surge line than the Holset. That means quicker spoolup and better transient response. Notice how the surge line for the EFR is more vertical in the low RPM, high boost area of the map as compared to the Holset. That means that the turbo is able to hold higher boost pressures at lower RPMs when, for example, you shift gears, without the turbo going into compressor surge and stalling or fluttering or whatever happens in that area. Whereas the Holset's surge line is more diagonal to the right as pressure increases in the low-RPM area. The EFR will also give you an additional 20 HP up top compared to the Holset.










Below I overlaid the 7 blade [BLUE] HX35 with the EFR7670 [RED] on 2.3L displacement. As you can see, the EFR has a better surge line by about 200 RPMs as compared to the Holset. You can expect better spoolup and transient response from this turbo but not as good as the EFR7163. The EFR7670, however, will give you an additional 70 HP up top at P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi at 7200 RPMs. Overall, this turbo is a significant improvement *on both sides of the map* as compared to the Holset.










Finally, I overlaid the 7 blade [BLUE] HX35 with the BW S257SX-E (AKA 57mm S200SX-E) [RED] on 2.3L displacement. As you can see, the surge line for the BW is better than the more expensive and similarly sized EFR7670 at least on paper. That means that you can expect quicker spoolup and better transient response from this turbo. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 6400 RPMs producing about 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP.










So, in conclusion, I think the BW S257SX-E is a really good fit for your engine displacement and will outperform the EFR7163 and EFR7670 in terms of spoolup and transient response. It will not have the top-end power of the EFR7670 but only by about 20 HP. I know others may not agree with this conclusion.

The Garrett G25-550 and G25-660 are great turbos but, like Pat said, I would not consider either of those ATM without a twin-scroll turbine housing. I definitely like your twin-scroll setup and would stick with twin-scroll turbos going forward. The only Garret turbo I would consider based on your needs is the second generation GTX3071R with a twin-scroll turbine housing. That will give you better spoolup and transient response as compared to the HX35 but only a slight increase in top end power.


----------



## MikeSAABt (Jan 23, 2004)

whew, interesting data. Not ashamed to admit it's got my head spun a bit.

Absorbing...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MikeSAABt said:


> whew, interesting data. Not ashamed to admit it's got my head spun a bit.
> 
> Absorbing...


LOL. The BW S257SX-E is a good choice followed by the EFR7670 and EFR7163 or GTX3071R2. Others might have a different take but those are the ones I like based on your goals.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Mike from Apparent Technologies sent me an update of his air-cooled Porsche 993 3.8L via email. Here is the link to the original post with the details of his project.



p-car993 said:


> John
> It's been a while and I wanted to give you an update. Progress is slow. I have some big projects going at work.
> So I got a pair of TS BW 7163 and made my own quick spool valves. Got it mounted and made some custom actuator brackets and catch cans. This is about as far as I got. I have about 40 hrs to wrap up all the odd and ends.
> I did start another project, I'm trying to integrate the electric center clutch found on the 997.2 into my car. My AWD setup is currently removed because it's a poor design and does't do much if anything. Viscous clutch type gets fried too easy.
> Here's some pics







































Those custom quick-spool valves are amazing! The twin-scroll BW 7163s with quick spool valves should give you great spoolup and incredible low end torque. Please keep us updated!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received another email from Mike from Apparent Technologies showing his custom quick-spool valve with linkage etc.



p-car993 said:


> Couple more pics


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

Nice, i would like to see the results of that spool valve :thumbup:


----------



## knightsmiles (Feb 28, 2019)

Hi John,

I'm amazed at your knowledge and skills you've got in guiding and advising on us.
I'd like to entrust my car to you in helping me find the right turbo.

My ride is a 2018 Porsche Macan 2.0l (Base), it has the VAG (1984cc) EA888 GEN 3 MQB engine (Transverse).
I'd like a bigger twinscroll turbo that perform about 600chp without meth and have a wideband peak hp (eg 4000RPM to 6500RPM).
I am interested at the EFR 7163 twin scroll, wouldn't mind a wee bit of later spool of around 2000RPM - 2500RPM but still keeping my options open, Garrett maybe?
Here is a list of mods the car already has.

JE Pistons 9.6:1 CR, 82.5mm Bore, 21mm Pin
IE Con-rods 21mm Pin
K&N Filter
300 cell High Flow DP (I've got a decat if needed)
K2 Motor Exhaust
Wagner Tuning Competition FMIC
Vaitrix Charge Pipe, Turbo Muffler Delete & Meth Kit
Forge BOV
HKS M40iL Plugs
CarSpeed Ignition Coils
S3 (8V) injectors

I'm not sure if stock fueling is enough for the turbo? Might need a bigger HPFP & LPFP?

Here is a Stage 1 Dyno Run in whp fully stock (252hp 370Nm) after a few weeks when I got the car from the dealer.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

knightsmiles said:


> Hi John,
> 
> I'm amazed at your knowledge and skills you've got in guiding and advising on us.
> I'd like to entrust my car to you in helping me find the right turbo.
> ...


That's a very cool vehicle! Below I reposted a stock picture of the 2018 Porsche Macan:










In order to achieve 500 WHP on the AWD Macan you will have to produce 600 HP at the crank (500 WHP x 1.2 = 600 HP). I recommend either the BW EFR7163 or the second generation Garrett GTX3071R with a twin-scroll turbine housing. Both of these turbos are capable of 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP.

Below I overlaid the BW EFR7163 with 2.0L displacement (1984 CC's). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi and 6700 RPMs producing about 57 lbs. of air per minute. I used a ratio of 10.5:1 per lb. of air for direct injection to achieve 600 HP at the crank versus the usual 10:1 for port injection (10.5 x 57 = 599 HP). The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 1600 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. That means you can expect the turbo to begin to spool around 1600 RPMs with full spool coming in around 3600 RPMs. Since you are upgrading to a true twin-scroll turbine housing, you will presumably have less cylinder back pressure as compared to the stock IHI IS20 turbo. The stock turbo combines both sets of runners before the turbine and is not a true twin-scroll. Less cylinder back pressure means cooler combustion temperatures and less chance of detonation. Consequently, you can run higher boost using the same octane fuel as compared to the stock turbo. So, I think 29 psi is possible on 93 AKI fuel (USA) or 98 RON or whatever they are running these days in Europe assuming you have good intercooling.










The **problem** with the third generation EA888 engine from a performance stand point is the built-in water-cooled exhaust manifold. Not only can you not change the manifold for a higher-flowing unit, but this design actually reduces your turbine inlet temperature by up to 160 degrees F (71 C). The lower inlet temperature reduces turbine efficiency. The more efficient the turbine, the better the turbocharger is able to extract and convert the hot exhaust gasses into positive boost on the compressor side. I calculate a 6% reduction in turbine efficiency on the low side and up to 12% on the high side due to the EA888's exhaust gas cooling design. So, what does this mean in terms of our compressor map? I think that you will have to run a few hundred RPMs higher engine speed or a few psi higher boost to compensate for lower exhaust gas temperatures in order to achieve your horsepower goals.










Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3071R with 2.0L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi and 8000 RPMs producing about 57 lbs. of air per minute. The surge line comes in around 2500 RPMs on 2.0L displacement but this is for a single scroll. You can expect a 400 to 800 RPMs (or better) improvement in the surge line using a twin-scroll turbine housing. So, the Garret will be comparable to the BW in terms of spoolup if using a twin-scroll housing but will require more engine speed (8000 RPMs) and lower boost to achieve your 600 HP goal.










APR sells a nice kit for the EFR7163 that adapts the third generation EA888 engine's vertical ports to horizontal. I imagine that should have no problem fitting inside the Macan's engine bay.


----------



## MK1 Rabbit GTI (Jan 13, 2006)

Hey John, quick question regarding turbos on a c5 rs6.
Goal is 1000+ whp.
Car has custom turbo manifolds, water to air intercoolers, water meth etc.
Was looking at a pair of the g25 660's or efr 7163s. Don't know if they'll flow enough though. Physical size is the only real issue I can see.running a manual transmission for added room as well.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MK1 Rabbit GTI said:


> Hey John, quick question regarding turbos on a c5 rs6.
> Goal is 1000+ whp.
> Car has custom turbo manifolds, water to air intercoolers, water meth etc.
> Was looking at a pair of the g25 660's or efr 7163s. Don't know if they'll flow enough though. Physical size is the only real issue I can see.running a manual transmission for added room as well.


Cool. I'll check into that Monday.:thumbup:


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

Greetings from north europe!
mainstayinc could I bother you to show me some maps or recommentations for audi/vw 1.8t 20v engine that has been stroked to 2.1l
Max rpm 7.5k to 8k Car is daily driver so Id appreciate lot hp/torque on mid range
AGU bigport engine
JE-pistons 83mm CR 9.5:1
Cat cams 3658
crank 95.5mm
K&N filter
etc.

Bad thing is that for now, I have to use 98e5 gasoline but planning to use E85 in future when it finally arrives to my home town.
Aim is 550-600hp
Could I get following advice on turbo.
- Quickest spool
- Quick spool with 600hp
- Ultimate setup
- Turbo to get 666hp from engine? (sorry for this, is just a thing id been wondering years, to have a "beast" of a car you know?  hope I dont offend you or anyone)

G25-660 seems pretty solid choice but what others I would have?
Also could you show me how far would my current turbo GTX2860R gen2 .64 flow on that setup?

Thank you in advance 

EDIT: Would it be wasteful to get a T25 flange with internal wastegate on G25-660?


----------



## knightsmiles (Feb 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> That's a very cool vehicle! Below I reposted a stock picture of the 2018 Porsche Macan:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you so much! I'll get to work on EFR 7163. Just wondering, would the EFR 7670 be better than 7163 for this setup?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is a link to PTP Turbo Blanket's website. I am posting this as a follow up to the EA888's exhaust gas cooling design. The University Texas at Austin performed a detailed analysis of the effect of a turbo blanket in increasing turbocharger efficiency. I briefly reviewed the report and found that even with a seven (7) degree Celsius increase in exhaust temperature, there were measurable gains in turbocharger spoolup and performance. One can conclude that cooling the exhaust gas before entering the turbine has the opposite effect. If a seven (7) degree temperature change has a measureable effect of turbocharger efficiency, then one can imagine the effect of a 71 degree change with the EA888's gas cooling design.



PTP Turbo Blankets said:


> A turbo blanket improves the performance of your turbocharger by keeping "the hot side hot".
> 
> In keeping the exhaust gases within the turbocharger hot, turbocharger efficiency is improved. As you may know, the hotter a gas is, the more expansive it is. Within a contained system of a specified size, the more expansive a gas is, the greater the pressure derived and thus, the greater the flow of gas to escape the containment. With this increased pressure and flow rate for a given engine RPM, the acceleration of the turbocharger's impeller is increased as compared to the same turbocharger with the engine at the same RPM but with cooler exhaust gases. This equates to faster spool up of the turbocharger, as well as greater attainable levels of boost. What a driver will experience with a turbo blanket is greater turbocharger responsiveness. The faster spool up of the turbocharger means less turbo lag and a more linear power curve.


Here is a link to the original research paper.

I will get to the compressor map requests today or tomorrow. We had a snow storm Sunday to Monday AM and I spend most of yesterday morning digging out.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MK1 Rabbit GTI said:


> Hey John, quick question regarding turbos on a c5 rs6.
> Goal is 1000+ whp.
> Car has custom turbo manifolds, water to air intercoolers, water meth etc.
> Was looking at a pair of the g25 660's or efr 7163s. Don't know if they'll flow enough though. Physical size is the only real issue I can see.running a manual transmission for added room as well.


Hey! I finally had some time this afternoon to look at your specs. In order to make 1000 WHP you will have to make 1200 HP at the crank on an AWD chassis. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2086 CC's (84.5mm x 93mm x 8 cylinders/2 = 2086). I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 8000 RPMs producing about 60 lbs. of air per minute. That will just about get you to 1000 WHP on a twin-turbo setup on pump/race gas. Alternatively, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 6600 RPMs producing about 58 lbs. of air per minute for 965 WHP on pump/race gas. The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 2000 RPMs on 2.1L +/- 100 RPMs. That means that you can expect the turbo(s) to begin to spool around 2000 RPMs with full spool coming at 3500 to 4000 RPMs.










Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 with 2086 CC displacement. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi at 7200 RPMs producing about 59 lbs. of air per minute or 983 WHP on a twin-turbo setup. The surge line comes in at 1500 RPMs but that is for a twin-scroll setup. You will have to subtract 400 to 800 RPMs from the surge line for single-scroll. So, expect spoolup to be about the same at the G25-660.










Of course, if you stick with twin-scroll that would be the ultimate setup. Below is the Audi 4.2L firing order just for reference.










The manifold setup for twin-scroll is as follows:

For cylinder bank 1: 1+3, 2+4
For cylinder bank 2: 5+6, 7+8










Since you already have a custom manifold this is probably not an option at this point.

C5 RS6 stock photo (Avant model):


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> Greetings from north europe!
> mainstayinc could I bother you to show me some maps or recommentations for audi/vw 1.8t 20v engine that has been stroked to 2.1l
> Max rpm 7.5k to 8k Car is daily driver so Id appreciate lot hp/torque on mid range
> AGU bigport engine
> ...


That's basically the same 2.1L setup I run in my MK4 daily driver and my MK1 "street killer" except I use Mahle 95.5mm pistons with 9:1 CR instead of the JE's. I had the 9.5:1 JE pistons in my MK4 but my engine never really like those. I changed to the Mahle's when I hydro-locked my engine testing a nitrous setup. The 9:1 Mahle's can take a lot more boost than the JE's and seem to be a lot happier.

Below I overlaid your current setup (second generation GTX2860R) with 2.1L (83mm x 95.5mm x 4 cylinders). This setup is capable of 422 HP (267 WHP) at about 5800 RPMs with a good intercooler setup. You have a nice surge line ranging from 1200 to 1800 RPMs giving your instant spool and great low-end torque. However, you will not be able to run this setup much past 5800 RPMs without creating serious heat (<60^% compressor efficiency). That means that you will not be able t take advantage of your Catcams 3658's since those don't kick in until 5400 RPMs and are good until 8000 RPMs (see comparison dyno below with stock cams).



















Below I overlaid the second generation GTX2860R with the G25-660 on 2.1L. As you can see, your surge line (left side of map) will move to the right about 200 to 400 RPMs. This means that you can expect boost to start a little later than your current setup. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi at 7400 RPMs producing just under 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas. That about 180 more HP than your current setup while only losing 200 to 400 RPMs on 2.1L. Not a bad tradeoff IMO.










In order to produce more HP, you would have to run E85. This setup on E85 is capable of over 700 HP. I don't recommend the T25 flange since you will be reving this engine above stock rev limit and can benefit with good external wastegate control. The only other turbo I recommend is the second generation GTX3071R with a twin-scroll housing. That will make similar power as the single-scroll G25-660 but with potentially better spoolup if you construct the **right** exhaust manifold.


----------



## MK1 Rabbit GTI (Jan 13, 2006)

That's perfect! Thanks John! 
Looks like I'll be getting 660's for the rs6.
How do you feel about the g25 550s on the audi 2.7t? Or a 2.7t stroked to 3.0l. 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MK1 Rabbit GTI said:


> That's perfect! Thanks John!
> Looks like I'll be getting 660's for the rs6.
> *How do you feel about the g25 550s on the audi 2.7t? Or a 2.7t stroked to 3.0l. 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore*.


Cool.:thumbup: Let me check into that and get back to you tomorrow.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

Wow! Thank you million times John(if I may call you by your name)!
That was so helpful!
Im definately going for G25-660 now 
I chose the 9.5:1 since my car is daily driver so Im not going to be on boost all the time  Also that cam figure is great! 700hp with e85 seems nice too 
btw what rods you have? I have no name h-profiles with rifle drilling that has been tested over 750hp but I started to fear about they torque, will they handle it..

Quick question about valves, what material you suggest them to be? keeping in mind that I dont rev much over 8k and what about valve seat? is 1mm bigger exhaust valves worth it?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> Wow! Thank you million times John(if I may call you by your name)!
> That was so helpful!
> Im definately going for G25-660 now
> I chose the 9.5:1 since my car is daily driver so Im not going to be on boost all the time  Also that cam figure is great! 700hp with e85 seems nice too
> ...


I have Integrated Engineering H-beam rods in my MK4 daily driver. Those rods were the only thing that survived when I had the engine rebuilt due to hydro-lock. Everything else including pistons, rings, crank, bearings etc. had to be replaced. I have IE's Tuscan I-beam rods in my MK1. Your no name H-beam rods should have no problem handing your power.

As far as valve material, other people are more expert than I am. I have Supertech inconel exhaust valves in my MK4 daily driver with stock intake valves and complete Ferrea valve train in my MK1. I don't think +1mm exhaust valves are worth it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MK1 Rabbit GTI said:


> That's perfect! Thanks John!
> Looks like I'll be getting 660's for the rs6.
> *How do you feel about the g25 550s on the audi 2.7t? Or a 2.7t stroked to 3.0l. 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore*.


You will have to run higher boost to get the most out of the G25-550 on the 2.7T. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1336 CC's (81mm x 86.4mm x 6/2 = 1336). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi and 7800 RPMs producing about 45 lbs. of air per minute or 900 HP on a twin-turbo setup on pump/race gas. The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 2000 to 3000 RPMs with full boost between 3500 and 4500 RPMs on a well-tuned setup.










Boring out the engine to 83mm and stroking to 92.8mm allows you to lower the amount of boost and results in slightly better spoolup. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1506 CC's (83mm x 92.8mm x 6/2 = 1506). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi and 8000 RPMs producing about 48 lbs. of air per minute or 960 HP on a twin-turbo setup on pump/race gas. The surge line (left side of map) improves over stock displacement by 300 RPMs.


----------



## MK1 Rabbit GTI (Jan 13, 2006)

Awesome. Thank you very much. Makes my life a lot easier now


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

MK1 Rabbit GTI said:


> Awesome. Thank you very much. Makes my life a lot easier now


:thumbup:


----------



## knightsmiles (Feb 28, 2019)

Hey John, what about choosing EFR 7670 twinscroll instead of the EFR 7163 twinscroll? Porsche Macan.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

knightsmiles said:


> Hey John, what about choosing EFR 7670 twinscroll instead of the EFR 7163 twinscroll? Porsche Macan.


I'll check into that later today or Monday and post my opinion.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

knightsmiles said:


> Hey John, what about choosing EFR 7670 twinscroll instead of the EFR 7163 twinscroll? Porsche Macan.


Below I overlaid the EFR 7670 with 2.0L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7300 RPMs producing about 62 lbs. of air per minute or 650 HP using a ratio of 10.5:1 per lb. of air for direct injection. The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 2400 RPMs or about 800 RPMs later than the EFR 7163. So, you can make an extra 50 HP over the EFR 7163 but will lose about 800 RPMs in spoolup. I would choose the EFR 7163 in this case due to quicker spool and only marginally (50 HP) less HP over the EFR7670. Also, keep in mind that you will take a penalty for the EA888's exhaust gas cooling design. Some people might argue this point, but lower exhaust gas temperatures will equate to less turbine efficiency.


----------



## knightsmiles (Feb 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the EFR 7670 with 2.0L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7300 RPMs producing about 62 lbs. of air per minute or 650 HP using a ratio of 10.5:1 per lb. of air for direct injection. The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 2400 RPMs or about 800 RPMs later than the EFR 7163. So, you can make an extra 50 HP over the EFR 7163 but will lose about 800 RPMs in spoolup. I would choose the EFR 7163 in this case due to quicker spool and only marginally (50 HP) less HP over the EFR7670. Also, keep in mind that you will take a penalty for the EA888's exhaust gas cooling design. Some people might argue this point, but lower exhaust gas temperatures will equate to less turbine efficiency.


Alright, thank you so much John! I'll go with the EFR 7163.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

knightsmiles said:


> Alright, thank you so much John! I'll go with the EFR 7163.


:thumbup: Good choice!


----------



## Cakecfh (Mar 13, 2019)

Hi Mainstayinc,

Please could you help me with a compressor maps. So I can choose the correct turbo. I'm not looking for big power maybe 250wkw at 1.4 bar High boost which will just be for fun and maybe if I want on track. I would then like to have a 1bar map that I use for Gymkahana, skidpan and go kart tracks events, with this map Id like to try get a flat torque curve from 3000 - 8000rpm or as close to that as possible. I would like a linear torque feel like an NA motor. I am also pretty high up so I realise I might have to run 1.2bar boost to get it to a pressure ratio of 2 on the compressor maps. I'm looking at rotate mount setups with external waste gate versions.

I have an EJ207 Motor with AVCS heads that have been flowed. Stock STI cams.
Bore 92 mm (3.62 in)
Stroke 75 mm (2.95 in)
Compression 9.0:1

from what I can find on the internet the cams are :
Adv. Dur. Dur @ .050 Lift (in) Lift (mm)
256°/256° 205°/210° .325"/.339" 8.25/8.6


I was thinking GTX2867_g2, G25-550 or GTX3071_g2 What would you recommend?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Cakecfh said:


> Hi Mainstayinc,
> 
> Please could you help me with a compressor maps. So I can choose the correct turbo. I'm not looking for big power maybe 250wkw at 1.4 bar High boost which will just be for fun and maybe if I want on track. I would then like to have a 1bar map that I use for Gymkahana, skidpan and go kart tracks events, with this map Id like to try get a flat torque curve from 3000 - 8000rpm or as close to that as possible. I would like a linear torque feel like an NA motor. I am also pretty high up so I realise I might have to run 1.2bar boost to get it to a pressure ratio of 2 on the compressor maps. I'm looking at rotate mount setups with external waste gate versions.
> 
> ...


Hello. Any of those turbos will get you to your power goals. I recommend either the G25-550 or the second generation GTX2867R. In order to make 250 wheel KW, you will have to make 335 WHP or about 400 HP at the crank on an AWD setup. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1994 CC's displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.2 or 1.2 bar or about 17 psi and 6400 RPMs producing about 40 lbs. of air per minute. The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 1800 RPMs with full spool occurring between 3300 and 3800 RPMs but is setup dependent. Things such as camshafts, tune, wastegate control etc. can greatly effect when full spool will occur. Expect this setup to make a broad power curve up to 7800 RPMs on 2.0L displacement.










Below I overlaid the G25-550 and the second generation GTX2867R for comparison. The second generation GTX2867R will spool 200 to 300 RPMs later than the G25-550 and will produce power up to 7200 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. The G25-550 is the better choice between these two turbos.


----------



## Cakecfh (Mar 13, 2019)

Thank you Mainstayinc. I really appreciate it. I'm just curious how you got to the 1984cc is it due to the EJ being inefficient?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Cakecfh said:


> Thank you Mainstayinc. I really appreciate it. I'm just curious *how you got to the 1984cc* is it due to the EJ being inefficient?


Sorry. I meant to type "1994 CC's" in my previous post.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a follow up PM from Junietob



Junietob said:


> Hello again John. I hope all is well with you! So I went with a Specific turbo setup and have also made a few new additions to my build. I added a Surge tank with dual walbro 450 pumps to help feel the full e85 Fuel tune.
> 
> I bought the Gen 2 Gtx3576r *WITH* T04S compressor cover(from a .60a/r to .70a/r, and 2.5" outlet vs 2") *Divided 1.01a/r vband turbine housing.* I know we spoke about what the spool would be like, but i would really like a Specific compressor map, now that i have chosen the turbine housing.
> 
> ...


Hey man. Sorry for the delay. The second generation GTX3576R is a great choice. It will spool sooner than the GTX3582R and will give you over 600 HP on pump/race gas and over 700 HP on E85. Below I overlaid the GTX3576R with 2092 CC's (88mm bore x 86mm stroke x 4 cylinders). I marked three (3) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.86 or 27 psi and 7700 RPMs producing 66 lbs. of air per minute or 660 HP on pump/race gas
P2/P1=3.07 or 30 psi and 6800 RPMs producing 64.5 lbs. of air per minute or 645 HP on pump/race gas
P2/P1=3.40 or 35 psi and 6200 RPMs producing 62 lbs. of air per minute or 620 HP on pump/race gas










This map is for a singe-scroll turbine housing. For a twin-scroll housing, your surge line (left side of map) will improve by 200 to 800 (or more!) RPMs over the single-scroll depending on the construction of your exhaust manifold. Shorter runners will usually equate to quicker spool. So, you can expect this setup to begin to spool between 2000 and 2600 RPMs with full spool coming in between 3600 and 4600 RPMs. However, things such as camshafts, tune, wastegate control etc. can greatly effect when full spool will occur.

Please note: I do not like the twin-scroll v-band turbine housing as the entry looks very restrictive (see below). I prefer a T3 or T4 twin scroll.










Original post here.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> That's basically the same 2.1L setup I run in my MK4 daily driver and my MK1 "street killer" except I use Mahle 95.5mm pistons with 9:1 CR instead of the JE's. I had the 9.5:1 JE pistons in my MK4 but my engine never really like those. I changed to the Mahle's when I hydro-locked my engine testing a nitrous setup. The 9:1 Mahle's can take a lot more boost than the JE's and seem to be a lot happier.
> 
> Below I overlaid your current setup (second generation GTX2860R) with 2.1L (83mm x 95.5mm x 4 cylinders). This setup is capable of 422 HP (267 WHP) at about 5800 RPMs with a good intercooler setup. You have a nice surge line ranging from 1200 to 1800 RPMs giving your instant spool and great low-end torque. However, you will not be able to run this setup much past 5800 RPMs without creating serious heat (<60^% compressor efficiency). That means that you will not be able t take advantage of your Catcams 3658's since those don't kick in until 5400 RPMs and are good until 8000 RPMs (see comparison dyno below with stock cams).
> 
> ...


May I ask for some "budget" solution too? can you recommend some turbos?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> May I ask for some "budget" solution too? can you recommend some turbos?


Maybe others can chime in on some budget options. I am not up to date on what people are running *budget-wise* these days. Maybe Holset turbos?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a follow up PM from Junietob:



Junietob said:


> Not at all! I really appreciate the updated map! Also, your not the only who has expressed concerns about the divided v-band exit being restrictive. However, there hasn't been enough real world testing to confirm that the v-band exit is truly restrictive. It'll be "guess we'll find out" kind of situation lol.
> 
> one thing i wanted to ask is, even thought the compressor map cuts off at about 65lbs/min, and you showed 27psi and 7700rpms producing 66lbs/min, what happens if i rev the motor to 8 or 8500 at 35psi? i ask this because there was an evo member i spoke to who has a built 2.0 done with t4 divided gen2 gtx3576 with a 1.06ar and he was producing 620whp on e85 and 27psi at 8k, and the graph showed the power curve to continue to go up at redline.
> 
> ...


Yes, you can make more power beyond the choke line (right side of map). However, there will be (increasingly) diminishing returns until the turbo chokes off completely. At that point, the turbo cannot produce any more usable air flow. You would have to use very good intercooling (chemical intercooling etc.) if you want to push the turbo past the choke line.



Junietob said:


> Again, Thank you so much for all the info you have provided. It has given me much insight, and positive outlook on my build. I'll keep you posted on the results after the build is finished and it hits the dyno!
> 
> -Bern


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received the following email from Matthew:



Matthew said:


> I am at an impasse on what turbo would be the best match for my engine.
> 
> The engine is a Land Rover 200tdi turbo diesel direct injected
> 
> ...


Here is some background on this engine:

Land Rover engines: 200Tdi (engine code: 11L, 12L and 13L)

Stock photo:










Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 2.5L displacement (90.47mm bore x 97mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 2494 CC's). I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 4000 RPMs producing 43 lbs. of air per minute
P2/P1=3.3 or 33 psi at 4000 RPMs producing 47 lbs. of air per minute

I am not sure what ratio to multiply the lbs. of air per minute to get HP for a diesel application. Typically for a gasoline engine, I use 10 for port injection, maybe 10.5 or 11 for direct injection. Since you are limited by a 4000 redline, you will not be able to produce as much HP as a gasoline engine. So, my best estimate is somewhere between 300 and 350 HP.

The surge line (left side of map) comes in around 1000 to 1500 RPMs on 2.5L. You can expect full spool by maybe 3000 to 3200 RPMs.










Below I overlaid the G25-550 and EFR 6258 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, you will be limited to about 29 psi at 4000 RPMs producing about 43 lbs. of air per minute. The surge line is about the same or slightly better than the G25-550.










As far as the GTD2872VRK, I don't have a compressor map for that turbo so I cannot compare with the other two turbos. However, it has a larger 72mm compressor exducer as compared to 60mm for the G25-550 and 62mm for the EFR 6258 (see chart below). Therefore, you can expect this turbo to be slower-spooling as compared to the Garrett and the BW while not being able to give you any more power up top due to your 4000 RPM redline. I recommend the GTB2260VK as that is a smaller turbo and has a 60mm compressor exducer similar to the G25-550 and EFR 6258.










So, in conclusion, out of the three turbos you are looking at, I recommend the G25-550 for your needs.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

Mainstayinc could you do me a favor and see how would GTW3884R with 1.0 AR split T3 turbine work on 2.1L 20v?
I wanted to have 600-700hp with gasoline and was offered this. Its bit big I think?

engine was basically same as your mk1 build but bit higher cr 9.5:1

I guess there is possible to change different AR turbine for that?
841297-5004S	715582-0009	inducer 64mm	84mm	58	0.70


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

the turbo I asked earlier is just way too big for me. Im not sure it will spool to my needs. It has potential but still, just too big.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> Mainstayinc could you do me a favor and see how would GTW3884R with 1.0 AR split T3 turbine work on 2.1L 20v?
> I wanted to have 600-700hp with gasoline and was offered this. Its bit big I think?
> 
> engine was basically same as your mk1 build but bit higher cr 9.5:1
> ...


Let me check into that and get back to you.:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> Mainstayinc could you do me a favor and see how would GTW3884R with 1.0 AR split T3 turbine work on 2.1L 20v?
> I wanted to have 600-700hp with gasoline and was offered this. Its bit big I think?
> 
> engine was basically same as your mk1 build but bit higher cr 9.5:1
> ...


That's actually quite similar to the turbo I am running in my MK1 *street killer*. Both the GTW3884R and the GTX3584RS have 84mm compressor exducers. However, the GTW3884R has a smaller 62.3mm inducer as compared to 67mm for the GTX. Also, the GTW3884R has a larger 74.2mm turbine inducer as compared to 68mm for the GTX. I do think the GTW3884R is a large turbo for 2.1L displacement. However, a properly setup divided manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing can help with that. Also, a smaller turbine A/R as you mentioned can help too. Below I overlaid the GTW3884R with 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 2067 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in around 3500 to 3800 RPMs (map is for single scroll). You can expect full spool somewhere between 5000 and 5800 RPMs depending on how much boost you want to run. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.95 or about 28 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas.
P2/P1=3.4 or about 35 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas.










For comparison, I overlaid the GTW3884R and the GTX3584RS on 2.1L displacement. The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX is better by about 1000 RPMs especially at lower boost and slowly tapers even with the GTW3884R as boost increases up to about P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi. Overall, the GTW3884R is a decent alternative to the more expensive GTX3584RS if you are willing to give up some spoolup.










For 700 HP you may want to consider the second generation GTX3576R on E85 or ethanol. That turbo will spool 1000 RPMs quicker than the GTW3884R. Another option is the G25-660 on E85 or ethanol. That will get you to the 600 to 700 HP range and spool even quicker on 2.1L as compared to the other turbos.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

Thank you tons! I already came to same conclusion: Its just too big for me and spool is way too high.
I have to stick on gasoline because I cannot get ethanole where I live, so 600+hp on gasoline.
g25-660 might be bit too little for that but GTW build with .63 AR would be nice.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> Thank you tons! I already came to same conclusion: *Its just too big for me and spool is way too high.
> *I have to stick on gasoline because I cannot get ethanole where I live, so 600+hp on gasoline.
> g25-660 might be bit too little for that but GTW build with .63 AR would be nice.


:thumbup:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

You're really a wizard wit these compressor maps. My new turbo is the compressor wheel off gtx3582r gen 2 and turbine off gtx3584rs @ 0.83ar. My cc is 2008 on E85. 

What would 1.5 and 1.9bar look like pretty please with sugar on top?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> You're really a wizard wit these compressor maps. My new turbo is the compressor wheel off gtx3582rs gen 2 and turbine off gtx3584rs gen 2 @ 0.82ar. My cc is 2008 on E85.
> 
> What would 1.5 and 1.9bar look like pretty please with sugar on top?


That's single scroll, correct?


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> That's single scroll, correct?


Yeah, vband.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Yeah, vband.


Let me check into that. That's a cool turbo setup BTW. The RS turbine wheel from the GTX3584RS is super efficient. Better than G-series.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> Let me check into that. That's a cool turbo setup BTW. The RS turbine wheel from the GTX3584RS is super efficient. Better than G-series.


I'm exited to see what it does. I also upgrade with a dogbox and sequential shifter these days so I'll be able to stay in the powerband for longer. no more tdi gearbox.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> That's actually quite similar to the turbo I am running in my MK1 *street killer*. Both the GTW3884R and the GTX3584RS have 84mm compressor exducers. However, the GTW3884R has a smaller 62.3mm inducer as compared to 67mm for the GTX. Also, the GTW3884R has a larger 74.2mm turbine inducer as compared to 68mm for the GTX. I do think the GTW3884R is a large turbo for 2.1L displacement. However, a properly setup divided manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing can help with that. Also, a smaller turbine A/R as you mentioned can help too. Below I overlaid the GTW3884R with 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 2067 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in around 3500 to 3800 RPMs (map is for single scroll). You can expect full spool somewhere between 5000 and 5800 RPMs depending on how much boost you want to run. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:
> 
> P2/P1=2.95 or about 28 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas.
> P2/P1=3.4 or about 35 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas.
> ...


What about GTX3576R gen 2 with gasoline? or 3582R ? EDIT: found answer to this on another topic. GTX3584RS seems to be very great for 2.1L


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> What about GTX3576R gen 2 with gasoline? or 3582R ? EDIT: found answer to this on another topic. GTX3584RS seems to be very great for 2.1L


The GTX3584RS is a pretty big turbo for 2.1L. Same with the second generation GTX3582R. I think the best option for 600 to 700 HP on pump/race gas is the second generation GTX3576R. That will spool better than the other turbos while still being able to achieve your HP goals.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EDIT: Bumped this post to the bottom.


----------



## DaveG1974 (Apr 10, 2019)

Wow what excellent information.
I would be very greatful for you input.
Im building a 2jz engine and am trying to figure which turbo will best suit my need.
Im looking for 500bhp at the crank and as early a spool as possible and a red line around 6500 - 7000 revs
im looking at garrett gtx3076r in twin scroll .82 or 1.02 and the new g25 660 in .92 gtx8576r in .82 is another option
efr7163 and efr7670 are also options.

thanks in advance for any input you can give me
Dave


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

DaveG1974 said:


> Wow what excellent information.
> I would be very greatful for you input.
> Im building a 2jz engine and am trying to figure which turbo will best suit my need.
> Im looking for 500bhp at the crank and as early a spool as possible and a red line around 6500 - 7000 revs
> ...


Let me check into that.


----------



## shane34 (Apr 10, 2019)

Absolutely love this thread, credit to mainstayinc for his effort in this.

ive been reviewing unregistered generally most of the g25-660, .92Ar in comparison to the BW 7163.

Do you think they will look at going twin scroll with g25-660? Being Vband they flow better im told than single scroll versions, i guess nobody really knows when or what they are about to release?

Im in the process of looking to swap out my old Gen 1 gt35.82, this has done me well, 480bhp at 1.6 bar, would be well into the 500+ if the 2bar/meth dependant map was set up right however this was meth bogging on the dyno.

currenlty everything is off and definitely looking to go to a modern turbo,

spec if you have time to finalise my decision.


3SGTE (mr2)
forged,piston rods etc,
264 cams
1050 ID injectors
meth dependant mapping( last set up was 12% less fuel and replaced with 50/50 meth
very free flowing exhaust set up
TTE Short inconel rally manifold T3 currently, will probably end up fabricating to accept Vband for g25-660, but T4 footprint is no issue as this was the original flange i believe 
external waste gate 


My aim circa 550/600 flywheel HP, and around full boost at 4k RPM. however would rather trade of the top end for usability and keeping in the rev range for boost after changing gears 

i believe my best options are either of the below?
g25-660
BW 7163


anything else i should consider?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

shane34 said:


> Absolutely love this thread, credit to mainstayinc for his effort in this.
> 
> ive been reviewing unregistered generally most of the g25-660, .92Ar in comparison to the BW 7163.
> 
> ...


Those are some good options. Let me check into that and post my opinion.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> You're really a wizard wit these compressor maps. *My new turbo is the compressor wheel off gtx3582r gen 2 and turbine off gtx3584rs @ 0.83ar*. My cc is 2008 on E85.
> 
> What would 1.5 and 1.9bar look like pretty please with sugar on top?


The RS turbine wheel from the GTX3584RS is lighter and more efficient than the GT wheel used in the second generation GTX3582R. It first appeared in the GTX3584RS and now on all G-series turbos. Here is a quote from a MotoIQ article:



MotoIQ said:


> To power the new compressor aero is new turbine aero. FINALLY!!!!!! The GTX3584RS was the first to use new turbine aero, and I’d guess this is the same design wheel scaled down... *Note the area I have circled; this is called the scallop, which is material removed from the back disk.* There are turbine wheels with a full back disk which can improve efficiency at the expense of increased rotational inertia. But, efficiency is not an issue for the new G-Series turbine wheel. *The large scallop cut reduces inertia by reducing mass at the greatest radius thereby improving transient response.*












Not only is the new turbine wheel lighter, but it is more efficient than the GT wheel used in second generation GTX3582R. That means that it can extract more energy from the exhaust gas to drive the compressor wheel. The RS turbine wheel has a maximum efficiency of 78% whereas the standard GT wheel on the second generation GTX3582R has a maximum efficiency of 70%.










A lighter, more efficient turbine wheel translates into quicker spoolup, better transient response (due to less rotational mass) and less back pressure in the exhaust manifold which increases the volumetric efficiency of the engine. Increased VE allows for more fuel and air to be burned in the combustion chamber.

How does this effect the performance of the second generation GTX3582R? Well, I suspect that it will allow for quicker spoolup by extending the surge line further to the left and reduce the time it takes to reach full boost. I don't think it will extend the choke line further to the right as that is mostly determined by the compressor wheel size and efficiency (which, in this case, hasn't changed). 

I will post up my analysis and opinions of this setup with maps tomorrow.

EDIT: I reposted a revised map of the second generation GTX3582R with RS turbine wheel below.

Note: I unofficially name this turbo the *GTX3582RS* ("thirty five eighty two RS") as it uses the new RS turbine wheel from the G-series line and a second generation GTX compressor wheel same as the GTX3584RS.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

DaveG1974 said:


> Wow what excellent information.
> I would be very greatful for you input.
> Im building a 2jz engine and am trying to figure which turbo will best suit my need.
> Im looking for 500bhp at the crank and as early a spool as possible and a red line around 6500 - 7000 revs
> ...


500 crank HP is easily achievable on 3.0L displacement with any of those turbos. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2997 CC displacement (86mm bore x 86mm stroke x 6 cylinders). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in between 1100 and 1300 RPMs on 3.0L displacement. That means you will start to see positive boost between 1100 and 1300 RPMs with full boost by 3000 RPMs. However, things such as camshafts, tune, wastegate control etc. can greatly effect when full spool will occur. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 4700 RPMs producing 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP on pump/race gas.
P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi at 5900 RPMs producing 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP on pump/race gas.

The turbo will be more efficient at 22 psi and 4700 RPMs versus 14.5 psi and 5900 RPMs as that point is closer to the center efficiency island. More efficient means cooler boost with less intercooling necessary. Overall, the G25-660 will be a very quick spooling turbo on 3.0L displacement in a single-scroll application with 100 HP more up top to play with.










You may also want to consider the second generation GTX3071R using a twin-scroll turbine housing. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3071R with 2997 CC displacement (map is for single-scroll). The GTX3071R will spool about 150 RPMs later than the G25-660 but have the same 600 HP potential up top. You can improve the surge line using a properly setup divided exhaust manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing. That will not only improve spoolup, but will also increase your engine volumetric efficiency due to less back pressure in the exhaust manifold.










Lastly, I overlaid the second generation GTX3576R with 2997 CC displacement (map is for single-scroll). You will lose 300 to 400 RPMs in spoolup but gain an additional 175 HP above your 500 HP goal. Just like the second generation GTX3071R, you can have significant gains using a properly setup divided exhaust manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing. The second generation GTX3076R and GTX3576R share the same compressor map.










EDIT: My choice would be the GTX3576R on a twin-scroll turbine housing as that allows you room to grow and will be a fairly quick-spooling turbo on 3.0L. The other two turbo will spool ridiculously fast on 3.0L.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

shane34 said:


> Absolutely love this thread, credit to mainstayinc for his effort in this.


:thumbup:



shane34 said:


> ive been reviewing unregistered generally most of the g25-660, .92Ar in comparison to the BW 7163.
> 
> Do you think they will look at going twin scroll with g25-660? Being Vband they flow better im told than single scroll versions, i guess nobody really knows when or what they are about to release?


I am not sure if they are going to release a twin-scroll version of this turbo. I called atpturbo.com back when the GTX3584RS was first released and asked if they were going to make a twin-scroll housing for that turbo. Surprisingly, they made a twin-scroll housing soon after that. So, maybe call them and see. A twin scroll G25-550 and G25-660 would be amazing.



shane34 said:


> Im in the process of looking to swap out my old Gen 1 gt35.82, this has done me well, 480bhp at 1.6 bar, would be well into the 500+ if the 2bar/meth dependant map was set up right however this was meth bogging on the dyno.
> 
> currenlty everything is off and definitely looking to go to a modern turbo,
> 
> ...


Here is a previous post for reference. It shows the G25-660 on 2.0L displacement. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with your previous turbo GT3582R (AKA "GT35") on 1998 CC displacement. What's impressive is that the smaller 67mm compressor wheel makes almost as much corrected air flow as the older 82mm wheel at 60 lbs. of air per minute versus 62. Smaller compressor wheel equals less mass and quicker spool. Talking about quicker spool, the surge line (left side of map) improves by over 1000 RPMs over the GT35 and comes in between 1700 and 2200 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. You can expect full spool around 4000 RPMs +/- 200 RPMs. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.75 or about 25 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP on pump/race gas.










Below I overlaid the G25-600 and EFR7163 on 2.0L displacement for reference. However, this is not a fair comparison as the BW is for twin-scroll and the Garrett is for single scroll. You can deduct a few hundred RPMs from the BW's surge line if using a single-scroll.


----------



## shane34 (Apr 10, 2019)

Thank you 

Which do you think is the better option. The BW will cost a fair bit more i think, and if i was ever go anti lag then this would work against the BW.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

shane34 said:


> Thank you
> 
> Which do you think is the better option. The BW will cost a fair bit more i think, and if i was ever go anti lag then this would work against the BW.


If you are single scroll, then G25-660 FTW. Otherwise if twin-scroll, then the EFR7163.


----------



## shane34 (Apr 10, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> If you are single scroll, then G25-660 FTW. Otherwise if twin-scroll, then the EFR7163.



Ordered g25-660 .92

hope the girlfirend doesnt read my history im ment to be selling the Mr2 as i purchased a supra twin turbo 2 weeks ago haha.


Thanks. ill try and get some results in the next month or 2


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

shane34 said:


> Ordered g25-660 .92
> 
> *hope the girlfirend doesnt read my history im ment to be selling the Mr2 as i purchased a supra twin turbo 2 weeks ago haha*.
> 
> ...


LOL [bolded]. Looking forward to any results you can post here.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> The RS turbine wheel from the GTX3584RS is lighter and more efficient than the GT wheel used in the second generation GTX3582R. It first appeared in the GTX3584RS and now on all G-series turbos. Here is a quote from a MotoIQ article:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Awesome! Tnx!

But I'm getting the gen2 gtx3582r compressor and map looks a bit different to gen1.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I corrected the compressor map for the second generation GTX3582R below. As you can see, a marked a point at P2/P1=3.37 or 34.5 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 77 lbs. of air per minute or 770 HP on pump/race gas or 890 to 925 HP on E85 or ethanol. I extended the surge line as before 250 RPMs to the left to take into consideration the lighter and more efficient RS wheel but this is just an estimate. You could perhaps see as much as a 500 RPM or more improvement in the surge line. The revised surge line ranges from 1500 to 3400 RPMs. I think you will definitely see boost start to build before 3000 RPMs. As to how much I am not sure. The surge line even before revising shows a portion of the surge line well below 3000 RPMs. Overall, I think this will be a great combination with quick spool for a large 82mm turbo and wide powerband all the way past 800 HP and potentially into the 900s!










Please keep us posted on the progress with this turbo.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> Cool. Let me re-do the map with the gen2 compressor wheel and re-post. Give me a day or two.


It's ok. I appreciate it. I see with this map and pressure ratio 2.9 which corresponds to 27psi it'll move around 81lbs of air. Should be plenty fun on E85 this thing :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> It's ok. I appreciate it. I see with this map and pressure ratio 2.9 which corresponds to 27psi it'll move around 81lbs of air. Should be plenty fun on E85 this thing :laugh:


Yes. I am very (very!) excited to see how this combination turns out. BTW, I edited and posted the revised map above ^^.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes. I am very (very!) excited to see how this combination turns out. BTW, I edited and posted the revised map above ^^.


Awesome work, thanks man! 

I see I should rev even higher wit this one. I have redline set to 8500rpm as is now. I'll def try 35psi on E85 and see what the setup is capable of. On the track I'll limit boost to 27psi.


:beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Awesome work, thanks man!
> 
> I see I should rev even higher wit this one. I have redline set to 8500rpm as is now. I'll def try 35psi on E85 and see what the setup is capable of. On the track I'll limit boost to 27psi.
> 
> ...


35 psi at 8500 RPMs will definitely get you closer to 80 lbs. of air per minute. Even at 27 psi and 8500 RPMs you should still be making just over 70 lbs. of air. This setup is capable of some very nice numbers :thumbup:


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the Garrett G25-660 and the BW K16 map you provided. I converted the K16 map from M^3/sec to lbs. of air per minute for comparison. The BW K16 is able to produce just over 45 lbs. of air per minute or 450 HP on a well tuned setup with good intercooling. However, that would be pushing the turbo to it's absolute limit as the choke line goes vertical at that point (right side of map). The G25-660, on the other hand, is able to produce 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP at its maximum point. The surge line (left side of map) comes in at about 1500 RPMs on 2480CCs or about 200 RPMs later than the smaller K16.
> 
> I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi (1.5 bar) at 6300 RPMs on 2480 CCs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP. This turbo would be a very nice fit for 2480CCs giving you stock-like spoolup and 600 HP capable. It will also be much more efficient above 4500 RPMs and will allow you to lower your EGT's significantly above that point.


Hi mate. So we have done a mapping. It is very close to figures that you provide. May be a little less because of a fuel quality. We use 100 Ron Lukoil. So we have set 24 psi peak and 22 psi top end. What we have you can see on the Dyno Graph.







If we do more that 22 psi top end the car is not keeping ignition on that fuel. So we stop at 24-22 psi and plan to install WMI for a second preset of Cortex EBC to get a little bit more from that turbo.


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> Hi mate. So we have done a mapping. It is very close to figures that you provide. May be a little less because of a fuel quality. We use 100 Ron Lukoil. So we have set 24 psi peak and 22 psi top end. What we have you can see on the Dyno Graph.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Awesome! Love that torque curve. The WMI should give you a nice increase in torque and HP. Thanks for posting.:thumbup:


----------



## Juannuez747 (Apr 16, 2019)

Hello John! I spent several days reading every compressor map you upload and I have to say I’ve learnt a lot for my build. I just want to ask you what would you do in my case. My build is an Audi A4 2.0tsi ea888 gen2 engine. 9.3 Mahle pistons, Tuscan rods, stock head and cams. I want to build a daily with fast spool, around 500hp crank. I was considering g25-550 turbo that Garret says it is capable of 550hp but after I read the compressor map it is ”only” capable of 500 and I don’t know if it is good to operate in the limit of the choke line. So my question is: do I go with the g25-550 to the limit, do I go with the g25-660 and work with it with more efficiency, or will I have better spool with a gtx3071r gen2 with twin scroll turbine housing and a short cast twin scroll manifold (t3 flange). I would really appreciate any info! Thank you in advance


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Juannuez747 said:


> Hello John! I spent several days reading every compressor map you upload and I have to say I’ve learnt a lot for my build. I just want to ask you what would you do in my case. My build is an Audi A4 2.0tsi ea888 gen2 engine. 9.3 Mahle pistons, Tuscan rods, stock head and cams. I want to build a daily with fast spool, around 500hp crank. I was considering g25-550 turbo that Garret says it is capable of 550hp but after I read the compressor map it is ”only” capable of 500 and I don’t know if it is good to operate in the limit of the choke line. *So my question is: do I go with the g25-550 to the limit, do I go with the g25-660 and work with it with more efficiency, or will I have better spool with a gtx3071r gen2 with twin scroll turbine housing and a short cast twin scroll manifold (t3 flange).* I would really appreciate any info! Thank you in advance


Any of those options are going to be really nice on 2.0L displacement. The G25-550 is going to spool about 400 RPMs sooner than the G25-660. At least that's what it shows on paper. The most efficient setup is going to be the cast twin-scroll manifold with the second generation GTX3071R. You may even want to consider the second generation GTX2867R on the cast twin-scroll manifold. That will also be very efficient since it's twin-scroll and less exhaust back pressure. That will probably spool quicker than the G25-550 on single-scroll and still be capable of 500 HP.

Here are a couple of compressor maps I threw together. I overlaid the G25-550 and the second generation GTX2867R on 2.0L displacement. The GTX2867R is for single-scroll. You can expect a 400 to 800 RPM improvement in the surge line (left side of map) if using a short-runner twin-scroll manifold. You will definitely be at the very edge of the choke line (right side of map) with either of these two turbos if you want 500 HP.










Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the second generation GTX3071R with 2.0L displacement. Again, you will see an improvement in the surge line for the second generation GTX3071R if using twin-scroll. Either of these two turbos will operate more efficiently for 500 HP as they are farther away from the choke line and will give you more room to grow.


----------



## Banj (Oct 12, 2008)

Awesome thread, learning a lot! Please can you help me with my setup... Rb25det 2498cc 86 bore x 71.7 stroke, single turbo, cast iron split manifold, looking for 450 crank hp with absolute minimum lag, won't need any more power than that, will be hanging off the standard 7k limiter in an off road truck so needs to be tuff! Standalone management map based, 100 octane fuel. If I don't go twin scroll will the g25-550 be suitable? Cheers, Banj


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Banj said:


> Awesome thread, learning a lot! Please can you help me with my setup... Rb25det 2498cc 86 bore x 71.7 stroke, single turbo, cast iron split manifold, looking for 450 crank hp with absolute minimum lag, won't need any more power than that, will be hanging off the standard 7k limiter in an off road truck so needs to be tuff! Standalone management map based, 100 octane fuel. If I don't go twin scroll will the g25-550 be suitable? Cheers, Banj


Cool. Let me check into that and post something later today.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Banj said:


> Awesome thread, learning a lot! Please can you help me with my setup... Rb25det 2498cc 86 bore x 71.7 stroke, single turbo, cast iron split manifold, looking for 450 crank hp with absolute minimum lag, won't need any more power than that, will be hanging off the standard 7k limiter in an off road truck so needs to be tuff! Standalone management map based, 100 octane fuel. If I don't go twin scroll will the g25-550 be suitable? Cheers, Banj


You can easily achieve 450 HP on 2.5L displacement reliably with either the EFR6758 or the second generation GTX2867R. Both are 67mm turbos and both come with the option of using a twin-scroll turbine housing. Below I overlaid the EFR6758 with 2.5L displacement (86mm bore x 71.7mm stroke x 6 cylinders). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in between 1100 and 1800 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. But that is for single scroll. A cast split manifold with short runners with a twin-scroll turbine housing on a straight-six engine will net you an additional 400 to 800 RPMs spoolup over a single scroll. So, you could easily see spoolup as early as 1000 to 1200 RPMs (or possibly better). Basically, you will have absolutely minimum turbo lag after idle and will continue to boost up to 7000 RPMs. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi at 6300 RPMs producing 45 lbs. of air per minute for 450 on pump/race gas. You don't have to increase boost above this point unless you want to achieve 450 HP sooner in the RPM band. Make sure intercooling is up to task. Less than ideal intercooling will require a few more psi or RPMs to achieve your target.










For comparison, below I overlaid the second generation GTX2867R with 2.5L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.2 or about 17.5 psi at 5800 RPMs producing 45 lbs. of air per minute or 450 HP on pump/race gas. For the Garrett, I recommend running slightly more psi and less RPMs to achieve your target. You will net an additional 400 to 800 RPMs spoolup over single scroll if using aforementioned twin-scroll setup.










Lastly, if you decide to go with the single-scroll G25-550, below I overlaid the G25-550 with the second generation GTX2867R on 2.5L for reference. I think the second generation GTX2867R or the EFR6758 on a cast split manifold with twin-scroll turbine housing will out-spool the single-scroll G25-550 provided everything pre-turbine is kept short and tight.


----------



## Warsuperior (Feb 26, 2018)

I bother you again mainstayinc
Still same engine

2.1l 20valce 4-cy engine
Max rpm 8k Car is daily driver so Id appreciate lot hp/torque on mid range
AGU bigport engine
JE-pistons 83mm CR 9.5:1
Cat cams 3658
crank 95.5mm
K&N filter
etc.

Max hp 600-650 range but 600 is ok if I get ultimate spool/fast reacting engine with loads of torque across the RPM zone. Since Im going to rev to 8k or even 8.5k(8k I think is best because of my cat cams 3658?)
I still cannot decide what turbo I should get. Im tied to use only 98 gasoline, cant go E85 because I can get it very rarely so gasoline it is.

What turbo gives great spool, lots of torque and fun to drive, not just max hp because I rarely can use it. Bigger wider torque range and rpm range is more meaningful.
What would you suggest? Garrett turbos are great but anything else I should consider? Or is it just G25-660 and go?


----------



## Keiranpj (Apr 22, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> 16V-Sauger said:
> 
> 
> > I´m running the 230hp M54B30 engine which is NA 😉 I tried to match the N55 charger, but i would have to delete my AC (which won´t happen!) and the stock single charger (N54 twin turbo, N55 single turbo) isn´t able to push 400hp. So i´m looking for one that has a bit more power potential without sacrificing to much of the incredible spool.
> ...



Hi sorry to jump in and ask you more questions but I read your replies late last year on the same engine 
I’m keiran from Australia 
I’m also building a m54b30 but running e85 fuel I have a set of 1400DW injectors custom inlet and exhaust manifold ets running emu black ECU 
Standard compression 10.2 to 1 
Double valve springs etc etc 
I currently have a shiny new gtx3072 and was wondering if you have time to give me your power four cast with the e85 fuel and my turbo as I’m thinking it may be a bit small I was hoping for 500ish rwhp ?? 

Thanks very much keiran


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Warsuperior said:


> I bother you again mainstayinc
> Still same engine
> 
> 2.1l 20valce 4-cy engine
> ...


There is always going to be a trade off between turbo spoolup and top end power. As far as the G25-660, Garrett managed to create a turbo that is capable of 600 HP on pump/race gas while having a relatively small 67mm compressor. So, you are not going to find another turbo that is able to spool fast on 2.1L and offer 600 HP up top. Unless, of course, you decide to go with a twin-scroll turbo like the EFR7163 or second generation GTX3071R with the right divided exhaust manifold. That setup could potentially have better spoolup than the G25-660, fatter mid-range and slightly more top end. So, my recommendation for you is still the G25-660 for 600 HP and quick spool with wide power band on 2.1L. If you want more power, then you will have to give up some spoolup. If you want better spoolup (like with the G25-550 = +400 RPMs spoolup), you will have to give up some top end power.

I currently run a first generation GTX2867R (also 67mm compressor) on my MK4 daily driver which is also 2.1L and a lot of fun to drive. I get instant spoolup on 2.1L displacement and great top end. The G25-660 will have the same or better spoolup than my turbo but is capable of an additional 130 HP up top. That's going to be a very very fun car IMO. Just go with the G25-660. I don't think you will be disappointed.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Keiranpj said:


> Hi sorry to jump in and ask you more questions but I read your replies late last year on the same engine
> I’m keiran from Australia
> I’m also building a m54b30 but running e85 fuel I have a set of 1400DW injectors custom inlet and exhaust manifold ets running emu black ECU
> Standard compression 10.2 to 1
> ...


I would be happy to check into that. Did you mean second generation GTX3071R when you typed "gtx3072"? Please confirm.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Banj (Oct 12, 2008)

Brilliant job thank you very much. I noticed you said to someone else that the 7163-g will actually spool faster than the 6758 according to compressor map, is this the case with my RB too? As I can find a 7163 much cheaper.... Cheers. Banj


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Banj said:


> Brilliant job thank you very much. I noticed you said to someone else that the 7163-g will actually spool faster than the 6758 according to compressor map, is this the case with my RB too? As I can find a 7163 much cheaper.... Cheers. Banj


The EFR7163 with twin-scroll turbine housing will spool faster than the EFR6758 with single-scroll turbine housing. At least that's how they compare *on paper*. However, if comparing twin-scroll to twin-scroll, the EFR6758 should spool faster than the EFR7163 since it's a smaller diameter turbo.


----------



## Eptapsyxos (Apr 29, 2019)

Hello from greece my name is Dimitrios.
I am owner of gtv 916 v6 tb
I Want to build my car to be used at street. 
My driving style is not something speciale. 
Quick accelerations at 1-2-3 gear
And some fast driving at Mountains. 
My goal is a Quick spool car i dont care so much about crazy horse powers. 
As far now i have the G25 660 in my mind 
(i dont know which a/r) and i am considering also a twinscroll setup.
The engine bay have limited space for big Turbos (the garret 2870 is the maximum it can get without modifications)

So some data 

6 cylinder
Compression Ratio 8:0:1
1996cc
80x66.2 Bore and stroke
12 valves 2 per cylinder
Red line 7200 rpm
And camshafts specs
I can email it cause i have it at pdf format and now i am from mobile ( Quick post) 

Any suggestions above all this i wrote or directions how to move on will be huge appreciated. 

Any other infos needed i am here. 

Thank you all


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Eptapsyxos said:


> Hello from greece my name is Dimitrios.
> I am owner of gtv 916 v6 tb
> I Want to build my car to be used at street.
> My driving style is not something speciale.
> ...


That's a very cool project. We don't have that car here in the US. Below is a photo of the 2.0L inline 6 cylinder from the Alfa Romeo GTV.










For quick spool and 500 HP on 2.0L I recommend either the single-scroll G25-550 or the second generation GTX2867R with a twin-scroll turbine housing. The inline 6 cylinder will work well with a twin-scroll setup as the exhaust manifold should group cylinders 1+2+3 and 4+5+6. But I would double check Alpha Romeo's cylinder firing order to be sure. You can always step up to the G25-660 for 600 HP but you will lose a few hundred RPMs in spoolup.

Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 2.0L displacement (80mm bore x 66.2mm stroke x 6 cylinders = 1996.5 CC's). You will definitely start to spool below 2000 RPMs with full spool maybe around 3500 RPMs. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1 = 2.5 or about 22 psi at 6900 RPMs producing about 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on pump/race gas.










Below I overlaid the G25-660 on 2.0L for comparison. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.9 or about 28 psi at 7200 RPMs producing 59 lbs. of air per minute or 590 HP on pump/race gas. You will lose about 400 RPMs in spoolup as compared to the G25-550.


----------



## Eptapsyxos (Apr 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Eptapsyxos said:
> 
> 
> > Hello from greece my name is Dimitrios.
> ...


What a great news!!!
2.0 v6 tb was a Quick solution for alfa offering it at certain countrys only due to high taxes.
France italy greece (and 50 samples at japan)
That engine is a Diamond inside mud. 
Old ignition system 
Afm capable to measure air until 400 hp
And various other things... 
But the sound and the overall feeling give you Back a lot of emotions. 

Thank you very much for your Time and your effort hope some Day universe to send you Back some of the kindness you share to world friend

P. S the firing order is 1 4 2 5 3 6


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Eptapsyxos said:


> What a great news!!!
> 2.0 v6 tb was a Quick solution for alfa offering it at certain countrys only due to high taxes.
> France italy greece (and 50 samples at japan)
> That engine is a Diamond inside mud.
> ...


:thumbup: That firing order is perfect for twin-scroll!


----------



## psychofox (Mar 24, 2008)

Hello mainstayinc ,

I'd like to seek out your advice on my turbo upgrade project.
The engine is 1742 cc (83 x 80.5) I4 with 6800rpm redline. The goal is around 330 to 350HP with fast spool and response.

I am thinking going with EFR 6258 Twin scroll configuration.
I believe this the ideal turbo for my goal. What do you think?

The one thing I am not sure of is going with short runner manifold or true equal length manifold?
Will I give up considerable performance for a quicker spool with the short runner, or the impact is negligible?

Thanks
Your help is appreciated.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

psychofox said:


> Hello mainstayinc ,
> 
> I'd like to seek out your advice on my turbo upgrade project.
> The engine is 1742 cc (83 x 80.5) I4 with 6800rpm redline. The goal is around 330 to 350HP with fast spool and response.
> ...


That's a great turbo to achieve your HP goals. Also, the short runner twin scroll manifold should give you gains across the board as compared to the true equal length manifold if done correctly. That means quicker spool, fatter mid-range and slightly higher top end. There should be no negative impact going with the short-runner manifold that I can see.


----------



## psychofox (Mar 24, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> That's a great turbo to achieve your HP goals. Also, the short runner twin scroll manifold should give you gains across the board as compared to the true equal length manifold if done correctly. That means quicker spool, fatter mid-range and slightly higher top end. There should be no negative impact going with the short-runner manifold that I can see.



Great to hear~
Sounds like short runner is the better choice.
Thanks~!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

psychofox said:


> Great to hear~
> Sounds like short runner is the better choice.
> Thanks~!


:thumbup: That's going to be a very nice setup.


----------



## stefm5 (May 19, 2019)

hey mainstayinc
first post here. 
i'm about to buy a turbo for my 3lt bmw engine.
twinscroll exhaust manifold.
i've decided to go with efr8374 devided 1.05 but then efr8474 became available. goal is about 700whp.
what do you think is the spool difference between two of them?
is there a better spooling turbo for that range of power?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

stefm5 said:


> hey mainstayinc
> first post here.
> i'm about to buy a turbo for my 3lt bmw engine.
> twinscroll exhaust manifold.
> ...


Let me check into that and get back to you.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

stefm5 said:


> hey mainstayinc
> first post here.
> i'm about to buy a turbo for my 3lt bmw engine.
> twinscroll exhaust manifold.
> ...


In order to make 700 WHP on a rear wheel drive chassis, you will have to make 805 HP at the crank assuming a 15% drivetrain loss on pump/race gas. Below I overlaid the EFR 8374 [RED] and the EFR 8474 [BLUE] on 3.0L displacement (84mm bore x 89.6mm stroke = 2979 CC's - not sure of your exact specs). As you can see, the EFR 8474 is capable of about 94 lbs. of air per minute or about 940 HP as compared to the EFR 8374 at 79 lbs. of air per minute or 790 HP on pump/race gas. I marked several points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi at 6300 RPMs producing 80 lbs. of air per minute or 800 HP
P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7600 RPMs producing 80 lbs. of air per minute or 800 HP

The EFR 8374 falls just short of your HP goals and has to be pushed very hard in order to achieve anything close to 800 HP on pump/race gas. Whereas the EFR 8474 is a lot more efficient at producing 80 lbs. of air per minute especially at P2/P1=3.0 since that is closer to the center efficiency island. The surge line (left side of map) for the EFR8474 is only 350 RPMs later than the EFR 8374 at least on paper. In my opinion, 350 RPMs is not a whole lot compared to the additional 150 HP you can gain up top with the EFR 8474.










As far as a better spooling turbo in that HP range, I recommend the GTX3584RS. Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS [PURPLE] and the EFR 8474 [RED] on 3.0L displacement. As you can see, these turbos are fairly evenly matched below P2/P1=2.65 or about 24 psi but the surge line for the Garrett is 500 RPMs better than the EFR. My friend has a 3.3L VR6 race car with a single-scroll GTX3584RS on a long runner race manifold. That setup produces positive boost at idle and has trouble boosting less than 26 psi due to a single standard-size wastegate. I think that the GTX3584RS on a twin-scroll manifold and 3.0L will pretty much give you instant boost and is capable of 900 HP (785 WHP) on pump/race gas.


----------



## stefm5 (May 19, 2019)

thanks a lot for your answer.
you're right on spot, cylinder dimensions on m54b30 engine are 84x89.6. redline 7200rpm. it has ported head, schrick camshafts, oversized valves, water/meth as is supercharged now.
so how all these calculations change if i choose 700+ crank hp?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

stefm5 said:


> thanks a lot for your answer.
> you're right on spot, cylinder dimensions on m54b30 engine are 84x89.6. redline 7200rpm. it has ported head, schrick camshafts, oversized valves, water/meth as is supercharged now.
> *so how all these calculations change if i choose 700+ crank hp?*


For 700 crank HP, look at the horizontal axis and find 70 lbs. of air per minute. Draw a vertical line at 70 lbs. of air per minute. Then intersect the vertical line with some horizontal lines corresponding to different pressure ratios on the vertical axis (for example, P2/P1=2.0, 2.5, 3.0 etc.). Then calculate your RPMs based on where the vertical and horizontal lines intersect. Basically, for 700 crank HP, you will not have to run as much boost or RPMs as compared to 800 crank HP (of course!). I can do another map, but it will look the same except that it will have different lines on it.


----------



## stefm5 (May 19, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> For 700 crank HP, look at the horizontal axis and find 70 lbs. of air per minute. Draw a vertical line at 70 lbs. of air per minute. Then intersect the vertical line with some horizontal lines corresponding to different pressure ratios on the vertical axis (for example, P2/P1=2.0, 2.5, 3.0 etc.). Then calculate your RPMs based on where the vertical and horizontal lines intersect. Basically, for 700 crank HP, you will not have to run as much boost or RPMs as compared to 800 crank HP (of course!). I can do another map, but it will look the same except that it will have different lines on it.


no you don't need to do new map.
i just want to know if you still would choose 8474 instead of 8374 and 3584rs over the two of them.
i checked gtx3584rs and it comes only with single scroll housings. sad.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

stefm5 said:


> no you don't need to do new map.
> *i just want to know if you still would choose 8474 instead of 8374 and 3584rs over the two of them.*
> i checked gtx3584rs and it comes only with single scroll housings. sad.


Yes, I would choose the EFR 8474 over the EFR 8374 and the GTX3584RS over both of those turbos. Here is a link to the turbine housing options for the GTX3584RS (including divided housing options):

GTX3584RS Turbine Housings

I would choose either the T4 Divided housing 1.06 A/R for 3.0L but you can probably use the T3 Divided housing 1.01 A/R as well. Don't use the V-band divided housing as those look somewhat restrictive.


----------



## stefm5 (May 19, 2019)

thanks a lot mate.
i didn't know atp had more housings for the 84rs.
you've been very helpful :wave:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

stefm5 said:


> thanks a lot mate.
> i didn't know atp had more housings for the 84rs.
> you've been very helpful :wave:


:thumbup:


----------



## alexro999 (May 23, 2019)

Hello mate, I hope you could help me out with a dilemma I am having at the moment choosing between EFR7163 (T4 TS 0.8, either IWG or EWG), or G25-660 (likely 0.72 and EWG) for my nissan s15 
Engine is sr20det, 2L with some goodies 
Including mild cams and port work (in/ex/squish pad), retaining the Variable intake cam gear
Comp ratio is slightly raised at 9:1 
and I will be using E85 fuel 

Initially my aims for the engine were to have it responsive, achieving full boost under 4k 
And making between 350-400kw at the rear wheels. I am also happy if it was not to make 400... (thats 470hp-530hp as per google calculator) 
More than happy to lean on the turbo, I was only concerned regarding the fragility of the EFR if its on its last legs 

Id appreciate any help !


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

alexro999 said:


> Hello mate, I hope you could help me out with a dilemma I am having at the moment choosing between EFR7163 (T4 TS 0.8, either IWG or EWG), or G25-660 (likely 0.72 and EWG) for my nissan s15
> Engine is sr20det, 2L with some goodies
> Including mild cams and port work (in/ex/squish pad), retaining the Variable intake cam gear
> Comp ratio is slightly raised at 9:1
> ...


Let me check into that and post something later today or tomorrow.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

alexro999 said:


> Hello mate, I hope you could help me out with a dilemma I am having at the moment choosing between EFR7163 (T4 TS 0.8, either IWG or EWG), or G25-660 (likely 0.72 and EWG) for my nissan s15
> Engine is sr20det, 2L with some goodies
> Including mild cams and port work (in/ex/squish pad), retaining the Variable intake cam gear
> Comp ratio is slightly raised at 9:1
> ...


The EFR 7163 in a twin-scroll configuration will definitely be more responsive and spool quicker than the G25-660 single-scroll. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement (1998 CCs). As you can see, the surge line for the twin-scroll EFR 7163 is 500 RPMs further to the left than the single scroll G25-660. You can expect the EFR 7163 to start to spoolup 500 RPMs sooner than the G25-660 with full spool coming in below 4000 RPMs. I marked two points as follows:

P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 47 lbs. of air per minute (350 KW) on pump/race gas
P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 54 lbs. of air per minute (400 KW) on pump/race gas










Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement for E85 assuming a 15% increase in efficiency over pump/race gas. I marked two points as follows:

P2/P1=2.2 or 18 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 41 lbs. of air per minute on E85 (41 x 1.15 = 47 lbs. of air per minute or 350 KW).
P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 47 lbs. of air per minute on E85 (47 x 1.15 = 54 lbs. of air per minute or 400 KW).










Both turbos can easily achieve 350 to 400 KW with the EFR 7163 being more responsive and quicker spooling and, therefore, the better turbo. I would choose the EFR 7163 with the T4 twin-scroll and external wastegate. That should make for a quick spooling and robust setup. I don't think that turbo would be any less robust than the G25-660 unless I am missing something (for example, possible smaller diameter bearings or center section, fragile turbine wheel material?).


----------



## alexro999 (May 23, 2019)

Oh wow thanks so much ! 
These turbos really are similar on the comp map, even though the 660 physical size is smaller. Very interesting. 
Yes I do agree with you, I can’t go past 500rpm extra spool. 
The concern arises from the TiAl of the EFR vs the MarM of the g series 
(And previous efr wheels coming off when overspooled) 

Are you able to plot 27 or 30 psi on this map ? 
I mentioned the aim in kilowatts but in PS it’s closer to 470-540ps . Much appreciated!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

alexro999 said:


> Oh wow thanks so much !
> These turbos really are similar on the comp map, even though the 660 physical size is smaller. Very interesting.
> Yes I do agree with you, I can’t go past 500rpm extra spool.
> The concern arises from the TiAl of the EFR vs the MarM of the g series
> ...


I meant to write "KW" instead of "PS" in my previous response. I edited my previous response to reflect this change. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement but with P2/P1=3.0 or 29 psi. As you can see, you can achieve 47 lbs. of air per minute 1000 RPMs sooner on 2.0L displacement at 29 psi versus 22 psi (5500 RPMs versus 6500 RPMs). 47 lbs. of air per minute is good for 540 HP on E85 (400 KW or 548 PS) or 470 HP on pump/race gas (350 KW or 476 PS). Notice, however, that the surge line for the EFR 7163 is much further to the right above P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi as compared to the G25-660. That's the part of the map that is shaded gray. Consequently, the EFR 7163 is more likely to go into compressor surge and less likely to keep you in boost in low engine RPM/high boost situations, such as when you shift gears while in high boost (>22 psi). As long as your shift point is above 4000 RPMs at 29 psi (for example, shifting from 2nd to 3rd gear), there will be no compressor surge. It seems like the EFR 7163 is not able to handle that area of the map very well. Compare that to the G25-660 which will hold boost in low engine RPM/high boost situations without a problem. The anti-surge housing on the G25-660 must really do the trick! The EFR 7163 appears to lack any anti-surge housing. Below is a short demonstration video of compressor surge (i.e.: turbo flutter). Turbo flutter is no bueno for your turbo.















Turbo flutter on an EFR 6758.






Maybe with a proper wastegate and BOV control, this will not be such a problem on the EFR 7163. Not sure. But, in this case, I definitely recommend an external wastegate if using the EFR 7163 as that will give you better boost control.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a PM from Nick aka vdub18njp:



vdub18njp said:


> Hey John,
> 
> My name's Nick, a fellow MKIV 1.8T big turbo guy in CA. Below is my build thread:
> 
> ...





vdub18njp said:


> Hey John,
> 
> Hope you enjoyed your Memorial Day weekend! Thank you kindly for checking into this for me. I'm always curious to know what each turbos potential is. If it's not too late I'd be looking at the V2 GTX3071 v. a GT3071r (what I have with Al's PPT V2 wheel) but I'll assume what I have is normal.
> 
> ...


I re-read through your build thread. That's a great project. CA 91 octane is not the best for a turbo car, but WMI should help out quite a bit. I don't have a map specific to Arnold's V2 compressor, so your turbo will be slightly different. Quite a few people run or have run his V2 GT3071R with great success. Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the second generation GTX3071R on 1848 CC's (82.5mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). The second generation GTX3071R is capable of an additional 100 HP over the original GT3071R. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7000 RPMs producing just over 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP on pump/race gas or 650 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup. The surge line (left side of map) for the second generation GTX3071R comes in 425 RPMs later than the GT3071R. However, Arnold's V2 compressor wheel may have a surge line similar to the second generation GTX3071R. In that case, you may not lose that much spoolup going to the second generation GTX3071R.










Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the second generation GTX3076R on 1848 CC's if you want to step up to a bigger turbo. The surge line I (left side of map) for the second generation GTX3076R comes in 650 RPMs later than the GT3071R. I marked a couple of points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=3.4 or 35 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP on pump/race gas or 756 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.
P2/P1=3.1 or 31 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 65+ lbs. of air per minute or 650+ HP on pump/race gas or 780+ HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.










You may also want to consider the G25-660. Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the G25-660 on 1848 CC's. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are virtually identical between the older GT3071R and the G25-660. So you can expect not to lose any spoolup going to the new-tech Garrett. However, the G25-660 is capable of an additional 100 HP over the GT3071R. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.2 or 32 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 59 lbs. of air per minute or 590 HP on pump/race gas or 710 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.



















I really like the G25-660 on your setup. I don't think you will be disappointed if you decide to go this route.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

*Humble Gratitude*

Thank you kindly! Going to share this on my build thread :thumbup:



mainstayinc said:


> I received a PM from Nick aka vdub18njp:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

*Thank you kindly!*

You're the man John! Owe you drinks if you ever come to CA! 



mainstayinc said:


> I received a PM from Nick aka vdub18njp:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdub18njp said:


> You're the man John! *Owe you drinks if you ever come to CA!*


:thumbup:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

My ppt 3071 spools much faster than a regular gt3071r. I should add. We'r tried a 3076 against it and my billet 3072 made more power, and superior spool. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Also there were 3 revisions and then and oversized wheel. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> My ppt 3071 spools much faster than a regular gt3071r. I should add. We'r tried a 3076 against it and my billet 3072 made more power, and superior spool.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


So, between the PPT 3071R and the second generation GTX3071R, which one would you choose?


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

I'm happy with my V2 wheel of the 3071. I def want to go the V3 wheel route and compare that to the GTX3071 gen 2. 



Vegeta Gti said:


> My ppt 3071 spools much faster than a regular gt3071r. I should add. We'r tried a 3076 against it and my billet 3072 made more power, and superior spool.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Also there were 3 revisions and then and oversized wheel.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I would love to compare the oversized wheel to a GTX3071. I need to get the tune sorted out as 034s tune has issues they won't resolve and blame on other things:
- car surges/hiccups
- rough idle
- partial throttle sucks

034s explaination:
- injectors are too big (other tuners have said that's not true at all, they just haven't tuned accordingly)
- turbo is too big 
- bad quality gas (which I'll agree with)

I'm going with a Motoza tune, Dave is beyond knowledgeable and said I need WMI to run better then I should be able to extract 100 or so WHP with my current set up. After it runs properly and I take V8 people's money, I'll play with the turbos and share results with Vortex.


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

mainstayinc said:


> So, between the PPT 3071R and the second generation GTX3071R, which one would you choose?


I asked Al @ PPT about this, he said the GTX will make more power sooner, but the PPT V3 over-sized wheel is a close runner up. The V3 over-sized wheel should add another 50 at the crank.. I'm curious to see for my self.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdub18njp said:


> I asked Al @ PPT about this, *he said the GTX will make more power sooner, but the PPT V3 over-sized wheel is a close runner up.* The V3 over-sized wheel should add another 50 at the crank.. I'm curious to see for my self.


That's great information. Thanks for posting. Feel free to post any results in this thread if you get a chance.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I dislike the gtx3071. Ive installed and tuned a few now(not just on vw's) and they're just a gt3076 to me.. laggy, mediocre power on a 1.0-2.0 liter engine. Even on a 2.5 they're just not astonishing, a gt3582 does exactly the danger thing and costs less now and fit a fees hundred bucks, stil less than a new gtx3071, you can get a billet wheel from Arnold for it. I find the gtx2867 to be a faslr more fun turbo that, with cams, 2.0l and e50 is far more usable and plenty of power. But that's my opinion based on what I've seen them do. 


I still prefer my ppt billet. But I've had my eyes set on a gp25-550 since they came out.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## -NoNo- (Jun 30, 2019)

Hello, I am currently running a GTX2863 gen I A/R .64 tial, on a 1.6 engine (1627cc 79.5 bore x 82 stroke).

Max power I got is 430HP with 2.8-2.9 pressure ratio, and 98 octane fuel.
The car is only used on track (race car).
See dyno curve attached








http://i65.tinypic.com/2zzqanc.jpg

Injectors duty is at the limit in this configuration.

I'm now planning to map it for e85 (with bigger injectors), and I was questioning about G25-550 turbo... (probably with A/R .72 ?)

Would there be any interest to switch for this model ?
I'd like to have faster spool, and also a bit more HP 🙂

Or perhaps a GTX2867 genII with 0.59 A/R could do the job ?

Thanks for your feedback!


----------



## GrantfSA (Jul 1, 2019)

*Golf 7.5R*

Ok so sorry to abuse your generosity but for a Golf 7.5R daily driver would you go G25-550 or G25-660 or BW EFR-7163, stock internals, Racingline R600 intake, Airtec MQB intercooler and big boost pipe package, Catless downpipe, Cobb plug in, our fuel in South Africa is pretty poor ( 95 octane ) and I am struggling to decide between those 3 turbos. Hoping to make around 500 HP but more concerned with driveability and longevity. I have searched a bit but can't find too much in the way of factual comparisons. Thanks.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

-NoNo- said:


> Hello, I am currently running a GTX2863 gen I A/R .64 tial, on a 1.6 engine (1627cc 79.5 bore x 82 stroke).
> 
> Max power I got is 430HP with 2.8-2.9 pressure ratio, and 98 octane fuel.
> The car is only used on track (race car).
> ...





GrantfSA said:


> Ok so sorry to abuse your generosity but for a Golf 7.5R daily driver would you go G25-550 or G25-660 or BW EFR-7163, stock internals, Racingline R600 intake, Airtec MQB intercooler and big boost pipe package, Catless downpipe, Cobb plug in, our fuel in South Africa is pretty poor ( 95 octane ) and I am struggling to decide between those 3 turbos. Hoping to make around 500 HP but more concerned with driveability and longevity. I have searched a bit but can't find too much in the way of factual comparisons. Thanks.


I'll check into that tomorrow (Tuesday).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

-NoNo- said:


> Hello, I am currently running a GTX2863 gen I A/R .64 tial, on a 1.6 engine (1627cc 79.5 bore x 82 stroke).
> 
> Max power I got is 430HP with 2.8-2.9 pressure ratio, and 98 octane fuel.
> The car is only used on track (race car).
> ...


The G25-550 will spool about the same as the first generation GTX2863R below P2/P1=1.8 or about 12 psi but can produce an additional 60 HP on pump/race gas or 72 hp on E85/Ethanol. Below I overlaid the G25-550 and the first generation GTX2863R on 1627CC's. I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.65 or about 24 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute.










The second generation GTX2867R will produce about the same output as the G25-550 but will spool a little slower unless you use a smaller turbine A/R or decide to use a twin-scroll setup. My recommendation is for the G25-550 on your setup as you will not lose any spoolup but will have substantial gains up top.


----------



## -NoNo- (Jun 30, 2019)

Thank you for this really detailed analysis, I had the same conclusion but it helps me a lot.

I was also thinking about gtx2860 gen2 and same AR as my 2863 gen1. I could get a faster spool, with the same peak power (or higher with e85). It could help a lot in some slow corners on the track and giving a better higher speed.

One friend of mine has mounted a g25-550 on a similar engine, I will see the result on the dyno very soon.

Thank you again!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

-NoNo- said:


> Thank you for this really detailed analysis, I had the same conclusion but it helps me a lot.
> 
> I was also thinking about gtx2860 gen2 and same AR as my 2863 gen1. I could get a faster spool, with the same peak power (or higher with e85). It could help a lot in some slow corners on the track and giving a better higher speed.
> 
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GrantfSA said:


> Ok so sorry to abuse your generosity but for a Golf 7.5R daily driver would you go G25-550 or G25-660 or BW EFR-7163, stock internals, Racingline R600 intake, Airtec MQB intercooler and big boost pipe package, Catless downpipe, Cobb plug in, our fuel in South Africa is pretty poor ( 95 octane ) and I am struggling to decide between those 3 turbos. Hoping to make around 500 HP but more concerned with driveability and longevity. I have searched a bit but can't find too much in the way of factual comparisons. Thanks.


If that were my car I would go with the G25-660 over the G25-550 on stock internals. The G25-660 will spool about 400 RPMs later than the G25-550 but will have an additional 100 HP up top. The delay in spool will preserve, to some extent, your bottom end and transmission as the torque curve will be shifted to the right. Also, the G25-660 will have to work less to make 500 HP as compared to the G25-550. Less work means less heat, less intercooling and less chance of detonation etc. Below I overlaid the G25-550 and G25-660 on 1984CC's. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.4 or about 20 psi and 7000 RPMs producing 47.5 lbs. of air per minute. I assume that direct injection will be 5% more efficient than port injection so I used a ratio of 10.5 HP per lb. of air (10.5 x 47.5 = 498 HP). Notice how this point is very close to the G25-550's choke line (right side of RED map) whereas the same point is closer to the G25-660's center efficiency island (center of BLUE map).










As far as the EFR 7163, I would only choose that turbo if using a divided turbine housing (i.e. twin-scroll setup). That would give you quick spool, better engine volumetric efficiency, and top end similar to the G25-660. So, for single scroll, I would choose the G25-660. For twin-scroll, I think the EFR 7163 is a better choice.


----------



## GrantfSA (Jul 1, 2019)

*Thank you*

Thanks, really appreciate your advice. Yeah abrupt torque arrival may well upset the DSG even with the Cobb flash for it and 400 rpm isn't a material difference.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GrantfSA said:


> Thanks, really appreciate your advice. Yeah abrupt torque arrival may well upset the DSG even with the Cobb flash for it and 400 rpm isn't a material difference.


:thumbup:


----------



## Audi2.7what (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm looking for a little turbo advice looking over this I could definitely use some pointers. I have a 2.7 build stroked to a 3L 83mm pistons, 154X21 rods, 92.8mm stroke. Using 1176cc injectors as of now but going up with a turbo upgrade for sure either thinking g25-550 or g25-660 in a twin application or a huge single.

1st 3.500:1 
2nd 1.889:1 
3rd 1.231:1 
4th 0.967:1
5th 0.806:1
6th 0.684:1 
Final Drive 4.111:1 

Gearing I'm looking for something Motorsport driven GTX,EFR,Xona if you could help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Audi2.7what said:


> I'm looking for a little turbo advice looking over this I could definitely use some pointers. I have a 2.7 build stroked to a 3L 83mm pistons, 154X21 rods, 92.8mm stroke. Using 1176cc injectors as of now but going up with a turbo upgrade for sure either thinking g25-550 or g25-660 in a twin application or a huge single.
> 
> 1st 3.500:1
> 2nd 1.889:1
> ...


Let me check into that and get back to you.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here is a post from earlier this year that looks at the G25-550 on 3.0L displacement.

How do you feel about the g25 550s on the audi 2.7t? Or a 2.7t stroked to 3.0l. 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore.










I'll look into the G25-660 on 3.0L displacement and some super-single options for this setup in the next day or two.


----------



## Audi2.7what (Sep 27, 2011)

mainstayinc said:


> Here is a post from earlier this year that looks at the G25-550 on 3.0L displacement.
> 
> How do you feel about the g25 550s on the audi 2.7t? Or a 2.7t stroked to 3.0l. 92.8mm stroke, 83mm bore.
> 
> ...


I appreciate the swift response looks like 660 or a comparable single setup would be ideal let me know what you find I take the motor to 8500-9k so I have a little play room with top end.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Audi2.7what said:


> I appreciate the swift response looks like 660 or a comparable single setup would be ideal *let me know what you find I take the motor to 8500-9k so I have a little play room with top end.*


:thumbup:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

so stock displacement, 10:1 compression, and 93 octane I wonder if the gp25-550 will see 20psi by 3k and if it can make [email protected] 30psi or less  hmmmmm


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I just saw this.
> 
> I had a buddy with a setup nearly identical to mine except it had a gtx3071....it spooled like a 35R. Even with VVT to help.
> 
> I'm wondering if the g25-550 will not only out spool the ppt billet 3071 but also make more power.


I'm sure the G25-550 will out spool the PPT billet 3071R. But I don't think it will make more power since it's only a 60mm compressor wheel versus 71+ mm for the PPT 3071R.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Hmmm, true. I believe I'm v1 though

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Audi2.7what said:


> I appreciate the swift response looks like 660 or a comparable single setup would be ideal let me know what you find I take the motor to 8500-9k so I have a little play room with top end.


Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 1.5L displacement (83mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 3 cylinders = 1506.3 CC's). As you can see, the G25-660 will spool about 400 RPMs later than the G25-550 with the surge line around 3000 RPMs and full spool coming in around 4500 to 4800 RPMs on 1.5L. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi at 8000 RPMs producing about 48 lbs. of air per minute for 480 HP on pump/race gas or 960 HP on a twin-turbo setup. The G25-660 will be more efficient at producing this output as compared to the G25-550 since it is closer to is center efficiency island. However, you will have to give up 400 RPMs spoolup on the front end to achieve this output. You can increase boost on the G25-660 to P2/P1=3.4 or about 35 psi and 8000 RPMs producing 57 lbs. of air per minute or 1140 HP on a twin-turbo setup on pump/race gas. That's a 180 HP increase.










Below I overlaid the EFR 9180 on 3.0L displacement (83mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 6 cylinders = 3012.6 CC's). As you can see, the EFR 9180 has a surge line similar to the G25-660 on a twin-turbo setup coming in around 3000 RPMs. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or 26 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 96 lbs. of air per minute or 960 HP on a single-turbo setup. At this point, the EFR 9180 will be maxed out and cannot produce any more usable air flow. That makes the G25-660 a better option since it will spool similar to the EFR 9180 on a single-turbo setup but will give you an additional 180+ HP up top to play with.


----------



## Audi2.7what (Sep 27, 2011)

mainstayinc said:


> Audi2.7what said:
> 
> 
> > I appreciate the swift response looks like 660 or a comparable single setup would be ideal let me know what you find I take the motor to 8500-9k so I have a little play room with top end.
> ...


I'm right in the home of the steel stacks I see your close I owe you a beer if I ever see you at cars and coffee ☕


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Audi2.7what said:


> I'm right in the home of the steel stacks I see your close I owe you a beer if I ever see you at cars and coffee ☕


:thumbup::beer:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Xona xr6156 .73 ar on a 2.1 9.5:1 with thr big IE cams.

Vs a gp25-660

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> *Xona xr6156* .73 ar on a 2.1 9.5:1 with thr big IE cams.
> 
> Vs a gp25-660
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I'm having trouble finding a compressor map for the Xona. Please post here or send a PM if you have it.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I will look sir.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

Hi there !
I was searching for some infos about the G25s, and what can i say ... i wish i found this thread sooner, there is so much in it ! Please be nice, i am new here.

I hope you will not mind if i do not own a VW/audi ... But i do own a turbo 1.8L inline four, so in a way it fits right in the 1.8T engine forum category, right ? 

I was wondering if it would be comparable to the engines you use, and i am still wondering about which turbo to chose. I hope you can give me some advice. 
Right now the car has an IWG gt2560r on its engine, and a new engine is being built. It is a trackday car, and runs on e85. The car is a 200sx, engine is a ca18det (bore x stroke: 83 mm × 83.6 mm, 1809cc).

It is being built with forged internals, ported head, 1 piece coated valves, solid lifters, 10.25mm lift 260/270 duration cams, and "high compression", should be around 10:1. The guy building it knows these engines inside out; basically these are capable of holding (at least) 45psi of boost and run a 9000rpm redline once correctly done.

My objective is not to max that boost though, so i will limit myself to 25-30psi and 8500rpm redline (for now).

I thought of the following options and their pros and cons, if you think about some others, please tell me. 

cost effective, drop ins options: gtx2867r / gtx2971r, in .86 AR, T25 flanges . 
I only know of the gtx2867r, and it is a very good turbo for these engines. It can be run at a bit under 30psi right to its limit... with a stock head and a stock 7500 rev limit. The stock head does not give power past 5500/6000rpm, so i feel it will be heavily overworked with mine. I also have never heard of the other one, so if you know about it, let me know. It does not look like they can handle 30psi. I expect to get around 500hp with these.


less cost effective, with some mods:
G25-550/660 . The plan would be to chop off my manifold / elbow and weld a Vband on them. A bit of fab work, but it should fit on low mount, like the previous ones. Pricey turbos though. 
From the info i got, the 550 would perform like a gtx2867r, and i should get around 500hp from them. Is there a point considering it, since it is more expensive and adds fab work ?

Another option is to go 660, and that is 600hp capable territory. I think with a .72AR it would be ok. My engine builder thinks it will produce too much backpressure and the .92 AR is the way to go. I'd rather keep some "bottom" end though (these engines are known to be peaky and head work will not help, but i'd rather have some power at 3000/3500rpm...). 
It also seems that from another thread on this forum (tested on a build 1.8L turbo on an ibiza if i recall correctly ?) , the .72 AR stays at ~1.5 backpressure ratio.

Still, these are pricey. Also undecided on IWG or EWG... i know IWG setups will not be able to keep 30psi and will create a lot more backpressure. They always do. I will have to use a dual port actuator and a 4 ports boost controller valve if i ever hope to get there IWG. The other option is to go EWG, which means adding expensive wastegate and fab work (i do not want to run a screamer pipe). 

And at that point, EFR comes in ...

But EFRs require a top mount manifold, they wont fit at all bottom mounted. My guess is the 7163 would be a good match for the g25 - 660, but i wonder how they compare on transients. From what i gathered on this thread, the EFR should have better spool IF i get it to run twin scroll. 


So, any advice, comment, idea ? please dont tell me to sell it and buy a vw  I might buy a vw as a daily driver though. But that is another story ! Thanks everyone


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

crousti said:


> Hi there !
> I was searching for some infos about the G25s, and what can i say ... i wish i found this thread sooner, there is so much in it ! Please be nice, i am new here.
> 
> I hope you will not mind if i do not own a VW/audi ... But i do own a turbo 1.8L inline four, so in a way it fits right in the 1.8T engine forum category, right ?
> ...


That looks like a cool build. I will look into a couple of comparisons and give you my opinion and analysis in the next day or two.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Xona refused to give compressor map. They said it was very similar to gen1 gtx3076.

So compare that, versus gtx3067 and gtx3071 both gen2. On a 2.1l with the big IEcams.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Xona refused to give compressor map. They said it was very similar to gen1 gtx3076.
> 
> So compare that, versus gtx3067 and gtx3071 both gen2. On a 2.1l with the big IEcams.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Ok. Will do.:thumbup:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Ok. Will do.




Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

The xona people said this....

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

They keep dodging









Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> That looks like a cool build. I will look into a couple of comparisons and give you my opinion and analysis in the next day or two.


Thanks a lot. I'll check if i can share some pics / data on the head work if the community here is interested, but as you may know engine builders do not like to share their trade secrets


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

crousti said:


> Thanks a lot. I'll check if i can share some pics / data on the head work if the community here is interested, but as you may know engine builders do not like to share their trade secrets


Yes, please share.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Xona refused to give compressor map. They said it was very similar to gen1 gtx3076.
> 
> * So compare that, versus gtx3067 and gtx3071 both gen2. On a 2.1l with the big IEcams.*
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3076R (XONA analogue) and the second generation GTX3071R on 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke = 2066.9 CC's). The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3076R ranges from 2500 to 4200 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. You will start to see positive boost on the first generation GTX3076R around 2500 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. Full boost could be anywhere between 4000 and 5000+ RPMs. The surge line for the second generation GTX3071R, on the other hand, ranges from 2000 to 2400 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. That's a 500 to 1800 RPM improvement over the older model GTX3076R. The second generation GTX3071R will be much more responsive on 2.1L displacement while still being able to provide about 60 lbs. of air per minute at 8000 RPMs or about 600 HP on pump/race gas or upwards of 700+ HP on ethanol/E85. Add a twin-scroll housing to that setup and you're golden (LOL).










Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3076R (XONA analogue) and the second generation GTX2867R on 2.1L displacement. I don't have a map specific to the 30-series turbine housing used on the GTX3067R. You will have to shift the numbers for the GTX3067R a few hundred RPMs to the right for a more accurate analysis of that turbo. As you can see, the surge line for the second generation GTX2867R ranges from 1600 to 2000 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. That's a 900 to 2200 RPM improvement over the older GTX3076R. You can expect this turbo to spool instantly on 2.1L displacement while still being able to achieve 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP on pump/race gas or up to 600 HP on ethanol/E85. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi and 6700 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute. This turbo will be maxed out on 2.1L displacement under 7000 RPMs and is good for stock cylinder head. Consequently, big IE cams will only make this turbo more laggy down low and will not gain any significant HP up top.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

crousti said:


> Hi there !
> I was searching for some infos about the G25s, and what can i say ... i wish i found this thread sooner, there is so much in it ! Please be nice, i am new here.
> 
> I hope you will not mind if i do not own a VW/audi ... But i do own a turbo 1.8L inline four, so in a way it fits right in the 1.8T engine forum category, right ?
> ...


The GT2560R is not a bad little turbo. My first "big turbo" on stock 1.8L displacement was a GT2560R but with EWG and made 300+ HP. That's what got me hooked.



crousti said:


> Still, these are pricey. *Also undecided on IWG or EWG... i know IWG setups will not be able to keep 30psi and will create a lot more backpressure. They always do. I will have to use a dual port actuator and a 4 ports boost controller valve if i ever hope to get there IWG. The other option is to go EWG, which means adding expensive wastegate and fab work (i do not want to run a screamer pipe).
> 
> *And at that point, EFR comes in ...
> 
> ...


I definitely recommend an external wastegate for anything over 1 bar boost



crousti said:


> It is being built with forged internals, ported head, 1 piece coated valves, solid lifters, 10.25mm lift 260/270 duration cams, and "high compression", should be around 10:1. The guy building it knows these engines inside out; basically these are capable of holding (at least) 45psi of boost and run a 9000rpm redline once correctly done.
> 
> My objective is not to max that boost though, so i will limit myself to 25-30psi and 8500rpm redline (for now).
> 
> ...


For your goals I think the second generation GTX2867R or the G25-550 would be a great option. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX2867R and G25-550 with 1.8L displacement (83mm bore × 83.6mm stroke = 1809 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) for the G25-550 is slightly better than the GTX2867R by about 200 RPMs. You can expect either turbo to reach full spool by 3500 RPM +/- 300 RPMs on 1.8L displacement. I marked two points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 42 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on ethanol/E85.
P2/P1=2.6 or 23 psi at 7200 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on pump/race gas.










The G25-660 is a great turbo but will delay spoolup by about 400 RPMs. It will produce 500 HP more efficiently than the second generation GTX2867R or G25-550 but will require more boost or higher engine revs to achieve its full potential (600 HP+ on 1.8L displacement). I wouldn't worry too much about back pressure with a smaller turbine A/R if you are running E85. The best solution to reduce back pressure IMO is to run a divided exhaust manifold into a twin-scroll housing.

Stock photo of CA18DET:


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> The GT2560R is not a bad little turbo. My first "big turbo" on stock 1.8L displacement was a GT2560R but with EWG and made 300+ HP. That's what got me hooked.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey mate I absolutely love your work, new to the forum. Your sensational. 

I have a tricky one for you and hopefully you can help. 

I'm building a race only S3 2007 quattro 2.0t FSI for a series called IPRA in Australia. I have to run a restricted so I'm thinking bigger is better. They go from 36mm to 39mm and have to be a flat plate less than 50mm from the inlet air end of the compressor. 

A number of questions to you guys as your on it:

Doing some quick calcs I feel E85 is a much better race solution due to more fuel in before restricted flow goes supersonic compared to 105 octane race fuel. Please note in Australia e85 is sold as race e85 and is between 84 and 86% ethanol. (they don't call us the lucky country for nothing) 

Am I correct and what % increase in power and torque would I expect to see running E85 over race fuel using a K04 and very open supply and exhaust piping given I'm restricted? (as E85 conversion will be painful and costly.)

With the K04 and by turning up the wick all the way what boost can I get using standard ecu? 

What power figure would be expected with 39mm restrictor ? 

Can I use an external controller to control the turbo and use the std ecu? What sort of boost can I get from the k04?

What power figure would be expected with 39mm restrictor ? 


What turbo selection with tubular header would you recommend? And why? 

Am I right to go as big a restricted as possible as there is a 100kg penalty for every 1mm the restricted is increased. 

Does anyone have the maximum airflow of 36mm, 37mm, 38mm and 39mm restrictor at 30 Dec C. 

I apologise in advance using metric and I am happy to get all answers in old skool imperial. Quite like using HP myself over kW. Makes me feel like the cars got more go. 



Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> *Hey mate I absolutely love your work, new to the forum. Your sensational.
> *
> I have a tricky one for you and hopefully you can help.
> 
> I'm building a race only S3 2007 quattro 2.0t FSI for a series called IPRA in Australia. I have to run a restricted so I'm thinking bigger is better. They go from 36mm to 39mm and have to be a flat plate less than 50mm from the inlet air end of the compressor.


Welcome and thanks for the compliment. That sounds like a cool project. Hopefully, others can chime in with their opinion. 



brucefil said:


> A number of questions to you guys as your on it:
> 
> Doing some quick calcs I feel E85 is a much better race solution due to more fuel in before restricted flow goes supersonic compared to 105 octane race fuel. Please note in Australia e85 is sold as race e85 and is between 84 and 86% ethanol. (they don't call us the lucky country for nothing)
> 
> *Am I correct and what % increase in power and torque would I expect to see running E85 over race fuel using a K04 and very open supply and exhaust piping given I'm restricted?* (as E85 conversion will be painful and costly.)


I usually use 1.15 to 1.20 increase for a well-tuned E85 setup over pump/race gas for calculation purposes. E85 can take a lot more timing before Maximum Brake Torque (MBT) is achieved. E85 is totally worth the expense IMO if you are running in a restricted class.



brucefil said:


> *With the K04 and by turning up the wick all the way what boost can I get using standard ecu?*
> 
> What power figure would be expected with 39mm restrictor ?
> 
> ...


 I'm not sure about that. Check out user Marcus_Aurelius (MadMax) posts in this forum. He would be a good source of information about maxing out the stock turbo on E85 on a race setup. Here's one of his posts: Chronicles of a track TT I'm not sure if he posts anymore but has left a wealth of information on this forum.



brucefil said:


> What turbo selection with tubular header would you recommend? And why?


For the ultimate track setup:

Exhaust manifold: Custom fabricated short-runner divided manifold.
Turbo: second generation GTX2860R, GTX2867R or GTX3071R with a twin-scroll exhaust manifold depending on how much power you want to make.
Fuel: ethanol/E85
Cooling: Water-to-air intercooler combined with pre-turbo water/methanol injection. That will allow you to reduce the effects of a restrictor plate. You can turn the restrictor plate into a mounting plate for pre-turbo water/methanol injection system if the IPRA rules allow that.



brucefil said:


> Am I right to go as big a restricted as possible as there is a 100kg penalty for every 1mm the restricted is increased.
> 
> *Does anyone have the maximum airflow of 36mm, 37mm, 38mm and 39mm restrictor at 30 Dec C.*
> 
> ...


Let me look into that.


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Welcome and thanks for the compliment. That sounds like a cool project. Hopefully, others can chime in with their opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mainstayinc thanks for your help, your heading in the same direction I was thinking. Not sure I can run water/meth under the rules as I can not add anything other than race gas or e85 that changes the octane rating of the fuel under the rules, can run water injection though is that worth looking at? 

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Mainstayinc thanks for your help, your heading in the same direction I was thinking. Not sure I can run water/meth under the rules as I can not add anything other than race gas or e85 that changes the octane rating of the fuel under the rules, *can run water injection though is that worth looking at?*
> 
> Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


I think so. There is at least one good thread in this forum that discusses water injection in detail.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3076R (XONA analogue) and the second generation GTX3071R on 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke = 2066.9 CC's). The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3076R ranges from 2500 to 4200 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. You will start to see positive boost on the first generation GTX3076R around 2500 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. Full boost could be anywhere between 4000 and 5000+ RPMs. The surge line for the second generation GTX3071R, on the other hand, ranges from 2000 to 2400 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. That's a 500 to 1800 RPM improvement over the older model GTX3076R. The second generation GTX3071R will be much more responsive on 2.1L displacement while still being able to provide about 60 lbs. of air per minute at 8000 RPMs or about 600 HP on pump/race gas or upwards of 700+ HP on ethanol/E85. Add a twin-scroll housing to that setup and you're golden (LOL).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Outfuknstanding as always man. Thank you!!!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Am I right to go as big a restricted as possible as there is a 100kg penalty for every 1mm the restricted is increased.
> 
> *Does anyone have the maximum airflow of 36mm, 37mm, 38mm and 39mm restrictor at 30 Dec C.*
> 
> ...


I decided to re-calculate the maximum air flow through each restrictor plate and came up with the following results. Maximum air flow is expressed in lbs. of air per minute and is based on the choke point of air though an orifice at 100% speed of sound at 20 degrees C. Eighth mile times are calculated here.

Plate diameter: 36mm
Calculated air flow: 36.45 lbs. of air per minute
Maximum HP on E85: 419 (36.45 x 1.15 x10)
Vehicle weight 3175 lbs. (3000 base weight + 175 driver + 0 penalty)
*Calculated 1/8 mile time: 7.73*

Plate diameter: 37mm
Calculated air flow: 38.51 lbs. of air per minute
Maximum HP on E85: 443 (38.51 x 1.15 x10)
Vehicle weight 3395 lbs. (3000 base weight + 175 driver + 220 x 1 penalty)
*Calculated 1/8 mile time: 7.76*

Plate diameter: 38mm
Calculated air flow: 40.62 lbs. of air per minute
Maximum HP on E85: 467 (40.62 x 1.15 x10)
Vehicle weight 3615 lbs. (3000 base weight + 175 driver + 220 x 2 penalty)
*Calculated 1/8 mile time: 7.79*

Plate diameter: 39mm
Calculated air flow: 42.78 lbs. of air per minute
Maximum HP on E85: 492 (42.78 x 1.15 x10)
Vehicle weight 3835 lbs. (3000 base weight + 175 driver + 220 x 3 penalty)
*Calculated 1/8 mile time: 7.81*

As you can see, there is only a 73 HP difference between the smallest restrictor plate and the largest (492 - 419). Also, eighth mile times differ by only .08 seconds ("eight hundredths of a second") with the smallest restrictor plate having a slight advantage. It makes sense to run the smallest restrictor plate since there is no additional weight penalty. A lighter vehicle can brake later in the corners, have better handling, less tire wear and better lap times. The best turbo that matches with the smallest restrictor plate is the second generation GTX2860R. Below I overlaid the GTX2860R with 2.0L displacement. The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1200 to 2000 RPMs. You can expect this setup to spool instantly on 2.0L displacement. This turbo is able to produce a maximum of 43 lbs. of air per minute where it chokes off at 6500 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. I marked two point corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.15 or 17 psi at 6000 RPMs producing 36.5 lbs. of air per minute or 419 HP on ethanol/E85 *using the smallest 36mm restrictor plate.*
P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6000 RPMs producing 42 lbs. of air per minute or 483 HP on ethanol/E85 *using the largest 39mm restrictor plate.*

The second generation GTX2860R provides plenty of air flow to run the smallest 36mm restrictor plate and avoid any weight penalty. It also provides just enough air flow to run the largest 39mm restrictor plate in case you want to test whether you can improve lap times by increasing HP while taking a weight penalty. I also recommend the G25-550 in a single-scroll setup. However, that turbo makes more power (50 lbs. of air per minute) than can fit through the largest restrictor plate. But it will have similar spool characteristics as the second generation GTX2860R using a single-scroll turbine housing.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Outfuknstanding as always man. Thank you!!!
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


:thumbup::beer::beer:


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I decided to re-calculate the maximum air flow through each restrictor plate and came up with the following results. Maximum air flow is expressed in lbs. of air per minute and is based on the choke point of air though an orifice at 100% speed of sound at 20 degrees C. Eighth mile times are calculated here.
> 
> Plate diameter: 36mm
> Calculated air flow: 36.45 lbs. of air per minute
> ...


Man that is incredible, you are the man. That is exactly what I've been looking for. What this allows me to do is to go for the lightest car I can make under the rules (there are other weight restrictions around swept volume and drive line) and then get an appropriate restricted to suit. 

I have one more question as I will build the car in 2 stages. What is the maximum boost and power I can get from the K04 in the car? (I plan to do all the cooling upgrades for later with the K04 and run that for 6 months to get used to the extra power before fully boosting the Audi) 

You have been way too generous with driver weight as I'm no F1 jockey and am about 220 lbs.  (no need to recalculate) 

If your ever in Melbourne (Australia) I need to buy you a beer. 

Thank you very much. 

I'm investigating running my ability to run water/meth as prevailing air prior to the turbo is allowed, however as previously stated I can not add to the fuel anything that raises the octane rating. So not exactly clear like most race specs. Backup 1 will be water only injection with backup 2 being air/water intercooler. (using ice water) both pretty turbo and charge air. 



Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Man that is incredible, you are the man. *That is exactly what I've been looking for. *What this allows me to do is to go for the lightest car I can make under the rules (there are other weight restrictions around swept volume and drive line) and then get an appropriate restricted to suit.
> 
> I have one more question as I will build the car in 2 stages. What is the maximum boost and power I can get from the K04 in the car? (I plan to do all the cooling upgrades for later with the K04 and run that for 6 months to get used to the extra power before fully boosting the Audi)
> 
> ...


Glad I can help. :thumbup: As far as the K04, there were several variants of that turbo. Do you know exactly what model you have (K04-0015, K04-0022, KO4-0025, K04-0028)? The compressor map varies widely between each of these models. Is it the stock turbo for the 2.0T FSI? I'm not sure which one they used.

'No need to recalculate' :laugh:



brucefil said:


> I'm investigating running my ability to run water/meth as prevailing air prior to the turbo is allowed, * however as previously stated I can not add to the fuel anything that raises the octane rating.* So not exactly clear like most race specs. Backup 1 will be water only injection with backup 2 being air/water intercooler. (using ice water) both pretty turbo and charge air.
> 
> Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


Water and/or methanol injection will definitely increase overall octane rating. You could inject E85 pre-turbo or post-turbo and gain some cooling benefits while not increasing your octane rating. That will not be as effective as water/methanol but it will still work. That's what I did with my 2002 VW MK4 1.8T daily driver. I had a singe nozzle post-intercooler to cool the charge air before entering into the intake manifold. Worked great until I hydro-locked my engine due to some kind of malfunction in the controller or solenoid.


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Glad I can help.  As far as the K04, there were several variants of that turbo. Do you know exactly what model you have (K04-0015, K04-0022, KO4-0025, K04-0028)? The compressor map varies widely between each of these models. Is it the stock turbo for the 2.0T FSI? I'm not sure which one they used.
> 
> 'No need to recalculate'
> 
> ...


Yes it is the stock K04 from an 8p s3 2.0t Fsi on a stock computer

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

I think it's a K04-064 compressor

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> I think it's a K04-064 compressor
> 
> Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


Let me check into that.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> I have one more question as I will build the car in 2 stages. *What is the maximum boost and power I can get from the K04 in the car?* (I plan to do all the cooling upgrades for later with the K04 and run that for 6 months to get used to the extra power before fully boosting the Audi)Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


It looks like the stock K04-064 uses the K04-2283 compressor wheel (60mm) capable of 40 lbs. of air per minute or 400 HP on pump/race gas or 460 HP on ethanol/E85. Below I overlaid the K04-064 and the second generation GTX2860R (also 60mm) on 2.0L for comparison. As you can see, both turbos are very closely matched with the Garrett having a slightly better surge line but a better choke line (right side of map) and is capable of 30 more HP than the BW. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1= 2.7 or about 25 psi at 5300 RPMs producing 40 lbs. of air per minute. The stock K04-064 best fits with the smallest 36mm restrictor plate in the IPRA series.


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> It looks like the stock K04-064 uses the K04-2283 compressor wheel (60mm) capable of 40 lbs. of air per minute or 400 HP on pump/race gas or 460 HP on ethanol/E85. Below I overlaid the K04-064 and the second generation GTX2860R (also 60mm) on 2.0L for comparison. As you can see, both turbos are very closely matched with the Garrett having a slightly better surge line but a better choke line (right side of map) and is capable of 30 more HP than the BW. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1= 2.7 or about 25 psi at 5300 RPMs producing 40 lbs. of air per minute. The stock K04-064 best fits with the smallest 36mm restrictor plate in the IPRA series.


Thank you so much, that is exactly the answer I needed. That's great as I can set up the car with standard engine internals on e85 to start with. At full power how do I work out how much fuel I will need to flow? 

My idea may be to run the standard LP fuel pump and standard injectors with updated HP fuel pump (as the car already has that) along with a secondary supply of e85(or water methanol) , some of which I will inject just before the restricted and after the MAF and some which I will inject through a secondary fuel rail in one of the Greek inlet manifolds. 

I'm interested in your views and of others on this idea. 

I already race another car (Clio 172 2.0 na) in the under 2 litre class and have found that the more you deviate from stock the more potential problems you have = fast but not finishing. 

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Thank you so much, that is exactly the answer I needed. That's great as I can set up the car with standard engine internals on e85 to start with. *At full power how do I work out how much fuel I will need to flow?*


I usually use this fuel injector calculator.



brucefil said:


> My idea may be to run the standard LP fuel pump and standard injectors with updated HP fuel pump (as the car already has that) along with a secondary supply of e85(or water methanol) , *some of which I will inject just before the restricted and after the MAF and some which I will inject through a secondary fuel rail in one of the Greek inlet manifolds.
> 
> *I'm interested in your views and of others on this idea.
> 
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## FAZED (Jul 2, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I usually use this fuel injector calculator.
> 
> 
> 
> :thumbup:


What would your recommendation be for the quickest-spooling setup capable of achieving low to mid 500s whp on a 2.0L using race fuel? Is the G25-660 all its hyped up to be or would an EFR or PTE spool just as quickly?

I see you highly recommend a twin scroll gtx3071r setup but the shops I've reached out to don't seem interested in making a custom twin scroll kit. Thanks for any guidance you may have.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

FAZED said:


> What would your recommendation be for the quickest-spooling setup capable of achieving low to mid 500s whp on a 2.0L using race fuel? Is the G25-660 all its hyped up to be or would an EFR or PTE spool just as quickly?
> 
> I see you highly recommend a twin scroll gtx3071r setup but the shops I've reached out to don't seem interested in making a custom twin scroll kit. Thanks for any guidance you may have.


The G25-660, second generation GTX3071R and the EFR 7163 will all make 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas or about 520 WHP on a FWD chassis. On a single-scroll setup, the 67mm G25-660 will be the fastest spooling turbo on 2.0L displacement due to 67mm compressor wheel and advanced turbine technology. The G25-660 is really that good. At least on paper. It would be nice to see some real world comparisons on the dyno to verify. For a twin-scroll setup, I recommend the EFR 7163 or the GTX3071R. Setup correctly, both of those can out-spool the G25-660 which is only offered in single-scroll at this time. PTE doesn't publish compressor maps as far as I know so there is no way to compare data. My favorite setup out of these three is the GTX3071R with twin-scroll turbine housing as you mentioned. If my first generation GTX2867R T3 single-scroll dies on my 2.1L MK4 daily driver, then I'm going with this setup using a SPA cast twin-scroll manifold. I'm pretty sure you can find an off-the-shelf T3 cast manifold for your MK6. Add the twin-scroll EFR 7163 or second generation GTX3071R and you're good to go. You should also be able to lower your fuel octane using twin-scroll.


----------



## FAZED (Jul 2, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> The G25-660, second generation GTX3071R and the EFR 7163 will all make 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas or about 520 WHP on a FWD chassis. On a single-scroll setup, the 67mm G25-660 will be the fastest spooling turbo on 2.0L displacement due to 67mm compressor wheel and advanced turbine technology. The G25-660 is really that good. At least on paper. It would be nice to see some real world comparisons on the dyno to verify. For a twin-scroll setup, I recommend the EFR 7163 or the GTX3071R. Setup correctly, both of those can out-spool the G25-660 which is only offered in single-scroll at this time. PTE doesn't publish compressor maps as far as I know so there is no way to compare data. My favorite setup out of these three is the GTX3071R with twin-scroll turbine housing as you mentioned. If my first generation GTX2867R T3 single-scroll dies on my 2.1L MK4 daily driver, then I'm going with this setup using a SPA cast twin-scroll manifold. I'm pretty sure you can find an off-the-shelf T3 cast manifold for your MK6. Add the twin-scroll EFR 7163 or second generation GTX3071R and you're good to go. You should also be able to lower your fuel octane using twin-scroll.


Thank you for that thoughtful response. A twin scroll GTX3071R sounds heavenly. For the sake of the simplicity and cost effectiveness of single scroll, I'll be giving the G25-660 with vband 0.92a/r a shot. You gave me the extra bit of validation I needed. I'll help out the community by posting my dyno results when I get them, likely in the fall when boost weather arrives. I'm planning on having a dyno day with a few other Mk6s, including a gtx3071r and an efr7163. It'll be nice to see how they all stack up. 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

FAZED said:


> Thank you for that thoughtful response. A twin scroll GTX3071R sounds heavenly. For the sake of the simplicity and cost effectiveness of single scroll, I'll be giving the G25-660 with vband 0.92a/r a shot. You gave me the extra bit of validation I needed. *I'll help out the community by posting my dyno results when I get them, likely in the fall when boost weather arrives. I'm planning on having a dyno day with a few other Mk6s, including a gtx3071r and an efr7163. It'll be nice to see how they all stack up.*
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


:thumbup:That would be great! Looking forward to seeing how the G25-660 performs.


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

Very excited to see the results! I will be posting a PPT GT3071-71BB-V2 (current) v. Al's PPT GT3071-73BB-V3 soon. I'm upgrading from 034s 91 Oct tune to Motoza 91 custom tune adding WMI. Hoping to be in the 400s.









Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> The GT2560R is not a bad little turbo. My first "big turbo" on stock 1.8L displacement was a GT2560R but with EWG and made 300+ HP. That's what got me hooked.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hi, sorry for the delay, I had a lot of work to do and forgot to check back this thread. 

Thanks a lot for your analysis. This is what i was looking for, spoolup differences, transient response differences too.
I think wikipedia may be the only place you can find a bone stock s13 engine bay 

The gt2867r setup i know spools like you say it should, but is ran at 29psi (e85) and churns a little over 510hp (e85). I do think it is overspinning and told the owner, but ultimately it is his decision.

My current setup is a gt2560r coming off an sr20det, that is run at 14 psi on track, 17 off track. At 14psi I can feel it losing power over heat soak, even with the massive intercooler. It is a very nice turbo on this engine, cheap, nearly bolt on, nice spool. It also basically is at the gearbox torque limit, and nearly maxes all bolt on nissan parts (we use an sr20det MAF and rb26 injectors, the ECU is based off a motorola 6802 with standard rom chips and is very easy to reverse engineer). Tthat setup is usually good for ~300hp at 17psi, with an intercooler and a remap of course, on standard fuel. It does not produce a lot more with e85 as the turbo is alreay nearly maxed, but that fuel makes it more reliable (i got ~10hp more out of it, and most of all 50°C less EGT) and way cheaper to run. Also, no detonation risks ... 


I unfortunately cannot share much of the work on the engine. Actually i was told i said too much about the cams, but i argued these are nearly the only ones you can get without going custom cam grinding, so it ended up ok. I can show the head from the bottom angle though, not the in/ex ports, so here it is (after most work)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-1uy8b4AEI3fZHJ6Y5d9c4R35OHd2O02/view?usp=sharing

I also like to control my car, and while i am not that good with engine assembly, i am much better at suspension settings and tuning. Here is the front suspension, with custom made knuckles (lowers the car, fixes a nasty bump steer issue, and allow 1.5, 2 or 2.5 steering wheel turn lock to lock depending on where the steering arm is attached ... oh, and more than 50° steering angle), 2 piece brake rotors, wilwood calipers, FA500 coilvers and so on. It drives like a charm and feels razor sharp. Oddly enough i do not drift it, i like gripping. But it can easily drift.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q3pgZeUJ4qJ7RKl8nRxzvewiSuUAPajI/view?usp=sharing


There actually is a twin scroll option for the g25 660, but it has a T4 flange with a .92 AR, not a vband .72. I might go this way eventually, if i want 600HP on low mount. That engine is going to rev, so clearly the 2867 / 550 are not going to cut it since they get out of breath at 8000. It needs 500/1000 more revs 

Summary:
-The cheapest is to just drop an IWG gt2867r and call it a day ... But i will not benefit from the high revving capabilities or the engine.
-If i want to use it, my options are low/high mount g25 660 w/T4 twinscoll.92 AR, or top mount EFR7163, both with EWG. And of course, that is expensive work that i cannot do...

Again, thanks a lot for confirming my assumptions about the 2867 / 550 and the infos on the other. I was still unsure about the EWG but it seems i will have to go that way. It is going to be expensive, but still cheaper than going IWG, regretting it and then going EWG 


edit: PN for the G25 660 with T4 twinscroll .92 AR is 877895-5012S ... but it is IWG, there is currently no option for a twinscroll EWG. So there comes the IWG dilemma again ... 2 port actuator + 4 ports solenoid should be enough to get 30psi out of it ...

edit 2: it seems i forgot something about EFRs : size. They are BIG turbos. This is a top mount IWG 6758 on a ca18. An EWG 7163 is not going to be smaller. I really do not like the BMC sitting that much near exhaust turbine ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

crousti said:


> Hi, sorry for the delay, I had a lot of work to do and forgot to check back this thread.
> 
> Thanks a lot for your analysis. This is what i was looking for, spoolup differences, transient response differences too.
> I think wikipedia may be the only place you can find a bone stock s13 engine bay
> ...


Thanks for the update. The twin-scroll option for the G25-660 is a game changer. The T4 twin-scroll turbine housing makes it a little less accessible for some people especially on a 4 cylinder application. Also, the IWG is not ideal IMO. You can always weld that thing shut and go EWG. But, that still puts this setup on the top of my list now for quickest spool and 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP class turbo. The second generation GTX3071R with a twin-scroll turbine housing comes in at a close second place will spool predicted to come -200 RPMs later than the TS G25-660.

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdub18njp said:


> Very excited to see the results! I will be posting a PPT GT3071-71BB-V2 (current) v. Al's PPT GT3071-73BB-V3 soon. I'm upgrading from 034s 91 Oct tune to Motoza 91 custom tune adding WMI. Hoping to be in the 400s.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting. I'm interested in seeing the results of the PPT GT3071R V3.0.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3076R (XONA analogue) and the second generation GTX3071R on 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke = 2066.9 CC's). The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3076R ranges from 2500 to 4200 RPMs depending on the pressure ratio. You will start to see positive boost on the first generation GTX3076R around 2500 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. Full boost could be anywhere between 4000 and 5000+ RPMs. The surge line for the second generation GTX3071R, on the other hand, ranges from 2000 to 2400 RPMs on 2.1L displacement. That's a 500 to 1800 RPM improvement over the older model GTX3076R. The second generation GTX3071R will be much more responsive on 2.1L displacement while still being able to provide about 60 lbs. of air per minute at 8000 RPMs or about 600 HP on pump/race gas or upwards of 700+ HP on ethanol/E85. Add a twin-scroll housing to that setup and you're golden (LOL).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Can you do this with the new g30-660 when the compressor map is released?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Can you do this with the new g30-660 when the compressor map is released?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Sure thing!


----------



## calder (Jun 8, 2003)

Wondering the difference between the g25-660 and g30-660 on an RB26 platform?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

calder said:


> Wondering the difference between the g25-660 and g30-660 on an RB26 platform?


Unfortunately, the G25-660 and G30-660 share the same compressor map. So, there is no way to compare data. Someone would have to do a back-to-back comparison to check surge and choke lines.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

That's weird, maayybe they haven't released it yet, the map.

Peoples posts are talking about 350-850hp type numbers. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> That's weird, maayybe they haven't released it yet, the map.
> 
> Peoples posts are talking about *350-850hp type numbers*.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Whoa that nuts. It looks like there are a few new G series turbos in the GT30 category including a 71mm, 76mm and 84mm compressor wheel. ATP turbo has the compressor maps for the G30-770, G30-900 but removed the map for the G30-1050 which is their 84mm compressor turbo.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Yeah, they're going to be pretty insane. Hopefully the price on the g25-550 comes down now lol

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

I was interested in a comparison of the g25 660 and the g30 660 too . Same compressor, (way) bigger turbine ? 

G25 660 turbine flow:
https://www.garrettmotion.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Turbine-Flow-G25-1-1.jpg


Atp has the g30 660 turbine flow:
https://www.atpturbo.com/info/g30turbineflowmap.jpg


Basically the biggest g25 is just around 20lb/min at 1.5 pressure ratio, which is the same as the second smaller g30 660 (.83) does. And then, it comes in 1.01 and 1.21 A/R flavor .

The biggest difference i can see in these maps is that the G25 kind of chokes at 1.5 ratio, while it does not happen before a 2.5 ratio on the g30.

My conclusion is that the g25 660 is a 60lbs turbo for small engines (up to 2.5L), while the g30 is for bigger engines (3L+ ).


This is only my reading based on what i know about turbos, so i'd be happy if someone could confirm it (or explain why it is wrong)


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

crousti said:


> I was interested in a comparison of the g25 660 and the g30 660 too . Same compressor, (way) bigger turbine ?
> 
> G25 660 turbine flow:
> https://www.garrettmotion.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Turbine-Flow-G25-1-1.jpg
> ...


Thanks for the info. Talking about turbine maps, it's interesting to note that turbine efficiency is lower for the new G-Series turbos (G30-660, G30-770, G30/35-900 and G35-1050) as compared to the "RS" turbine of the slightly older GTX3584RS at 74% vs. 78% maximum efficiency (see below). That means that the "RS" turbine is able to extract more power out of the exhaust energy to drive the compressor as compared to the new G-Series. However, the new G-Series compressors are more efficient than the GTX3584RS.

New G-Series turbine map:










GTX3584RS turbine map:


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Awesome! Love that torque curve. The WMI should give you a nice increase in torque and HP. Thanks for posting.:thumbup:


Hi mate. Just want to check your opinion about how much increase in gains I would have if I change my existing G25-660 (92ar) to the new Garret G30-770 (83ar) if I do it as plug and play, of course do some software correction but overall?


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> Hi mate. Just want to check your opinion about how much increase in gains I would have if I change my existing G25-660 (92ar) *to the new Garret G30-770 (83ar)* if I do it as plug and play, of course do some software correction but overall?
> 
> 
> Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


Let me check into that. You are 2480 CC's, correct?


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Let me check into that. You are 2480 CC's, correct?


Yes if you remember my post about G25 - 660 vs K16 and after I also post a Dyno on G25-660 (92) on 2.5 TFSI 


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Awesome! Love that torque curve. The WMI should give you a nice increase in torque and HP. Thanks for posting.:thumbup:


That’s post 


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## waldmenz (Sep 5, 2019)

Hello mainstayinc, not gonna lie searching for info on comparison between G25-660 and EFR's brought me here.

Long story short: I'm building a Nissan for a local Touring car championship and I'm trying to decide what Turbo to run.

The engine is Nissan SR20 with a VVL(similar to Hondas VTEC) head from a JDM car.
Capacity is 1998cc, the cams are I264/E268 E10,7/E10,3.
Will run on E85 with CR of 9.5:1.
The goal is to run reliable 500hp without pushing the turbo too much with room for higher horsepower if you remove the restrictor ~600hp.
Intake is restricted with a 50mm restrictor not further than 47mm from the impeller if the impeller size is larger than 48mm, see below.










Planning to have a twin scroll T4 Manifold or a V-band manifold

I'm undecided between these options:

T4 Manifold
Garrett G25-660 877895-5012S A/R0.92 with IWG welded shut
BorgWarner EFR7670 179392 A/R1.05 EWG
BorgWarner EFR7670 179390 A/R0.90 IWG welded shut

V-Band Manifold
BorgWarner EFR7163 A/R0.85
Garrett G25-660 871389-5011S A/R0.92

Pro's of a Twin Scroll slightly faster spool, but wouldn't be as much of a deal since road racing still is mostly up high in the revs.
Pro's of a V-band, takes up less space, easier to work on.

I would appreciate your input on these turbos, or maybe even there is some turbo that suits this setup even better that I have forgotten about.

Not a brilliant picture of a car in not a brilliant state of build.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> Hi mate. Just want to check your opinion about how much increase in gains I would have if I change my existing G25-660 (92ar) to the new Garret G30-770 (83ar) if I do it as plug and play, of course do some software correction but overall?
> 
> 
> Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


Below I overlaid the G25-660 and G30-770 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in 200 to 400 RPMs later for the G30-770 as compared to the smaller G25-660. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi and 7000 RPMs producing about 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas. So, if you are willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup, you can gain an additional 100 to 150 HP with the G30-770 on 2.5L displacement without too much effort. IMO I would upgrade to the G30-770 over the G25-660 at your displacement.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

waldmenz said:


> Hello mainstayinc, not gonna lie searching for info on comparison between G25-660 and EFR's brought me here.
> 
> Long story short: I'm building a Nissan for a local Touring car championship and I'm trying to decide what Turbo to run.
> 
> ...


Sorry I missed your post. Let met look into this and post back later today or Monday.

-John (mainstayinc)


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

waldmenz said:


> Hello mainstayinc, not gonna lie searching for info on comparison between G25-660 and EFR's brought me here.
> 
> Long story short: I'm building a Nissan for a local Touring car championship and I'm trying to decide what Turbo to run.
> 
> ...


I think any of those turbos can achieve your HP goals. I guess it comes down to preference for either a twin-scroll T4 setup or a V-band setup. I personally like twin-scroll setups because they increase engine volumetric efficiency. Less exhaust back pressure equals more room for fuel and air to fill the cylinder. It also means less heat in the cylinder. This allows for more timing, boost and lower octane. If done correctly, you an even increase your spool, mid-range and top end. Correctly means keeping the runners short even if they are not equal length. Some people may debate this last point, but this is the formula that I stand by. However, in your case, you are running E85 which is very tolerant of boost and timing. This mitigates some of the advantages of a twin-scroll setup.

Below I overlaid the G25-660 (single scroll) and the EFR 7163 (twin scroll) with 2.0L displacement (86mm bore x 86mm stroke = 1998 CC's). Both turbos are capable of producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas and over 700 HP on E85. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) for the EFR 7163 is 500 RPMs further to the left as compared to the G25-660. You can expect the twin-scroll EFR 7163 to spool 500 RPMs quicker than the single-scroll Garrett. However, expect the surge line for the T4 twin-scroll G25-660 (P/N 877895-5012S) to slightly out-perform the EFR 7163 due to the fact that it has a smaller compressor wheel and is probably lighter than the EFR 7163. I don't have a separate map for the T4 twin-scroll G25-660 but you get the idea.

I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.4 or about 20.3 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 45 lbs. of air per minute or 500+ HP on E85.
P2/P1=2.75 or about 25.4 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 600+ HP on E85










Below I overlaid the G25-660 and the EFR 7670 with 2.0L displacement for comparison (both single scroll). The EFR 7670 is capable of just under 65 lbs. of air per minute or 650 HP on pump/race gas and 750+ HP on E85/ethanol and is one size too large IMO for your HP goals.










In conclusion, I recommend either the G25-660 or the EFR7163 in T4 twin-scroll or even the V-band turbine housing (with the twin-scroll housing being the preferred option). Any one of these configurations will achieve your HP goals.


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the G25-660 and G30-770 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in 200 to 400 RPMs later for the G30-770 as compared to the smaller G25-660. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi and 7000 RPMs producing about 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas. So, if you are willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup, you can gain an additional 100 to 150 HP with the G30-770 on 2.5L displacement without too much effort. IMO I would upgrade to the G30-770 over the G25-660 at your displacement.


Thanks mate. Already buy one. Would change and post the Dyno










Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> Thanks mate. Already buy one. Would change and post the Dyno
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice! Looking forward to dyno numbers.


----------



## cipbatata (Sep 11, 2019)

Hello mainstayinc,

I am new to this forum.

I have read all the pages, may you give me some advise?

I would like to buy G25 for my 2.2L engine and it is limited to run around 15.7psi due to the 2 bar sensor.

1. I want a quicker spool turbo, either smaller A/R or twin scroll can have quicker spool, but for 0.72 A/R Vband single scroll and 0.92 A/R T4 twin scroll, which one has quicker spool?

2. And As you mentioned before, G25-550 have 400rpm faster spool than G25-600, how much peak power will be sacrificed by running G25-550 at 15.7psi boost?

3. Should I go for external wastegate for better torque?

Thank you in advance

Regards,
Batata


----------



## cipbatata (Sep 11, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Nice! Looking forward to dyno numbers.


Hello mainstayinc,

I am new to this forum.

I have read all the pages, may you give me some advise?

I would like to buy G25 for my 2.2L engine and it is limited to run around 15.7psi due to the 2 bar sensor.

1. I want a quicker spool turbo, either smaller A/R or twin scroll can have quicker spool, but for 0.72 A/R Vband single scroll and 0.92 A/R T4 twin scroll, which one has quicker spool?

2. And As you mentioned before, G25-550 have 400rpm faster spool than G25-600, how much peak power will be sacrificed by running G25-550 at 15.7psi boost?

3. Should I go for external wastegate for better torque?

Thank you in advance

Regards,
Batata


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cipbatata said:


> Hello mainstayinc,
> 
> I am new to this forum.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your interest.

1. I don't have separate compressor maps for single scroll and twin scroll or even different A/R's for the same turbo. So, to answer your question, someone will have to do a back-to-back test to see which of those setups spools quicker.
2. At P2/P1=2 or about 14.5 psi, the G25-550 maxes out at 46 lbs. per minute or 460 HP on pump/race gas at 7250 RPMs. You won't gain any more horsepower with the G25-660 unless you rev past 7250 RPMs. In that case, the G25-660 is able to produce 56 lbs. of air per minute or 560 HP on pump/race gas at 9000 RPMs. So, unless you plan to rev past 7250 RPMs, stick with the G25-550.
3. For 14.5 psi boost, internal wastegate is fine. Anything above that I recommend external wastegate.


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

Hello..

I wonder what's the difference in spool and power between the gtx3076 already used now and the new garrett g30=900 that I'm think to upgrade. 
My car is an 2.0 Evo x and the engine Revving to 9200rpms. 
The turbine ex size is the same as I saw for both Turbos 55mm 60mm I wonder how is possible with only a bigger inducer the power climb so high... 

Thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Evoxlimited said:


> Hello..
> 
> *I wonder what's the difference in spool and power between the gtx3076 already used now and the new garrett g30=900 that I'm think to upgrade. *
> My car is an 2.0 Evo x and the engine Revving to 9200rpms.
> ...


Thanks for your interest. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3076R and the new G35-900 on 2.0L displacement (86mm bore x 86mm stroke = 1998 CC's). Both turbos have a 76mm compressor exducer. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are virtually identical for both turbos ranging from about 2000 to 3000 RPMs. So, you can expect both turbos to spool about the same with the second generation GTX3076R being slightly better. However, the choke line (right side of map) is way better for the G35-900 with maximum output at 82.5 lbs. of air per minute versus 67.5 for the GTX3076R. That's an additional 15 lbs. of air per minute for the G35-900 or 150 HP on pump/race gas for the same size 76mm compressor. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 9200 RPMs producing 79 lbs. of air per minute on 2.0L displacement or about 790 HP on pump/race gas or 900+ HP on E85/ethanol.

NOTE: The G30-900 and G35-900 have the same compressor map.


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

I currently have a G30-900 0.83 on the way. looking at the post above comparing gtx3076 gen 2 and the G30-900. you compared the 35-900 instead of the G30-900 requested. I have a Mazda 6 MPS that is 2.4L I wondering how the 3076 compares to the G30-900 and how the G30-900 compares with G35-900. my redline is going to be set at 7800RPM. any advice on what I'd expect the spooling characteristics and max power is also appreciated


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> I currently have a G30-900 0.83 on the way. looking at the post above comparing gtx3076 gen 2 and the G30-900. *you compared the 35-900 instead of the G30-900 requested. *I have a Mazda 6 MPS that is 2.4L I wondering how the 3076 compares to the G30-900 and how the G30-900 compares with G35-900. my redline is going to be set at 7800RPM. any advice on what I'd expect the spooling characteristics and max power is also appreciated


As mentioned above, the G30-900 and G35-900 have the same compressor map.



mainstayinc said:


> NOTE: The G30-900 and G35-900 have the same compressor map.


You probably missed that from my previous post. So, unfortunately, there is no way to compare the G30-900 and the G35-900 at this time. What is the bore and stroke of your Mazda 6 MPS 2.4L? I was only able to find a reference to the 2.3L MZR I4 engine.


----------



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

Hey John.

I know precision likes to keep maps hush hush, but do you have a map for a 6466


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Hey John.
> 
> I know precision likes to keep maps hush hush, but do you have a map for a 6466


Hey Pat. Nice to hear from ya! The Precision 6466 looks like a pretty potent turbo. I checked around the internet and couldn't find any compressor maps or even the compressor exducer size (has 64mm inducer). Anyone have any more info on this turbo?


----------



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

Yeah they really don't like giving out details about their turbos. Is been out for about 5 years now, so I was hoping something surfaced.

Compressor Wheel Exducer: 86.61mm
Compressor Wheel Inducer: 64.39mm
Compressor Housing Connections:
Inlet: 4.0″ Hose Coupler (CCS)
Outlet: 2.5″ Hose Coupler (CCS)
Turbine Specifications
Turbine Wheel Exducer: 66mm
Turbine Wheel Inducer: 74.17mm

The thing makes anywhere from 500-900whp on various engine displacements with full spool around 4000-4500 on 2.8-3l


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Yeah they really don't like giving out details about their turbos. Is been out for about 5 years now, so I was hoping something surfaced.
> 
> *Compressor Wheel Exducer: 86.61mm*
> Compressor Wheel Inducer: 64.39mm
> ...


That's about one size above the GTX3584RS with a slightly larger compressor exducer (86.61mm vs. 84mm) and larger turbine wheel. Looks like that might be a good option in that HP range. Too bad no compressor map, though.


----------



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

I would bet they're pretty comparable in exhaust flow given the 3584rs is the latest aero and the 6466 was precision's gen2 exhaust aero. So slightly bigger turbine, slight bit laggier, but similar overall performance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I would bet they're pretty comparable in exhaust flow given the 3584rs is the latest aero and the 6466 was precision's gen2 exhaust aero. So slightly bigger turbine, slight bit laggier, but similar overall performance.


Cool. Impressive dyno results for the 6466 here.


----------



## Juannuez747 (Apr 16, 2019)

Hello!! I asked a while ago about choosing a turbo for my vw 2.0tsi gen2. I went as you recommended, with GTX3071r gen2 with twin scroll configuration and a short cast manifold. But I’m having trouble choosing the turbine AR. There is not much info about this, everyone telling me to go with the one in the middle, just to make things easier. But the fact is that I would like to know a little more about choosing the right AR. My goals are about 500 to 550 crank hp, and spinning 7k to red line. The options are .61, .78 or .84 for twin scroll and T3 flange. Any info would be priceless! Thanks you! Juan


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Juannuez747 said:


> Hello!! I asked a while ago about choosing a turbo for my vw 2.0tsi gen2. I went as you recommended, with GTX3071r gen2 with twin scroll configuration and a short cast manifold. But I’m having trouble choosing the turbine AR. There is not much info about this, everyone telling me to go with the one in the middle, just to make things easier. But the fact is that I would like to know a little more about choosing the right AR. My goals are about 500 to 550 crank hp, and spinning 7k to red line. The options are .61, .78 or .84 for twin scroll and T3 flange. Any info would be priceless! Thanks you! Juan


Unfortunately, I won't be able to help with picking the right turbine A/R for you HP goals. I agree with those who recommended the middle (0.78 A/R) option since you are not going to run the GTX3071R all out (600 HP). I think for your HP goals, the 0.78 A/R makes the most sense.


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > I currently have a G30-900 0.83 on the way. looking at the post above comparing gtx3076 gen 2 and the G30-900. *you compared the 35-900 instead of the G30-900 requested. *I have a Mazda 6 MPS that is 2.4L I wondering how the 3076 compares to the G30-900 and how the G30-900 compares with G35-900. my redline is going to be set at 7800RPM. any advice on what I'd expect the spooling characteristics and max power is also appreciated
> ...



I have the stock stroke but 90mm pistons/bore instead of 87.5 oem. wet sleeved block, big head porting and the biggest cams available with +1mm valves

I picked the G30-900 over the G35-900 because I wanted early spool. my power goal is 700awhp with a 3800 rpm spoolup


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> I have the stock stroke but 90mm pistons/bore instead of 87.5 oem. wet sleeved block, big head porting and the biggest cams available with +1mm valves
> 
> I picked the G30-900 over the G35-900 because I wanted early spool. my power goal is 700awhp with a 3800 rpm spoolup


Ok. Let me check into that and post something later today or tomorrow.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> I have the stock stroke but 90mm pistons/bore instead of 87.5 oem. wet sleeved block, big head porting and the biggest cams available with +1mm valves
> 
> *I picked the G30-900 over the G35-900 because I wanted early spool. my power goal is 700awhp with a 3800 rpm spoolup*


About the Mazda6 MPS:



Wikipedia said:


> *Mazda6 MPS*
> 
> The 2006 *Mazdaspeed Atenza* (known as Mazdaspeed6 in North America and Mazda6 MPS in Europe, South Africa and Australia) is a high-performance version of the Mazda6. Its mission statement was written with the help of Peter Birtwhistle, chief of Mazda's advanced design studio in Germany at the time. It was initially unveiled as a concept at the 2002 Paris Motor Show. It features a turbocharged version of the 2.3 L MZR I4 which produces 272 PS (200 kW) (European version is detuned to 260 PS (191 kW); the North American version, at 274 hp (204 kW), revised to 270 hp (201 kW) for 2007). All models have 280 lb⋅ft (380 N⋅m) of torque. This 2.3 L DISI turbocharged engine features direct fuel injection and conforms to the new Euro 5 emissions standards. It has a revised front fascia with a raised hood, a 6-speed manual transmission, and all-wheel drive. The all-wheel-drive system uses Mazda's Active Torque Split computer-based control, which routes up to 100% of the power to the front or rear wheels depending on driving conditions.
> 
> ...


Stock photo:










In order to make 700 AWHP, the turbo will have to produce 80 lbs. of air per minute using a ratio of 10.5:1 for direct injection assuming a 20% drivetrain loss ((700 x 1.2 )/10.5). Below I overlaid the G30-900 and the second generation GTX3076R on 2.4L displacement (90mm bore x 94mm stroke = 2392 CCs). The surge line (left side of map) comes in between 1500 and 2300 RPMs. You can expect the turbo to reach full spool somewhere around 3500 to 4300 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi and 7700 RPMs producing 79 lbs. of air per minute or 830 HP on a direct injection engine on pump/race gas or 691 AWHP taking into account drivetrain loss. Overall, I think the G30-900 is a great turbo to meet your HP goals and desired spoolup at your displacement.


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > I have the stock stroke but 90mm pistons/bore instead of 87.5 oem. wet sleeved block, big head porting and the biggest cams available with +1mm valves
> ...



super appreciated John, it was hard to find the right kind of info and understand the compressor maps. but I know guys with a 2.3L (2263cc) can make 600awhp off a gen 2 gtx3076 so I figured this had to come close with the new aero but it was all speculation tbh. I had just purchased a GTX3584RS the day before the G30s were officially released and was very worried about the lag and 4500-4800 spool up then next the the g30 was out so I returned the 3584 and am now in waiting for the G30-900 I'm told by Garrett Australia the I'm the 1st in line to order 1 so it's pretty exciting 😉 super helpful mate thank you very much. out of curiosity how does it stack up against the GTX3584RS? if you have the time? What would inhale expected to see with it? I think I'm in the right ball park with the spool characteristics. the other option would behave been to wait for the G35-900 . but if it is anything like the 3076 and the 3576 where the 30 spools faster and overall power is about the same. I would assume the same stands for the G30-900 vs the G35-900


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

another thing I'd like to add is that I have a 2 stage injection setup and have port injection 4x ID1050x also on top of the direct injection. I will be running and e50 ethanol mix. may manifold is a sidewinder with a TS hypergate 45 plumbed back into a full 3.5" system


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> super appreciated John, it was hard to find the right kind of info and understand the compressor maps. but I know guys with a 2.3L (2263cc) can make 600awhp off a gen 2 gtx3076 so I figured this had to come close with the new aero but it was all speculation tbh. I had just purchased a GTX3584RS the day before the G30s were officially released and was very worried about the lag and 4500-4800 spool up then next the the g30 was out so I returned the 3584 and am now in waiting for the G30-900 I'm told by Garrett Australia the I'm the 1st in line to order 1 so it's pretty exciting 😉 super helpful mate thank you very much. *out of curiosity how does it stack up against the GTX3584RS? if you have the time? What would inhale expected to see with it?* I think I'm in the right ball park with the spool characteristics. the other option would behave been to wait for the G35-900 . but if it is anything like the 3076 and the 3576 where the 30 spools faster and overall power is about the same. I would assume the same stands for the G30-900 vs the G35-900


Let me check into that. The GTX3584RS is capable of an additional 75 HP over the G30-900 but only with a larger displacement engine. It will be interesting to see how the surge lines match up between those two turbos. It's Thursday PM at the moment. I will post something up tomorrow.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> another thing I'd like to add is that I have a 2 stage injection setup and have port injection 4x ID1050x also on top of the direct injection. I will be running and e50 ethanol mix. may manifold is a sidewinder with a TS hypergate 45 plumbed back into a full 3.5" system


That sounds killer. I am building a 2.1L with the GTX3584RS on a short-runner twin scroll manifold and ID2000's x4. I also plan to run E50 on my setup and methanol injection.


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > super appreciated John, it was hard to find the right kind of info and understand the compressor maps. but I know guys with a 2.3L (2263cc) can make 600awhp off a gen 2 gtx3076 so I figured this had to come close with the new aero but it was all speculation tbh. I had just purchased a GTX3584RS the day before the G30s were officially released and was very worried about the lag and 4500-4800 spool up then next the the g30 was out so I returned the 3584 and am now in waiting for the G30-900 I'm told by Garrett Australia the I'm the 1st in line to order 1 so it's pretty exciting 😉 super helpful mate thank you very much. *out of curiosity how does it stack up against the GTX3584RS? if you have the time? What would inhale expected to see with it?* I think I'm in the right ball park with the spool characteristics. the other option would behave been to wait for the G35-900 . but if it is anything like the 3076 and the 3576 where the 30 spools faster and overall power is about the same. I would assume the same stands for the G30-900 vs the G35-900
> ...



yeah that's my thoughts too. there a 2 x 6 MPS's making a tad over 700awhp on GTX3584RS 1 in Aus and 1 in the U.S. personally I think the extra get up aren't worth the lag, given we have an 8k rpm limit due to ECU logic. if we were capable of higher RPM well that's that different story. but given my oversized setup. higher revving isn't really the best option anyway would certainly be interesting to see how the map stacks up tho soo again thank you for your time/help


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > another thing I'd like to add is that I have a 2 stage injection setup and have port injection 4x ID1050x also on top of the direct injection. I will be running and e50 ethanol mix. my manifold is a sidewinder with a TS hypergate 45 plumbed back into a full 3.5" system
> ...



what car do you have John? sounds exciting and I'd bet it'll rev at least to 9k to milk that 3584 from a 2.1L? I'm on a single vband in/out setup I'd post a pic but i dont know how 😂😂 ID 1050x will get me to 700awhp with the addition of the stock direct injection but anything over that I'll need bigger says my tuner. what are you using the meth for? BATS or even more fueling?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> *what car do you have John? sounds exciting and I'd bet it'll rev at least to 9k to milk that 3584 from a 2.1L? *I'm on a single vband in/out setup I'd post a pic but i dont know how 😂😂 ID 1050x will get me to 700awhp with the addition of the stock direct injection but anything over that I'll need bigger says my tuner. what are you using the meth for? BATS or even more fueling?


I'm building a 1984 Rabbit GTI with an AWD (Haldex) conversion from an 2004 Audi TT 225. Here is my build thread. With the Haldex conversion and upgraded engine/transmission etc. I am hoping the car will weigh less than 1000 kilograms. Yeah, I plan to rev between 8500 and 9000 RPMs to get the most out of the GTX3584RS on 2.1L using a Link G4+ Standalone ECU from New Zealand.

EDIT: I plan to run 3 bar boost so I will need the Methanol injection to control knock.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> yeah that's my thoughts too. there a 2 x 6 MPS's making a tad over 700awhp on GTX3584RS 1 in Aus and 1 in the U.S. personally I think the extra get up aren't worth the lag, given we have an 8k rpm limit due to ECU logic. if we were capable of higher RPM well that's that different story. but given my oversized setup. higher revving isn't really the best option anyway would certainly be interesting to see how the map stacks up tho soo again thank you for your time/help


Below I overlaid the G30-900 and the GTX3584RS on 2.4L displacement. Comparing the surge lines (left side of map), the G30-900 ranges from about even to 420 RPMs farther to the left. That means you can expect the G30-900 to spool up to 420 RPMs sooner than the GTX3584RS *all other things being equal*. I marked two points corresponding to:

P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7800 RPMs producing 79 lbs. of air per minute for the G30-900
P2/P1=3.25 or about 33 psi at 7800 RPMs producing 85 lbs. of air per minute for the GTX3584RS

The GTX3584RS can produce an extra 5 lbs. of air per minute or 50 HP on pump/race gas as compared to the G30-900 at 2.4L displacement at 7800 RPMs. So, if you are willing to give up 50 HP for a 420 RPM increase in spoolup, then the G30-900 is the better choice. Please note that turbine A/R and other factors can also effect when the turbo will spoolup.


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > yeah that's my thoughts too. there a 2 x 6 MPS's making a tad over 700awhp on GTX3584RS 1 in Aus and 1 in the U.S. personally I think the extra get up aren't worth the lag, given we have an 8k rpm limit due to ECU logic. if we were capable of higher RPM well that's that different story. but given my oversized setup. higher revving isn't really the best option anyway would certainly be interesting to see how the map stacks up tho soo again thank you for your time/help
> ...


thanks John, that's a good trade off in my eyes. those HP figures stated at 79Lbs and 83Lbs respectively , are they the max power that these turbo will produce at my displacement? my question is what if I turn the boost up to say 35psi for either turbo? will I make more power or does the turbo become inefficient and just generates heat or over spools? probably a bit of a noob question to you but I don't know many who can answer this question accurately. (what happens if you just turn it up) and how do you know as a drive/owner (not a tuner) when it has reached it's limit before damage is done? in case my tuner (who I do trust) goes too far?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> thanks John, that's a good trade off in my eyes. those HP figures stated at 79Lbs and 83Lbs respectively , are they the max power that these turbo will produce at my displacement? my question is what if I turn the boost up to say 35psi for either turbo? will I make more power or does the turbo become inefficient and just generates heat or over spools? probably a bit of a noob question to you but I don't know many who can answer this question accurately. (what happens if you just turn it up) and *how do you know as a drive/owner (not a tuner) when it has reached it's limit before damage is done?* in case my tuner (who I do trust) goes too far?


That's a good question. You have two options to make more power at your displacement with either turbo. The first option is to increase engine speed past 7800 RPMs while following the choke line (right side of map). Both turbos will create slightly more power with this strategy (+35 HP for the G30-900 at 9800 RPMs). The second option is to run the turbo outside of it's efficiency area (to the right or above the choke line). You can gain more power with this strategy as some users on this forum have demonstrated (Marcus_Aurelius I thnk). However, as you stated, the turbo will generate a lot more heat and intercooling becomes much more important. That's what I plan to do on my 2.1L + GTX3584RS setup. However, at some point you cannot produce any more usable airflow no matter how hard you push the turbo. With Garrett compressor maps, I think there is a little bit more room above the choke line where you can make more power as the choke line is usually defined at 60% efficiency. On Borg Warner maps, however, you will notice that the choke line goes vertical and almost intercepts the x-axis. That's because the choke line on those maps are usually 58% efficiency or less. At that point, you cannot produce any more usable air flow.

Intake air temperature (post turbo) and, of course, boost level, are what determine if a turbo has reached it's limit before damage is done. High intake temperatures without proper knock protection (high octane fuel, chemical intercooling, water injection etc.) will definitely cause the engine to knock and quickly destroy itself if allowed to continue. Your tuner should be able to build in knock control to adjust boost and/or timing to avoid this kind of failure. You will usually hear the engine knocking before any serious damage is done. At that point, you should let off the throttle if you tune is not dialing your boost or timing back enough. You may also want to increase your fuel octane or make your tune less aggressive (EDIT: or reduce your static compression i.e: compression ratio).


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

*Choice between G25 550, G25 660 and EFR 7163*

My car is Subaru STI 08 GRB, the engine is EJ257,I use 93# gasoline, using the PERRIN front intercooler.
I am using the GTX3076 GEN1 0.82 A/R, but this turbine is slow to respond and I want to replace it.
I want to have 500HP and have a very fast SPOOL. Can I achieve results if I use G25 550 0.92 A/R?
Other choices are G25 660 0.72 A/R or EFR 7163 0.63 A/R. Which turbine should I choose? Thank you.


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

Hi after all of your great help I have decided to run the stock K04 turbo on my Audi 8p S3 2.0tfsi with 3 very important changes. It will be run in a track racing series in Australia in a track car only. 

Qualifying is 15 minutes long with most races being 20 minutes and feature races 30 minutes. 

Normal summer air temperatures around 30 Deg C and winter around 20 Dec C

No 1 which I have little control over which will be running a 38mm 3mm thick restrictor 50mm from the inlet of the turbo. 

No 2. I will run E85 which is always E85 here. (not 60-90%) as in the states. 

No 3. For which I would really really appreciate feedback on. 

I want to run a water to air intercooler using the convenient battery box that is empty at the rear of the car as an air/ice reservoir, changing the ice between each race and using salt in the water to lower the freezing point below 0 Dec C. (it works on beer so why not race car!!!!) 

I would estimate water temp close to zero degrees C so should see at the start of each race or qualifying session (the most important time for Max power and passing ability) intake temperatures of about 10 Deg C. (please advise if I'm being realistic here) 

So how much more power should I expect from a water/ice chiller? 





Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

Can I please add one more item. Should I run the water air intercooler only or run it after the stock air to air intercooler? 

Seems a easy answer at first but the more you think about it the more there are both positives and negatives to either 

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Hi after all of your great help I have decided to run the stock K04 turbo on my Audi 8p S3 2.0tfsi with 3 very important changes. It will be run in a track racing series in Australia in a track car only.
> 
> Qualifying is 15 minutes long with most races being 20 minutes and feature races 30 minutes.
> 
> ...


The compressor maps are corrected to standard temperature which is 20 degrees C or 68 degrees F. So, in the previous example, I showed that the stock K04 turbo (K04-2283 compressor) can produce 40 lbs. of air per minute at 25 psi and 5300 RPMs at your displacement. For air intake temperatures below standard temperature, you can use the absolute temperature scale to estimate your rated power output.

For 0 degrees C, calculate as follows:
(20C + 273.15C) / (*0 + 273.15*) = 1.073 or 107.3%

For 10 degrees C, calculate as follows:
(20C + 273.15C) / (*10 + 273.15*) = 1.035 or 103.5%

So, I estimate that you will see an increase in power and torque across the entire power band of 3.5 to 7.3% over what's indicated on the compressor map. You can also use this formula to calculate power output for air intake temperatures above standard temperature. So, for example, if you have an AIT of 40 degrees C, you have to reduce your rated output as follows:

For 40 degrees C, calculate as follows:
(20C + 273.15C) / (*40 + 273.15*) = 0.936 or 93.6%

I would run only the water-to-air intercooler by itself due to the fact that you will have more restriction and pressure drop if using both systems.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> My car is Subaru STI 08 GRB, the engine is EJ257,I use 93# gasoline, using the PERRIN front intercooler.
> I am using the GTX3076 GEN1 0.82 A/R, but this turbine is slow to respond and I want to replace it.
> I want to have 500HP and have a very fast SPOOL. Can I achieve results if I use G25 550 0.92 A/R?
> Other choices are G25 660 0.72 A/R or EFR 7163 0.63 A/R. Which turbine should I choose? Thank you.


Let me check into that and get back to you.

-John (mainstayinc)


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> My car is Subaru STI 08 GRB, the engine is EJ257,I use 93# gasoline, using the PERRIN front intercooler.
> I am using the GTX3076 GEN1 0.82 A/R, but this turbine is slow to respond and I want to replace it.
> I want to have 500HP and have a very fast SPOOL. Can I achieve results if I use G25 550 0.92 A/R?
> Other choices are G25 660 0.72 A/R or EFR 7163 0.63 A/R. Which turbine should I choose? Thank you.


I think the G25-550 is too small for your displacement. The G25-660 would be ideal for fast spool and 500 HP. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2.5L displacement (99.5mm bore x 79mm stroke = 2457 CCs). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is between 1400 and 1800 RPMs. You can expect full spoolup between 3400 and 3800 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs) if not sooner. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.2 or about 17.5 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 50 lbs. of air per minute for 500 HP on pump/race gas.










The EFR 7163 is also a good choice at your displacement for fast spool and 500 HP. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and the G25-660 with 2.5L displacement. The surge line for the EFR comes in around 1300 RPMs which is 100 to 500 RPMs better than the Garrett. That's because the EFR map is for twin scroll versus single scroll for the Garrett. So, if you want 500 HP and insane spoolup, go with the twin-scroll EFR 7163. If you can't do a twin-scroll and still want 500 HP and fast spoolup, then go with the G25-660.


----------



## brucefil (Jul 29, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> The compressor maps are corrected to standard temperature which is 20 degrees C or 68 degrees F. So, in the previous example, I showed that the stock K04 turbo (K04-2283 compressor) can produce 40 lbs. of air per minute at 25 psi and 5300 RPMs at your displacement. For air intake temperatures below standard temperature, you can use the absolute temperature scale to estimate your rated power output.
> 
> For 0 degrees C, calculate as follows:
> (20C + 273.15C) / (*0 + 273.15*) = 1.073 or 107.3%
> ...


Now I owe you a 6 pack of beers. Thank you. 
I could chill them in the W2A tank. 

You are an amazing help. 

Sent from my CPH1611 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brucefil said:


> Now I owe you a 6 pack of beers. Thank you.
> I could chill them in the W2A tank.
> 
> You are an amazing help.
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## yaji (Sep 24, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> yaji said:
> 
> 
> > thanks John, that's a good trade off in my eyes. those HP figures stated at 79Lbs and 83Lbs respectively , are they the max power that these turbo will produce at my displacement? my question is what if I turn the boost up to say 35psi for either turbo? will I make more power or does the turbo become inefficient and just generates heat or over spools? probably a bit of a noob question to you but I don't know many who can answer this question accurately. (what happens if you just turn it up) and *how do you know as a drive/owner (not a tuner) when it has reached it's limit before damage is done?* in case my tuner (who I do trust) goes too far?
> ...


Thank you John, you have been extremely helpful. Best of luck with your monster build mate


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I think the G25-550 is too small for your displacement. The G25-660 would be ideal for fast spool and 500 HP. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2.5L displacement (99.5mm bore x 79mm stroke = 2457 CCs). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) is between 1400 and 1800 RPMs. You can expect full spoolup between 3400 and 3800 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs) if not sooner. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.2 or about 17.5 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 50 lbs. of air per minute for 500 HP on pump/race gas.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


@mainstayinc, thank you very much. I don't currently have twins scroll system, so I should choose g25 660 a/r .72 to replace my GTX3076 GEN1. Although I also like efr7163, it has a faster response in twins Scroll.

In addition, I would like to ask, GEN1 GTX3076 needs more than 3000 rpm in my car to reach positive pressure (above 14.7PSI), can GTX3076 GEN2 VS GEN1 improve the spool?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> @mainstayinc, thank you very much. I don't currently have twins scroll system, so I should choose g25 660 a/r .72 to replace my GTX3076 GEN1. Although I also like efr7163, it has a faster response in twins Scroll.
> 
> In addition, *I would like to ask, GEN1 GTX3076 needs more than 3000 rpm in my car to reach positive pressure (above 14.7PSI), can GTX3076 GEN2 VS GEN1 improve the spool?*


Below I overlaid the first and second generation GTX3076R on 2.5L displacement. The surge lines (left side of map) look pretty identical below P2/P1 = 2.0 or about 14.5 psi and above P2/P1=1.5 or about 7 psi. So, I would expect both turbos to spoolup about the same although the second generation GTX3076R may be slightly better at lower pressure ratios.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yaji said:


> Thank you John, you have been extremely helpful. Best of luck with your monster build mate


:thumbup:


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the first and second generation GTX3076R on 2.5L displacement. The surge lines (left side of map) look pretty identical below P2/P1 = 2.0 or about 14.5 psi and above P2/P1=1.5 or about 7 psi. So, I would expect both turbos to spoolup about the same although the second generation GTX3076R may be slightly better at lower pressure ratios.


Thank you for your answer. When I saw the GEN1 3076 setting 2.5 pressure ratio from the picture, I entered the surge line at 2900-3000 of the engine, but in fact, when I use the 4th gear, I need 4700-4900 RPM. Up to 2.5, I use FMIC, use PUMP GAS WITH 850CC injector, the intake air temperature is about 20 degrees Celsius, if using G660 can increase the spool-up about 1000-1200 rpm? If using G550 can improve about 1500- 1800 rpm? But with the G550, can't reach 500HP with PUMP GAS?


----------



## cc6mt (Dec 13, 2013)

Hello John, thinking of skipping ko4 and try either EFR 6258 0.64ar or gtx2863r 0.64ar.
2.0tsi gen 1 cc with presumably redline increased to 7200rpm, all bolts on accounted for and lsd too.
So far this is will a custom tuned approach but still shopping for a tuner who will take on this and my guess is they'll be picky on which type of turbo so would like to see how do these 2 compare with a max 380chp/ctq whichever reaches that first, keeping stock engine so reliability will be a major factor, and any difference/advantages in lower end rpm.
Don't plan on W/M, trying to keep it simple unless it becomes necessary, 93 pump gas its good enough for now.

Thanks in advance Tony.



Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cc6mt said:


> Hello John, thinking of skipping ko4 and try either EFR 6258 0.64ar or gtx2863r 0.64ar.
> 2.0tsi gen 1 cc with presumably redline increased to 7200rpm, all bolts on accounted for and lsd too.
> So far this is will a custom tuned approach but still shopping for a tuner who will take on this and my guess is they'll be picky on which type of turbo so would like to see how do these 2 compare with a max 380chp/ctq whichever reaches that first, keeping stock engine so reliability will be a major factor, and any difference/advantages in lower end rpm.
> Don't plan on W/M, trying to keep it simple unless it becomes necessary, 93 pump gas its good enough for now.
> ...


I'll look into that and get back to you.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> Thank you for your answer. When I saw the GEN1 3076 setting 2.5 pressure ratio from the picture, I entered the surge line at 2900-3000 of the engine, but in fact, when I use the 4th gear, I need 4700-4900 RPM. Up to 2.5, I use FMIC, use PUMP GAS WITH 850CC injector, the intake air temperature is about 20 degrees Celsius, *if using G660 can increase the spool-up about 1000-1200 rpm? If using G550 can improve about 1500- 1800 rpm? But with the G550, can't reach 500HP with PUMP GAS?*


That sounds about right based on how the compressor maps line up. I would expect a minimum of 1000 RPM improvement with the G25-660 over the first generation GTX3076R on 2.5L displacement. The G25-550 can reach 500 HP on pump/race gas but will be at the absolute edge of the choke line.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cc6mt said:


> Hello John, thinking of skipping ko4 and try either EFR 6258 0.64ar or gtx2863r 0.64ar.
> 2.0tsi gen 1 cc with presumably redline increased to 7200rpm, all bolts on accounted for and lsd too.
> So far this is will a custom tuned approach but still shopping for a tuner who will take on this and my guess is they'll be picky on which type of turbo so would like to see *how do these 2 compare with a max 380chp/ctq whichever reaches that first, keeping stock engine so reliability will be a major factor, and any difference/advantages in lower end rpm.*
> Don't plan on W/M, trying to keep it simple unless it becomes necessary, 93 pump gas its good enough for now.
> ...


In order to make 380 crank HP on the 2.0L TSI, you will have to make 36 lbs. of air per minute using a ratio of 10.5 to 1 for direct injection (10.5 x 36 = 378 HP). Below I overlaid the GTX2863R and the EFR 6258 with 2.0L displacement (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke = 1984 CCs). The surge line (left side of map) comes in at 1500 RPMs for both turbos but drops off above P2/P1=1.8 or about 12 psi for the Garrett. You can expect to make full spool by 3500 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs) if not sooner. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi and 6400 RPMs producing 36 lbs. of air per minute for 378 HP on pump/race gas on a direct injection engine.










You may also want to consider the G25-550 at your displacement. Below I overlaid the G25-550 and the EFR 6258 on 2.0L displacement. As you can see, the the surge lines for both turbos are about the same. However, the smaller but more efficient G25-550 is capable of an additional 70+ HP as compared to the older EFR 6258. This turbo will give you more room to grow in the future should you decide to continue to make upgrades. In that case, I recommend a boost target of P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute (not shown on map) or 515 HP on pump/race gas on a direct injection engine (49 x 10.5).


----------



## cc6mt (Dec 13, 2013)

John, you're a gem in this forum. When you visit north jersey we should grab a drink.

Seeing the maps with rpms attached makes it clear that efr 6258 is the right turbo for what I'm planning to achieve. 
I appreciate the extra step you took factoring in the G25-550, its a great option indeed but daily a fwd at higher hp is too far in my plans for now.

Unitronic has a stg 3 tune for gt30 turbo but I'm crossing my fingers that they'll entertain my offer for efr6258 or gtx2863r. 

I'm more into usefulness vs numbers, finding a turbo manifold is my next challenge but thats not as bad as finding a tune either.

Thanks for your help John!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

cc6mt said:


> John, you're a gem in this forum. When you visit north jersey we should grab a drink.
> 
> Seeing the maps with rpms attached makes it clear that efr 6258 is the right turbo for what I'm planning to achieve.
> I appreciate the extra step you took factoring in the G25-550, its a great option indeed but daily a fwd at higher hp is too far in my plans for now.
> ...


:thumbup: Good luck finding your turbo manifold!


----------



## cc6mt (Dec 13, 2013)

It didn't take that long to find a proper manifold, waiting on unitronic to make up their mind now 

https://youtu.be/v1KEzEcbXvw


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> That sounds about right based on how the compressor maps line up. I would expect a minimum of 1000 RPM improvement with the G25-660 over the first generation GTX3076R on 2.5L displacement. The G25-550 can reach 500 HP on pump/race gas but will be at the absolute edge of the choke line.


Thanks again, I read Garrett's technical documentation, which mentions how to calculate the target horsepower: Wa= Airflow actual(lb/min)=target horsepower * Air/Fuel Ratio * BSFC / 60, I use this formula To calculate the air flow of the target horsepower I want to achieve, I chose A/F 11.75 (in my ecu lambda target table when manifold pressure reaches 2.3-2.5 bar), use a BSFC of 0.6, put these numbers into the formula to : Wa = 500 * 11.75 * 0.6 /60 = 58.75, so i need about 59 lb/min to reach 500hp, so the g25-550 can give me max 49lb/min, so maybe i can't get 500hp in my engine with G25-550? I don't know if this calculation is a problem, but I think using 550 is very reluctant.

If I want to use 550 to reach 500 horsepower, I must modify A/F to 10? 500hp × 10 a/r × 0.6 ÷ 60 = 50 lb/min?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> Thanks again, I read Garrett's technical documentation, which mentions how to calculate the target horsepower: Wa= Airflow actual(lb/min)=target horsepower * Air/Fuel Ratio * BSFC / 60, I use this formula To calculate the air flow of the target horsepower I want to achieve, I chose A/F 11.75 (in my ecu lambda target table when manifold pressure reaches 2.3-2.5 bar), use a BSFC of 0.6, put these numbers into the formula to : Wa = 500 * 11.75 * 0.6 /60 = 58.75, so i need about 59 lb/min to reach 500hp, so the g25-550 can give me max 49lb/min, so maybe i can't get 500hp in my engine with G25-550? I don't know if this calculation is a problem, but I think using 550 is very reluctant.
> 
> If I want to use 550 to reach 500 horsepower, I must modify A/F to 10? 500hp × 10 a/r × 0.6 ÷ 60 = 50 lb/min?


I see what you are saying. An AFR of 10 is very rich, even under full boost. It's interesting that Garrett advertises the G25-550 as being capable of 550 HP even though the compressor map clearly shows that it is only capable of about 50 lbs. of air per minute. If you plug the 550 HP number into the aforementioned Garrett formula, you get an AFR of about 9! 

50 = (550 * AFR * .60)/60

AFR = (50 * 60)/(550 *.6)

AFR = 9.09

That's an AFR is closer to E85. So, what Garrett doesn't tell you is that the 550 HP advertised for the G25-550 is for E85!. I think that 450 to 500 HP if more realistic for the G25-550 for most people on pump/race gas. As far as making 500 HP, I still think the G25-550 is too small for your 2.5L displacement. The G25-660 will definitely get you to 500 HP much easier with only a few hundred RPMs later spoolup over the G25-550.


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I see what you are saying. An AFR of 10 is very rich, even under full boost. It's interesting that Garrett advertises the G25-550 as being capable of 550 HP even though the compressor map clearly shows that it is only capable of about 50 lbs. of air per minute. If you plug the 550 HP number into the aforementioned Garrett formula, you get an AFR of about 9!
> 
> 50 = (550 * AFR * .60)/60
> 
> ...


Yes, Garrett's data is based on a maximized operating environment, so I think in practical applications, I need to select and calculate based on actual conditions, thank you very much @mainstayinc

I think the G25 660 is very suitable for my displacement.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

zqxathz said:


> Yes, Garrett's data is based on a maximized operating environment, so I think in practical applications, I need to select and calculate based on actual conditions, thank you very much @mainstayinc
> 
> *I think the G25 660 is very suitable for my displacement*.


I agree.:thumbup:


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

Hello John , Garrett remove from the catalog the g30=900 turbo so we don't know if they going to produce and when...
Now i have decide to remove the gtx3076 from my evo x which only produce 450whp on 25 psi now my only choice is gtx3584rs or maybe an efr9174 hoping to see real gains over the gtx3076 gen1
What do you think? I m really interested to hear your opinion about that.

Thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Evoxlimited said:


> Hello John , Garrett remove from the catalog the g30=900 turbo so we don't know if they going to produce and when...
> *Now i have decide to remove the gtx3076 from my evo x which only produce 450whp on 25 psi* now my only choice is gtx3584rs or maybe an efr9174 hoping to see real gains over the gtx3076 gen1
> What do you think? I m really interested to hear your opinion about that.
> 
> Thanks


LOL. Let me check into that. It might take a day or two since I'll be on the road all day tomorrow.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Evoxlimited said:


> Hello John , Garrett remove from the catalog the g30=900 turbo so we don't know if they going to produce and when...
> Now i have decide to remove the gtx3076 from my evo x which only produce 450whp on 25 psi *now my only choice is gtx3584rs or maybe an efr9174 hoping to see real gains over the gtx3076 gen1*
> What do you think? I m really interested to hear your opinion about that.
> 
> Thanks


450 WHP translates into about 540 crank HP on an AWD setup. That's 54 lbs. of air per minute on a well-tuned setup. Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3076R and the GTX3584RS with 2.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are about the same with the GTX3076R having a slight advantage of about 250 RPMs above P2/P1=1.6 or about 9 psi and below P2/P1=2.4 or about 20 psi. Otherwise the surge lines are identical. That means that you will only lose a maximum of 250 RPMs in spoolup *all other things being equal* if you were to upgrade to the GTX3584RS. You may choose a smaller turbine A/R for the GTX3584RS in which case spoolup may improve over the first generation GTX3076R. I marked two points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 7700 RPMs producing 54 lbs. of air per minute or 540 HP on pump/race gas (450 WHP on an AWD setup)
P2/P1=3.5 or about 36 psi at 8100 RPMs producing 80 lbs. of air per minute or 800 HP on pump/race gas (665 WHP on an AWD setup)

You could potentially see an increase of 260 HP (215 WHP on an AWD setup) if you were willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup and increase you boost.










For comparison, below I overlaid the GTX3584RS and the EFR 9174 on 2.0L displacement. The surge line for the EFR 9174 comes in 850 RPMs later than the GTX3584RS. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.7 or about 39 psi at 9000 RPMs producing 95 lbs. of air per minute or 950 HP on pump/race gas or 792 WHP on an AWD setup.


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

zqxathz said:


> My car is Subaru STI 08 GRB, the engine is EJ257,I use 93# gasoline, using the PERRIN front intercooler.
> I am using the GTX3076 GEN1 0.82 A/R, but this turbine is slow to respond and I want to replace it.
> I want to have 500HP and have a very fast SPOOL. Can I achieve results if I use G25 550 0.92 A/R?
> Other choices are G25 660 0.72 A/R or EFR 7163 0.63 A/R. Which turbine should I choose? Thank you.



Real world experience that may help you.

this is a friend's rb25det powered s13 (used in the french drift championship), which is a 2.5L known with not much torque at low revs. 
It has a built engine, no cam phasing (for now), and is using a g25 660 /.72AR with EWG and e85.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a64w9LCYSb8

As you can see turbo lag is nearly non existent. The car is plain stupid, it just goes on boost immediately. The engine seems choked at high RPM and does not hit the rev limiter on 4th gear, so he is going to change to the bigger AR and get the cam phasing working. Right now the engine has ~500-530HP at the crank. We are expecting more power from the bigger exhaust AR and more low down torque from cam phasing.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^^Thanks for posting that! I re-posted the video below:


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

crousti said:


> Real world experience that may help you.
> 
> this is a friend's rb25det powered s13 (used in the french drift championship), which is a 2.5L known with not much torque at low revs.
> It has a built engine, no cam phasing (for now), and is using a g25 660 /.72AR with EWG and e85.
> ...


think you for reply,the car is very fun.haha.

but it's a drift car, my car is a street car, its highest RPM in 7000,maybe the 660 with 0.72 a/r is suit it? because i user it only on street,i want it give me a quickly response


----------



## crousti (Aug 5, 2019)

Considering how you share the same displacement with that engine, i'd say the same turbo should produce what you want: virtually no lag and ~500HP. So thats a g25 660 .72AR for you  Pair it with a 44mm tial ewg and you should be all set.
If one day you want more power, switch to the bigger housing should net 50-100 more HP , at the cost of a bit of spool up time.


----------



## zqxathz (Sep 28, 2019)

crousti said:


> Considering how you share the same displacement with that engine, i'd say the same turbo should produce what you want: virtually no lag and ~500HP. So thats a g25 660 .72AR for you  Pair it with a 44mm tial ewg and you should be all set.
> If one day you want more power, switch to the bigger housing should net 50-100 more HP , at the cost of a bit of spool up time.


thanks for your reply,my displacement also have a 44mm tail ewg,so i very looking forward to it with 660 0.72 a/r.

The EJ257 is not a very strong engine. Although I have already strengthened it, I may not use more than 1.5 bar of pressure and more horsepower. I hope it is an easy to drive and stable street car.


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

mainstayinc said:


> I see what you are saying. An AFR of 10 is very rich, even under full boost. It's interesting that Garrett advertises the G25-550 as being capable of 550 HP even though the compressor map clearly shows that it is only capable of about 50 lbs. of air per minute. If you plug the 550 HP number into the aforementioned Garrett formula, you get an AFR of about 9!
> 
> 50 = (550 * AFR * .60)/60
> 
> ...



Hi John,

first, thumbs up to the great knowledge you are spreading here. This is an awesome thread.

Second, whenever you say "below I overlaid..."; is there supposed to be a map visible? I can't see anything, but luckily you stating which points you are referencing so I have an understanding of where you are on the compressor map.

Third, so happy that I read the thread til the end, because the HP rating of the turbos is what is "concerning" me.
I have a 2.0t FSI engine with AWD. Cylinders are slightly bored to 83mm. I would like to break into the 500awhp, which would mean that I would have to make more than 600chp. Now per that calculation stated above, the G25-660 wouldn't cut that for me.
My AFR is 12 and I am only running 93 pump gas. E85 is not feasible for me. 
Should I be looking at the G30-770 then or GTX3071 Gen2?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Der Typ said:


> Hi John,
> 
> first, thumbs up to the great knowledge you are spreading here. This is an awesome thread.
> 
> ...


Yes, there should be a map visible when I say "below I overlaid..."

Yes, I agree. The G25-660 may not make 600 HP on 93 octane pump gas without really good intercooling and, perhaps, a lower static compression ratio. As far as the G30-770, that turbo is capable of over 70 lbs. of air per minute. However, you will still have to run higher boost (1.6 to 2 bar boost) on that turbo to achieve 600 HP on 2.0L displacement. You might want to consider water/methanol injection in addition to regular intercooling to achieve 600 HP on either turbo. 

EDIT: See map below.


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

John,
must be the internet at work. I can see the maps at home.
Thanks for the overlay.

maybe a quick overview:

I am currently running a Gen1 GTX2867R and was able to make 400awhp on a Mustand Dyno, which would equate to about 500chp. I have fueling available for another 100-150hp and my goal would be to raise the power output and extend the powerband to redline, which is currently at 7500rpm.
I am looking to maximize my future setup in a healthy way. So not run the turbo beyond efficiency, running lean or any other stuff. 

Boosting at 2 bar would be like 30ish psi, correct?


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

*choosing hillclimb car turbo*

Hi guys. Im new on this forum. My name is Asier and im a owner of a formula hillclimb car. This car have a BMW s1000rr byke engine with 1000cm3 with four cylinder of 80mm bore and 49,54mm stroke. The limit of rpm are 14200. Actually we are building a turbo configuration on this engine reducing the cylinder compresion ratio from 13:1 to 9,5:1, carrillo rods etc etc. The question is that we are going to go with the new GT25 550 garrett turbo and dont know if we are on right direction. I have the two options with 
0.49 and 0.72 AR. Other byke engines with turbo usually here uses an EFR 6258 or the 6758. What did you think?
hanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Der Typ said:


> John,
> must be the internet at work. I can see the maps at home.
> Thanks for the overlay.
> 
> ...


[1] That's the turbo I run in my MK4 daily driver.

[2] The G25-660 (also a 67mm compressor turbo), is two generations beyond the first generation GTX2867R and makes a really nice fit for 2.0L displacement. In fact, it is capable of an additional 12.5 lbs. of air per minute or 125 HP as compared to the first generation GTX2867R without giving anything up in spoolup. Below I overlaid these two turbos on 2.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) for the G25-660 and the first generation GTX2867R are virtually identical with the new G-series being slightly better. Even though you will be running the G25-660 at the choke line (right side of map) to achieve 600 HP, that will be very close to your redline where power normally drops off anyways. Sure, you could step up to the G30-770 and achieve 600 HP more efficiently at redline, but you will have to give up some spoolup and drivability to get there (350 to 650 RPMs later spoolup).

[3] Yes.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Hi guys. Im new on this forum. My name is Asier and im a owner of a formula hillclimb car. This car have a BMW s1000rr byke engine with 1000cm3 with four cylinder of 80mm bore and 49,54mm stroke. The limit of rpm are 14200. Actually we are building a turbo configuration on this engine reducing the cylinder compresion ratio from 13:1 to 9,5:1, carrillo rods etc etc. The question is that we are going to go with the new GT25 550 garrett turbo and dont know if we are on right direction. I have the two options with
> 0.49 and 0.72 AR. Other byke engines with turbo usually here uses an EFR 6258 or the 6758. What did you think?
> hanks


That sounds like a very cool project. Let me check into that and post something tomorrow.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

a


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Thanks Mainstayinc. For aditional information, we are going to run with ELF perfo 105 fuel and a water-metanol injection. Iced cooled watercooler and anti lag sistem are planned too.


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

Thanks for overlaying those two.
Sounds like the G25-660 would be my best bet then to keep the surge line of the turbo but improve all other characteristics. 
Probably not going to throw in the turbo before spring time, but I like to get all the details worked out beforehand.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Der Typ said:


> Thanks for overlaying those two.
> *Sounds like the G25-660 would be my best bet then to keep the surge line of the turbo but improve all other characteristics. *
> Probably not going to throw in the turbo before spring time, but I like to get all the details worked out beforehand.


Yes, I agree.


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

John,

can we go back to the math from the previous page real quick?
I just trying to understand some of the equations and the math behind it. I am sure the 660 will make me plenty happy and get me where I want to be.
Just doing some brain exercise here.

So, I understand that the general approach is to say target HP = target amount of air lb/min; e.g. 600 HP = 60lbs/ min of air

The G25-660 is definitely capable of flowing 60 lbs/min, so we are good there.
But now when I used that formula it comes up with me needing over 70lbs of air to achieve 600HP. 

Thoughts?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Der Typ said:


> John,
> 
> can we go back to the math from the previous page real quick?
> I just trying to understand some of the equations and the math behind it. I am sure the 660 will make me plenty happy and get me where I want to be.
> ...


I usually multiply the amount of air per minute by 10 to get an estimate of HP. So, for 60 lbs. of air per minute, I multiply 60 x 10 to get 600 HP. I suppose you can multiply the amount of air per minute by 9 to get HP on a less efficient setup. In that case the G25-660 is only capable of 540 HP (9 x 60 = 540). However, I wouldn't go lower than that. Note that Garrett uses a factor of 11 to advertise their new G-Series turbos (60 x 11 = 660 as in G25-660). I think that is a little optimistic for most people even for E85/Ethanol. Using 10 is a convenient way to read the compressor maps and I think is achievable for most people.


----------



## gixercho (Oct 9, 2019)

Hi, please to meet you. 
May i ask you what you think about those 3 turbos for my m50b28 2.8ltr bmw engine?
EFR 7670 1.05 twin scroll
EFR 7163 0.80 twin scroll 
GTX3076 Gen2 0.78 twin scroll
The engine is with around 9.5CR and its on pure ethanol.
Thank you very much in advance.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> That sounds like a very cool project. Let me check into that and post something tomorrow.


Did you have the opportunity to assess my case?
Thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Hi guys. Im new on this forum. My name is Asier and im a owner of a formula hillclimb car. This car have a BMW s1000rr byke engine with 1000cm3 with four cylinder of 80mm bore and 49,54mm stroke. The limit of rpm are 14200. Actually we are building a turbo configuration on this engine reducing the cylinder compresion ratio from 13:1 to 9,5:1, carrillo rods etc etc. *The question is that we are going to go with the new GT25 550 garrett turbo and dont know if we are on right direction.* I have the two options with
> 0.49 and 0.72 AR. Other byke engines with turbo usually here uses an EFR 6258 or the 6758. What did you think?
> hanks





Pontxio said:


> Thanks Mainstayinc. For aditional information, we are going to run with ELF perfo 105 fuel and a water-metanol injection. Iced cooled watercooler and anti lag sistem are planned too.


About the BMW S1000RR:










Engine Specifications:










After looking at the compressor map of the G25-550 on 1.0L displacement, I definitely think you are going in the right direction. Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 996 CCs (80mm bore x 49.54mm stroke = 996 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in between 3000 and 4000 RPMs. You can expect to see full boost by 5000 to 6000 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). I marked three (3) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1= 1.5 or about 7 psi at 14,200 RPMs producing 30 lbs. of air per minute or 300 HP on pump/race gas.
P2/P1= 2.0 or about 15 psi at 14,200 RPMs producing 40 lbs. of air per minute or 400 HP on pump/race gas.
P2/P1= 2.5 or about 22 psi at 13,900 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on pump/race gas.










For comparison, below I overlaid the G25-550 and the EFR 6258 on 1.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge lines are about even for both turbos with the EFR 6258 having a slight 175 RPM advantage. However, the EFR 6258 chokes off at 42.5 lbs. of air per minute or 425 HP whereas the G25-550 can produce up to 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP at 15,000 RPMs.










Below I overlaid the G25-550 and the EFR 6758 on 1.0L displacement for comparison. As you can see, the surge line for the EFR 6758 is about 500 RPMs to the right of the G25-550. That means that the EFR 6758 will take longer to get into its efficiency zone and spool later as compared to the G25-550. The choke lines for both turbos are about the same with both turbos being able to produce 50 lbs. of air per minute at 15,000 RPMs.










So, in conclusion, I recommend the G25-550 over the EFR 6758 as it is simply a better turbo. I would only recommend the EFR 5258 over the G25-550 if you don't plan to make more than 400 to 425 HP since it has a slightly better surge line *on paper* at least. Otherwise, I recommend the G25-550 as that will give you more power to play with up top.

**IMPORTANT NOTE: I recommend getting a pair of turbo camshafts for this setup if at all possible. Turbo cams have shorter duration and less lift than their normally aspirated counterpart. Having shorter duration cams will reduce valve overlap between the intake and exhaust valves. Although valve overlap is crucial for high-output normally aspirated engines like the BMW S1000RR (as that allows for exhaust tuning and improved volumetric efficiency), it can seriously decrease VE in a turbo engine. This is especially true at lower engine speeds while the turbo begins to build boost. Too much valve overlap will cause the exhaust gas to reverse back into the intake manifold and mix with the intake charge. Not only will that delay spoolup (add an additional 2000 to 3000 RPMs if using NA camshafts), but it might not play nice with things such as injectors and valve sealing surfaces. Ideally, I recommend getting a pair of custom turbo camshafts for the BMW S1000RR with shorter duration, shorter lift and possibly wider centerlines to avoid too much valve overlap. If that is not possible, then consider grinding 1.0 to 1.5mm from the entire profile of both the intake and exhaust camshafts while retaining stock centerlines. Reducing valve duration and lift in this case will not have any effect on top end power due to forced induction. On the contrary, it will further improve low end performance due to better swirl (turbulence) of the intake charge at low engine speeds while not effecting top end power. Valve overlap is less of an issue at higher engine speeds as there is less time for the exhaust gas to reverse back into the intake manifold.

EDIT: If possible, please post some pictures!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gixercho said:


> Hi, please to meet you.
> May i ask you what you think about those 3 turbos for my m50b28 2.8ltr bmw engine?
> EFR 7670 1.05 twin scroll
> EFR 7163 0.80 twin scroll
> ...


Likewise! Let me check into that and post something later tomorrow. I'll be on the road all day Thursday.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> About the BMW S1000RR:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I dont know how to thank your contribution. I understand what are you saying about the problem of the return of gases at low revolutions . Now at they you can buy turbo conversion kits for any bike engine but they only change pistons and rods. I never eard about those kind of camshafts for bike turbo engines but what you propose has its logic. Did you know how can I design these new custom camshafts and where can build it or in the worst of case where can i grind the OEM ones?
Thanks again


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> I dont know how to thank your contribution. I understand what are you saying about the problem of the return of gases at low revolutions . Now at they you can buy turbo conversion kits for any bike engine but they only change pistons and rods. I never eard about those kind of camshafts for bike turbo engines but what you propose has its logic. Did you know how can I design these new custom camshafts and where can build it or in the worst of case where can i grind the OEM ones?
> Thanks again


I researched turbo camshafts for the BMW S1000RR before I posted my analysis and could not find anyone who sold aftermarket camshafts for this engine. I would contact a specialist like Catcams or even a small shop that knows how to re-grind camshafts. As far as the specific camshaft profile, I can check into that and get back to you. I have some ideas.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I researched turbo camshafts for the BMW S1000RR before I posted my analysis and could not find anyone who sold aftermarket camshafts for this engine. I would contact a specialist like Catcams or even a small shop that knows how to re-grind camshafts. As far as the specific camshaft profile, I can check into that and get back to you. I have some ideas.


I know that Alpha Racing (oficial preparer) sale improved camshafts with higher elevation because i have it on my other s1000rr engine. I know that web camshaft make the same but i never heard about turbo custom camshafts. I have no idea to design them. What I have is the possibility of measuring the profile of the OEM cam and passing the points to a plane. A friend has the machine to do it


----------



## yrk2.7t (Dec 12, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the G25-660 and G30-770 on 2.5L displacement. As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) comes in 200 to 400 RPMs later for the G30-770 as compared to the smaller G25-660. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi and 7000 RPMs producing about 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas. So, if you are willing to give up a few hundred RPMs in spoolup, you can gain an additional 100 to 150 HP with the G30-770 on 2.5L displacement without too much effort. IMO I would upgrade to the G30-770 over the G25-660 at your displacement.


Hi John,
Thank you so much for all that you are doing for everyone.

I like the gentleman that you did this post for have the Audi 2.5 TFSI aka 2480cce engine. 

I plan on using E-85, and would like to be 700-800AWHP. My engine has been forged, and I have extensive headwork done along with oversized valves, and Schrick camshafts aiming to increase VE, and also increase the engine RPM to 8000-8500 RPM if needed.

Could you possibly overlay the G30-700 and G30-900? My understanding is that both compressor maps are the same as the G35 counterpart the only difference being the exhaust flow. In your opinion should I go with the G30, or G35?

Thank you very much for your help.. eace:


----------



## yrk2.7t (Dec 12, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> I'm building a 1984 Rabbit GTI with an AWD (Haldex) conversion from an 2004 Audi TT 225. Here is my build thread. With the Haldex conversion and upgraded engine/transmission etc. I am hoping the car will weigh less than 1000 kilograms. Yeah, I plan to rev between 8500 and 9000 RPMs to get the most out of the GTX3584RS on 2.1L using a Link G4+ Standalone ECU from New Zealand.
> 
> EDIT: I plan to run 3 bar boost so I will need the Methanol injection to control knock.


That's going to be awesome!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yrk2.7t said:


> Hi John,
> Thank you so much for all that you are doing for everyone.
> 
> I like the gentleman that you did this post for have the Audi 2.5 TFSI aka 2480cce engine.
> ...


Let me check into that and get back to you. I have another request pending that I hope to get to tomorrow (Friday). 

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yrk2.7t said:


> Hi John,
> Thank you so much for all that you are doing for everyone.
> 
> I like the gentleman that you did this post for have the Audi 2.5 TFSI aka 2480cce engine.
> ...


In order to make 700 to 800 WHP on an AWD platform, you will have to make 840 to 960 HP at the crank. Using a conservative 11 HP per lb. of air per minute for E85, that equals 76 to 87 lbs. of air per minute. Below I overlaid the G30-770 and the G35-900 with 2.5L displacement (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 5 cylinders = 2480 CC's). As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are pretty close for both turbos with the G30-770 having a 200 RPM advantage over the G35-900. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi at 8500 RPMs producing 81 lbs. of air per minute or 891 HP on E85/Ethanol or 743 WHP on an AWD platform. The G35-900 is a good fit for your displacement and HP goals. The G30-770 is just too small. I recommend the G35 turbine wheel for sure. Also, ATPTurbo removed the G35-900 from their website so I don't know if that is still available or if they are changing the name or compressor map.


----------



## yrk2.7t (Dec 12, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> In order to make 700 to 800 WHP on an AWD platform, you will have to make 840 to 960 HP at the crank. Using a conservative 11 HP per lb. of air per minute for E85, that equals 76 to 87 lbs. of air per minute. Below I overlaid the G30-770 and the G35-900 with 2.5L displacement (82.5mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 5 cylinders = 2480 CC's). As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are pretty close for both turbos with the G30-770 having a 200 RPM advantage over the G35-900. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi at 8500 RPMs producing 81 lbs. of air per minute or 891 HP on E85/Ethanol or 743 WHP on an AWD platform. The G35-900 is a good fit for your displacement and HP goals. The G30-770 is just too small. I recommend the G35 turbine wheel for sure. Also, ATPTurbo removed the G35-900 from their website so I don't know if that is still available or if they are changing the name or compressor map.


You are awesome sir! Thank you very much! 

I did see that they removed it, but it is still on an australian website...

Where do you think that the boost will start coming in on the G35-900?

https://empireelite.com.au/GARRETT-G35-900-p147751141

PS they also have a G35-1050 listed 
And if you need any electrical help on your haldex swap LMK. 
I'm doing a similar swap on a TDI JSW.
I have all kinds of$$ tools for deleting, coding, etc..


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yrk2.7t said:


> You are awesome sir! Thank you very much!
> 
> I did see that they removed it, but it is still on an australian website...
> 
> ...


[1] Well, if you look at the [BLUE] map, boost should start to come on between 1800 and 2300 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. Expect full boost by 3800 to 4300 RPMs
[2] I might take you up on that. Thanks!

BTW, thanks for the link to the G35-900 and G35-1050. I am going to grab the compressor map for the 1050.


----------



## yrk2.7t (Dec 12, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> [1] Well, if you look at the [BLUE] map, boost should start to come on between 1800 and 2300 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. Expect full boost by 3800 to 4300 RPMs
> [2] I might take you up on that. Thanks!
> 
> BTW, thanks for the link to the G35-900 and G35-1050. I am going to grab the compressor map for the 1050.


Very welcome sir, and yes please if you need help let me know, I like helping other with cool projects.

Lastly do you think that there are any other turbos that would fit the bill any better than the G35-900?


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

hey John,

so, looks like my turbo is already a bust. Since there are no fitting G25-660 houses available for me right now, I am looking into an alternative for the moment.
Would you be able to overlay the GTX2867R Gen1 with a GTX3076R Gen2 on a 2.0T?
Thanks


----------



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

Get in touch with agp turbo. They sounded be able to machine ab turbine housing to fit. They have .75, 1.0 and 1.2 open and divided t3 and t4. They're doing a divided 1.0 for me right now for an efr 7163.


----------



## Der Typ (May 13, 2015)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Get in touch with agp turbo. They sounded be able to machine ab turbine housing to fit. They have .75, 1.0 and 1.2 open and divided t3 and t4. They're doing a divided 1.0 for me right now for an efr 7163.


Thanks Pat, but my setup is old. I need the combination of T25 flange and 5 bolt downpipe (GT28 pattern). I just don't feel like spending the money on upgrading my manifold and reworking the DP.
I understand that those are not the latest technology anymore and I might sacrifice some performance, but I can live with that.


----------



## shane34 (Apr 10, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> shane34 said:
> 
> 
> > Ordered g25-660 .92
> ...




Still got the supra and the MR2


MR2 was finished 2 weeks ago

Great results turbo is amazing

Mapper was surprised


Made 400 rwhp, at 1.3/1.4 bar (wastegate) no meth

434 rwhp 1.6 no meth.

With meth and unleashed it made 485 rwhp, estimate 570 flywheel. With meth and 1.8 bar.

Real face ripper, makes power all the way to limiter is set to 8k rpm.

Progressive boost map However it would probably break 500 rwhp if the boost was brought in harder and full at 4200rpm. However more tourqe which I didn't want, no point risking components.

Tourque is nice and flat on boost doesn't dip more than 15, from start to finish, currently at 340 at the wheels.


Got to say it's a fantastic turbo. Santa Pod hopefully this Sunday.


----------



## Subieturtle (Oct 16, 2019)

Wow. John you are awesome and I’m so glad I found this thread! I feel like I have learned more in the last hour reading this thread then I have in 10 years about turbo maps. I need to spend more time studying this so I can do this myself but for now I’ll ask 

So I currently have a EJ257 2.5L using 99.75MM bore. 

Current turbo: GEN 1 GT3076 .82
Proposed replacement: G25 (Unsure if I should go .72 or .92) I think .92 might be the better option for me. 

I was considering the G30 however I think the G25 will provide better spool and more power over my current setup since my turbo is only 52lbs/min now. 

My engine can’t take much more than 625HP at the crank which is why I think the G30 would be overkill and I wouldn’t be able to capitalize on its ability - if 600hp is the goal I think the G25 could get me there. 

Could you kindly plot these 2 turbos for me so I could see it visually?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

shane34 said:


> Still got the supra and the MR2
> 
> 
> MR2 was finished 2 weeks ago
> ...


Thanks for posting back in this thread! Those are great results.:thumbup: The G25-660 must be way different than you older generation GT35.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Subieturtle said:


> Wow. John you are awesome and I’m so glad I found this thread! I feel like I have learned more in the last hour reading this thread then I have in 10 years about turbo maps. I need to spend more time studying this so I can do this myself but for now I’ll ask
> 
> So I currently have a EJ257 2.5L using 99.75MM bore.
> 
> ...


Sure. Let me look into that. It may be a day or two as I am a little busy ATM.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gixercho said:


> Hi, please to meet you.
> *May i ask you what you think about those 3 turbos for my m50b28 2.8ltr bmw engine?*
> EFR 7670 1.05 twin scroll
> EFR 7163 0.80 twin scroll
> ...


Sorry for the delay. I think the EFR 7163 is somewhat undersized for 2.8L displacement. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and the G25-660 on 2.8L displacement (84mm bore x 84mm stroke x 6 cylinders = 2793 CC's) for comparison. The surge line (left side of map) for the EFR comes in at 1200 RPMs in a twin scroll configuration. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.3 or about 19 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 660 HP on E85/Ethanol (60 x 11 = 660 HP).










Below I overlaid the EFR 7670 and the second generation GTX3076R on 2.8L displacement. The map for the Garrett is for single scroll but it is unclear whether the map for the EFR 7670 is single or twin scroll. Since these are both 76mm turbos and the EFR 7670 has a much better surge line (+400 RPMs), it is probably safe to conclude that the map for the EFR 7670 is twin scroll. The sure line (left side of map) for the EFR 7670 ranges from 1200 to 2000 RPMs on 2.8L displacement with full boost coming in at 3200 to 4000 RPMs (surge line +2000 RPMs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1= 2.6 or about 23 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 67 lbs of air per minute or 737 HP on E85/Ethanol (67 x 11 = 737 HP).


----------



## gixercho (Oct 9, 2019)

Thank you very much. From your words i understand that the 7670 with T4 1.05 is a very good and fast spooling choice for m50b28 engine drift car. Am i right? And may i ask you what you think about using it on my T3 twin scroll flanged manifold with T3 to T4 adaptor flange or its better to build new manifold with T4 flange?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Subieturtle said:


> Wow. John you are awesome and I’m so glad I found this thread! I feel like I have learned more in the last hour reading this thread then I have in 10 years about turbo maps. I need to spend more time studying this so I can do this myself but for now I’ll ask
> 
> So I currently have a EJ257 2.5L using 99.75MM bore.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the original GT3076R and the new G25-660 on 2470 CC displacement (99.75mm bore x 79mm bore x 4 cylinders = 2469.5 CC's). As you can see, the new 67mm G-series turbo has a way better surge line and is capable of 8 lbs. of air per minute more on the top end or 80 HP as compared to the older tech 76mm GT3076R. The surge line ranges from 1300 to 1800 RPMs on 2.5L displacement. Expect full spool between 3300 and 3800 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). That's an 800+ RPM improvement over the older Garrett. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi at 6500 RPMs producing about 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup (60 x 10 = 600 HP) or 540 HP on a less efficient setup (60 x 9 = 540).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gixercho said:


> Thank you very much. *[1] From your words i understand that the 7670 with T4 1.05 is a very good and fast spooling choice for m50b28 engine drift car. Am i right? [2]And may i ask you what you think about using it on my T3 twin scroll flanged manifold with T3 to T4 adaptor flange or its better to build new manifold with T4 flange?*


[1] Yes, expect very good spool with the EFR 7670 on 2.8L displacement and twin-scroll turbine housing. 
[2] I would definitely build a new T4 manifold for this setup as that is better suited for a 6 cylinder 2.8L application. If possible, keep the exhaust primaries short as less volume equals quicker spool especially on a twin-scroll setup. An inline 6 cylinder engine is very well suited to a short-runner, twin scroll exhaust manifold.

EDIT: I just noticed a marked a point for the second generation GTX3076R and not the EFR 7670. Below I re-posted the map for the EFR 7670 with the a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 64 lbs. of air per minute or 704 HP on E85/Ethanol (64 x 11 = 704 HP).


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Pontxio said:


> I know that Alpha Racing (oficial preparer) sale improved camshafts with higher elevation because i have it on my other s1000rr engine. I know that web camshaft make the same but i never heard about turbo custom camshafts. I have no idea to design them. What I have is the possibility of measuring the profile of the OEM cam and passing the points to a plane. A friend has the machine to do it[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Hi Mainstayinc. Have you got any propose for this camshaft you comment? Im going to try puting my proyect pictures.
> Thanks


----------



## gixercho (Oct 9, 2019)

Its very hard the runners to be short with that engine on bmw e36 chasis only place for the turbo is behind right headlight. I dont know for bottom mount if they could be shorter, but itll be harder to maintain. What ID you reccomend for the runners?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gixercho said:


> Its very hard the runners to be short with that engine on bmw e36 chasis only place for the turbo is behind right headlight. I dont know for bottom mount if they could be shorter, but itll be harder to maintain. What ID you reccomend for the runners?


I usually try to match the ID of the exhaust runners to the diameter of the exhaust port. In my case, I used 1 1/4 inch stainless steel schedule 40 pipe on my 2.1L 4 cylinder as that almost perfectly matched my 20V Audi cylinder head. As far as fitment, I had to cut into my chassis to fit my bottom mount custom fabricated twin-scroll exhaust manifold since performance is way more important to me than looks. Here's a quick picture and my build thread. A six inch hole saw did the trick when the turbo didn't fit the chassis.










And here's my twin-scroll setup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Pontxio said:
> 
> 
> > I know that Alpha Racing (oficial preparer) sale improved camshafts with higher elevation because i have it on my other s1000rr engine. I know that web camshaft make the same but i never heard about turbo custom camshafts. I have no idea to design them. What I have is the possibility of measuring the profile of the OEM cam and passing the points to a plane. A friend has the machine to do it[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Subieturtle (Oct 16, 2019)

John. Your a gem! Thank you so much!!


----------



## Subieturtle (Oct 16, 2019)

@ John - how do I determine which A/R to go with? Looks like both the .72 and .92 have the same size inlets/outlets/trims.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Subieturtle said:


> @ John - how do I determine which A/R to go with? Looks like both the .72 and .92 have the same size inlets/outlets/trims.


I would be inclined to go with the larger 0.92 A/R on 2.5L displacement. But I would see what other people are using for this engine to see what works best.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Pontxio said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I carefully studied the camshaft for the S1000RR engine and am in the process of putting together a Catcams-style camshaft card for you with some suggestions. Here is a preview for you (see below). The top green lines are your cams (notice the overlap). The bottom black cams are the turbo cams I use in my engine (Catcams 3660) for reference. I'll try to put together the completed camshaft card for you sometime in the next week. I just don't have time to discuss or complete at the moment.
> ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Thanks Naistayinc. Yes i see that my camshafts have much overlap and yours almost nothing. Take it easy if you are bussy. I will be eager to see your ideas.
> Thanks


:thumbup:


----------



## Subieturtle (Oct 16, 2019)

John,

I’m still trying to figure all this Math out. Can you post one more plot for me? 2.5L EJ257 if it matters. G25-660 vs G30-770. No rush you can take other request first if needed. Thank you so much!


----------



## yrk2.7t (Dec 12, 2005)

Nice project man! Was reading through your build post John, that things going to be a beast!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

yrk2.7t said:


> Nice project man! Was reading through your build post John, that things going to be a beast!


Thanks, man:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Subieturtle said:


> John,
> 
> I’m still trying to figure all this Math out. Can you post one more plot for me? 2.5L EJ257 if it matters. G25-660 vs G30-770. No rush you can take other request first if needed. Thank you so much!


Not a problem. There's one other request before yours.


----------



## Oakenvalley (Oct 17, 2019)

*Audi I5 2.2*

Great thread!

I would very much like to see both the G25-550 and the G25-660 overlaid on the Audi 2.2 liter inline 5 engine.
I am aiming for an enjoyable car with torque from 3000 to 7000 rpm. Before I noticed the new G25 series I had the 
the small Borg Warner S252 SX-E in my sights, but it seems the G25 may be even better suited.










https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/shares/79KaTX


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Oakenvalley said:


> Great thread!
> 
> I would very much like to see both the G25-550 and the G25-660 overlaid on the Audi 2.2 liter inline 5 engine.
> I am aiming for an enjoyable car with torque from 3000 to 7000 rpm. Before I noticed the new G25 series I had the
> ...


Below I overlaid the G25-550 and G25-660 on 2.2L displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke x 5 cylinders = 2226 CC's). I think the G25-660 is a much better fit at your displacement. I can overlay the Garretts with the BW S252 SX-E, but that will take some time.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Subieturtle said:


> John,
> 
> I’m still trying to figure all this Math out. Can you post one more plot for me? 2.5L EJ257 if it matters. G25-660 vs G30-770. No rush you can take other request first if needed. Thank you so much!


Below I overlaid the G25-660 and G30-770 on 2470 CC displacement. You will lose a few hundred RPMs in spoolup but gain more up top if you are willing to increase your boost. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.9 or about 28 psi at 6800 RPMs producing about 69 lbs. of air per minute or 690 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup (69 x 10 = 690 HP) or 621 HP on a less efficient setup (69 x 9 = 621).


----------



## Oakenvalley (Oct 17, 2019)

Awesome!


----------



## PinnacleTuning (Oct 13, 2019)

John,
First off let me just say, thank you so much for the help you have given me throughout the years. You are truly amazing! I learned more from you indirectly then from anywhere else. 

I finally have something worth asking you about. I have a 02 jetta with stock longblock 1.8t. it has a 225hp manifold and an internally wastegated td06 meant for a subaru. The car was dyno’d by FFE at 335hp, 368 foot pounds on 93 pump gas. Those numbers were made at just shy of 20 pounds of boost. It peaks at 20 and tapers off to 18ish psi. As a side note, the car does have a single nozzle meth kit being introduced by a spacer between the throttle body and the intake manifold. The meth kit wasn’t used on the dyno because the tuner said that the connecting rods where maxed out on torque.

That being said, I like the power the setup makes but I hate the spool up time. The turbo doesn't make full boost until, 4500-4700rpm! 

Now I want to say that this build is extremely budget. Nothing shiny or fancy. the car is my fun daily driver/weekend highway/street warrior. 

Not fully satisfied with the power and spool. I searched for some used turbos in my budget using this thread and your replies as guidance. Here is what I was able to afford. 

New Spa t3 twin scroll top mount manifold(tma06)
1000cc injectors(currently using 630cc)for e85
new walbro 535lph intank fuel pump
turbosmart external wastegate 39mm v band
Gen 1 GTX3576r 60ar coldside and 82ar twinscroll hotside
Je Pistons drop in 81mm 9.5c/r
IE rods
225hp intake manifold with direct port meth bungs

I know the turbo is way overkill, but it was only a few hundred, so I couldn’t pass it up. the turbo has under 200 miles on it and still has all the original paint marks on the compressor and turbine fins! It is truly mint inside and out. 

Now on to my questions, 
1.what kind of spool time can I expect from a stock displacement 1.8t with 82 hotside? I do have a true twin scroll manifold, so I know that will help. 

2.Next, my power goals are 500hp to the wheels with e85 and meth. Is that realistic? I know the turbo can achieve this without breaking a sweat but I fear without the displacement I am going to run out of rpm. I only have stock cams as of right now. Unless I find a pair used cams for a good price. (if you have some recommendations I am all ears.) spa just came out with cams for the 1.8t and you can use the stock springs and retainers. let me know if you think they are worth it. here is a link. https://spaturbousa.com/collections/engine-components/products/252-260-performance-camshaft-set-for-vw-audi-1-8l-20v 

3. last question, I am willing to sacrifice a bit of power in exchange for quicker spool time. Atp turbo has the new Garrett T3 Twin Scroll Turbine Housing in Ni-Resist For GT35R/GTX35R .61 A/R. Considering I bought the turbo for so cheap, I might be willing to spend the money and buy a new turbine housing. I really don't want to spend 600 dollars on a new housing, unless I know for a fact I'm going to gain significant amount of rpm in spool time. 

Thank You so much in advance. I promise to post pictures of the rebuild and keep you up to date on the new dyno numbers. 

Jay


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PinnacleTuning said:


> John,
> *First off let me just say, thank you so much for the help you have given me throughout the years.* You are truly amazing! I learned more from you indirectly then from anywhere else.
> 
> I finally have something worth asking you about. I have a 02 jetta with stock longblock 1.8t. it has a 225hp manifold and an internally wastegated td06 meant for a subaru. The car was dyno’d by FFE at 335hp, 368 foot pounds on 93 pump gas. Those numbers were made at just shy of 20 pounds of boost. It peaks at 20 and tapers off to 18ish psi. As a side note, the car does have a single nozzle meth kit being introduced by a spacer between the throttle body and the intake manifold. The meth kit wasn’t used on the dyno because the tuner said that the connecting rods where maxed out on torque.
> ...


Glad I can be helpful! Let me check into your specific question and get back to you Monday.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received a PM from Chris in Germany:



Napkin said:


> hey man, i saw allot of maps you posted in the forum. thx for that.
> 
> i got a question. i run a vr5 engine. its for the european marked.
> its compareable with a vr6 12v
> ...


Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3076R with your bored out VR5 engine with 2.4L displacement (83mm bore x 90.2mm stroke x 5 = 2440 CC's). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.2 or about 32psi and 5800 RPMs producing 64 lbs. of air per minute or 640 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup (64 x 10 = 640 HP) or 576 HP on a less efficient setup (64 x 9 = 576 HP).










As far as a stock VR6, below I overlaid the second generation GTX3076R with 2.8L displacement (81mm bore x 90.2mm stroke x 6 = 2792 CC's) for comparison. The extra cylinder allows you to reduce your engine speed by about 750 RPMs across the entire powerband while achieving the same output. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.2 or about 32psi and 5050 RPMs producing 64 lbs. of air per minute or 640 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup (64 x 10 = 640 HP). Both the VR5 and VR6 have plenty of displacement to get the most out of this turbo.










Here is cool VR5 swapped MK2. Too bad this engine didn't come to the US! Sounds great!


----------



## PinnacleTuning (Oct 13, 2019)

John thanks again. I look forward to it..


----------



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

Hey John. 

Could you put together some quick maps for me? I have a customer running a efr 8374 on a 3.2L motor. They say they're holding 27psi to 7000rpm, I'm seeing around 700whp. Just curious if my rough estimates match up with your numbers.

Also, could you put together a twin 6758 on 2.8L revving to 7500?

Thanks man.


----------



## Sean D (Oct 20, 2019)

*can you help With my Choice*

Ive got to make a Choice for turbo on a Celica gt4 st205 2.0Litre 3sgte 86m Cp pistons Carillo Rods 1200c FIC injectors Stock cams custom Throttle , intercooler and other supporting Mods 

Road Car/track now and again : Aim is 550 -600bhp Fly want a safe boost level of 1.5 - 1.7 max 

Choices Are 3582Gtx GEn 2 0.83 ar t3 - or vband

G30 770 0.83 ar Cheapest v band

3584 RS 0.83 Ar same price as 3582 gen 2 V band 

3sgte can be prone to cracking so det is an issue so any advice on a choice for my goals . my builder swears on the 3582gen 2 gtx loves them never tried the 3584rs tho or g30 770 which is new

thanks in advance

Max rpm going to is 7500rpm so best suited for that

wasent planning on using meth or run e85 just road fuel


----------



## napkin (Mar 8, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I received a PM from Chris in Germany:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


man thx allot. i ran at an 102oktane + e20mix (20% pure ethanol) so i should had around 104octane. runs really badass. interesting was, that the charger did 0,4bar more boost in 4th gear as with 102 octane pump gas. i ran 2,6bar of boost in 4th gear. i dont want to do this forever but it was a nice ride haha..


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PinnacleTuning said:


> John,
> First off let me just say, thank you so much for the help you have given me throughout the years. You are truly amazing! I learned more from you indirectly then from anywhere else.
> 
> I finally have something worth asking you about. I have a 02 jetta with stock longblock 1.8t. it has a 225hp manifold and an internally wastegated td06 meant for a subaru. The car was dyno’d by FFE at 335hp, 368 foot pounds on 93 pump gas. Those numbers were made at just shy of 20 pounds of boost. It peaks at 20 and tapers off to 18ish psi. As a side note, the car does have a single nozzle meth kit being introduced by a spacer between the throttle body and the intake manifold. The meth kit wasn’t used on the dyno because the tuner said that the connecting rods where maxed out on torque.
> ...


Below I painstakingly re-traced the TD06-20G on your current setup based on the following map. Problem is that there are no units on the x-axis. After further research, I am pretty sure that air flow is measured here in kg/sec. It that's the case, then the TD06-20G is able to produce about 42.5 lbs. of air per minute at the maximum point on the choke line.










Below I overlaid the TD06-20G on stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 1781 CC's) converted to lbs. of air per minute. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1 = 2.4 or about 20 psi at 5800 RPMs producing about 350 HP on the high end (35 x 10 = 350) on pump/race gas or 315 HP on a less efficient setup (35 x 9 = 315 HP). The surge line (left side of map) drops off above P2/P1=1.8 or about 12 psi all the way to 4000 RPMs on 1.8L displacement. This may explain why you don't get full boost until 4500+ RPMs. Not sure.










Below I overlaid the TD06-20G and the first genertion GTX3576R on stock 1.8L displacement. The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3576R is about 1000 RPMs to the right of the TD06-20G. That means that you will lose an additional 1000 RPMs of spoolup with the GTX3576R on stock displacement. Based on your current setup, you can expect full spool somewhere between 5500 and 5700 RPMs. I definitely do not recommend this turbo if you want to improve spoolup over your current setup. Even with a twin-scroll turbine housing. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7200 RPMs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 575+ HP on E85/Ethanol using a conservative ratio of 10.5 HP per lb. of air for E85 or about 500 WHP on a FWD setup.










If you decide to go this route, then I think there is a cheaper twin-scroll turbine housing you can purchase for the GT35-series turbos.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Hey John.
> 
> Could you put together some quick maps for me? I have a customer running a efr 8374 on a 3.2L motor. They say they're holding 27psi to 7000rpm, I'm seeing around 700whp. Just curious if my rough estimates match up with your numbers.
> 
> ...


Hey Pat! Let me look into that and get back to you.

-John.


----------



## Gn0m4 (May 4, 2009)

Nice thread.
You have a pm .


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Hey John.
> 
> Could you put together some quick maps for me? *I have a customer running a efr 8374 on a 3.2L motor. They say they're holding 27psi to 7000rpm, I'm seeing around 700whp. Just curious if my rough estimates match up with your numbers*.
> 
> ...


In order to make 700 WHP you will need to make 805 HP at the crank (700 x 1.15). Below I overlaid the EFR 8374 and the GTX3584RS on 3.2L displacement for comparison. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.8 or about 26.5 psi and 6300 RPMs producing 79 lbs. of air per minute or 790 HP (687 WHP) on a highly tuned setup or 711 HP (618 WHP) on a less efficient setup. I think 700 WHP (or 805 HP at the crank) is plausible on 3.2L displacement with the EFR 8374 on a really good setup that uses water/methanol injection or perhaps a higher ethanol content fuel or maybe even direct injection. The EFR 8374 is maxed out at 79 lbs. of air per minute so reving past the choke line will produce more heat than usable air flow (for example holding 27 psi past the 6300 RPMs).










Below I overlaid the EFR 6758 on 1.4L displacement. The surge line ranges from 2000 RPM all the way to 5000+ RPMs on 1.4L displacement. This turbo will be somewhat laggy on a 2.8L twin-turbo setup. I marked the following points:

P2/P1= 2.0 or 14.5 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 30 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas on a twin-turbo setup (30 x 10 x 2 = 600 HP).
P2/P1= 2.5 or 22 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 37.5 lbs. of air per minute or 750 HP on pump/race gas on a twin-turbo setup (37.5 x 10 x 2 = 750 HP).
P2/P1= 3.2 or 32 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 47.5 lbs. of air per minute or 950 HP on pump/race gas on a twin-turbo setup (47.5 x 10 x 2 = 950 HP).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Sean D said:


> Ive got to make a Choice for turbo on a Celica gt4 st205 2.0Litre 3sgte 86m Cp pistons Carillo Rods 1200c FIC injectors Stock cams custom Throttle , intercooler and other supporting Mods
> 
> *Road Car/track now and again : Aim is 550 -600bhp Fly want a safe boost level of 1.5 - 1.7 max *
> 
> ...



Thanks for your interest. I think the second generation GTX3582R and the GTX3584RS are just too big on 2.0L displacement and will be very laggy for a road car/occasional track car. Your best bet for 550 HP on 2.0L displacement without too much turbo lag is the G25-660. For a reliable 600 HP on 2.0L displacement with some more potential up top I recommend the G30-770. Below I overlaid the G25-660 with 2.0L displacement (86mm bore x 86mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 1998 CC's). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1800 to 2200 RPMs on 2.0L displacement. You can expect full spool between 3800 and 4300 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.6 or about 23 psi and 7500 RPMs producing 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP on an highly tuned setup or 495 HP on a less efficient setup.










Below I overlaid the G30-770 with 2.0L displacement. The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 2200 to 3000+ RPMs on 2.0L displacement. You can expect full spool between 4200 and 5000+ RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi and 7800 RPMs producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on a highly tuned setup or 540 HP on a less efficient setup.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

So, the big IE cams suck ass. They are total spool killers, and i don't really see the point in them unless you're solid lifter and really big turbo. Via logs and compiled dyno data, they're just too big. 




Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## PinnacleTuning (Oct 13, 2019)

john, that is extremely disappointing to find out. I am really out of options right now. 

can you run one last map for me. 
can you over lay the .82 twin scroll exhaust housing compared to the new garrett .61 a/r exhaust housing. if it is a big difference I will go ahead and purchase it. 

if the difference is not that much then I will have to see if I can find someone to trade. 

thank you so much. also I want to thank you for taking the time to find that map for the td06-20g. 

Jay


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PinnacleTuning said:


> john, that is extremely disappointing to find out. I am really out of options right now.
> 
> can you run one last map for me.
> *can you over lay the .82 twin scroll exhaust housing compared to the new garrett .61 a/r exhaust housing.* if it is a big difference I will go ahead and purchase it.
> ...


Glad I can help. As far as comparing turbine housings, I don't have the ability to do that. You will have to try and find some dyno comparisons of the 0.82 A/R versus 0.61 A/R turbine housings and try and get an idea of the spool difference. The first generation GTX turbos are known for being laggy (GTX3071R, GTX3576R etc.). I do not recommend using the GTX3576R on stock displacement. I think you will be very disappointed with that setup. I would sell or trade that turbo for some other less expensive turbo like a Holset. The TD06-20G actually looks pretty good for stock 1.8L displacement on paper. You should be getting better spoolup on that turbo than what you reported.


----------



## ttbestas (Oct 24, 2019)

mainstayinc thanks for such detailed answers! im new to this forum, driving r35 gtr. its build 3.8l engine reving to 8krpm with stage 1 tomei cams, but has old gtx3076r based, probably china made turbos. I ran [email protected] on e85(no dyno numbers). During the winter looking for upgrade. Few people in gtr community have great results with g25-660. i saw 1100-1200whp reported(161mph in 1/4). great spool and power. Havent seen any info on g30-770 though. So would be nice to see the comparison on those 2in power and spool.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ttbestas said:


> mainstayinc thanks for such detailed answers! im new to this forum, driving r35 gtr. its build 3.8l engine reving to 8krpm with stage 1 tomei cams, but has old gtx3076r based, probably china made turbos. I ran [email protected] on e85(no dyno numbers). During the winter looking for upgrade. Few people in gtr community have great results with g25-660. i saw 1100-1200whp reported(161mph in 1/4). great spool and power. Havent seen any info on g30-770 though. So would be nice to see the comparison on those 2in power and spool.


Let me check into that and get back to you.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Gn0m4 (May 4, 2009)

mainstayinc said:


> ...
> 
> For comparison, below I overlaid the G25-550 and the EFR 6258 on 1.0L displacement. As you can see, the surge lines are about even for both turbos with the EFR 6258 having a slight 175 RPM advantage. However, the EFR 6258 chokes off at 42.5 lbs. of air per minute or 425 HP whereas the G25-550 can produce up to 50 lbs. of air per minute or 500 HP at 15,000 RPMs.
> 
> ...


Hi man,

could you help me to compare G25-550 .49, 6258 and 6758 .64 with a 1.6 displacement engine?
Thanks in advance !


----------



## ttbestas (Oct 24, 2019)

Thanks John,

if it matters I ran 152mph on 2.3bar and it looked that my turbos were done on that time( very high cylinder high pressure on high rpm). g25-660 on other hand from what I heard on gtr make this power just on over 2 bar, so I guess much more efficiently. Cant find info on A/r used I guess somewhere in 0.83. 

thanks,
Valdas


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gn0m4 said:


> Hi man,
> 
> could you help me to compare G25-550 .49, 6258 and 6758 .64 with a 1.6 displacement engine?
> Thanks in advance !


Ok. Hopefully I'll have time tomorrow to put something together.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ttbestas said:


> mainstayinc thanks for such detailed answers! im new to this forum, driving r35 gtr. its build 3.8l engine reving to 8krpm with stage 1 tomei cams, but has old gtx3076r based, probably china made turbos. I ran [email protected] on e85(no dyno numbers). During the winter looking for upgrade. *Few people in gtr community have great results with g25-660. i saw 1100-1200whp reported(161mph in 1/4). great spool and power. Havent seen any info on g30-770 though. So would be nice to see the comparison on those 2in power and spool.*





ttbestas said:


> Thanks John,
> 
> if it matters I ran 152mph on 2.3bar and it looked that my turbos were done on that time( very high cylinder high pressure on high rpm). g25-660 on other hand from what I heard on gtr make this power just on over 2 bar, so I guess much more efficiently. Cant find info on A/r used I guess somewhere in 0.83.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the G25-660 and G30-770 on 1.9L displacement (95.5mm bore x 88.4mm stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 = 1899.6 CC's). The surge line (left side of map) for the G25-660 ranges from 1800 to 2300 RPMs on 1.9L displacement. You can expect full spool somewhere between 3800 and 4300 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). The surge line for the G30-770 ranges from 2200 to 3000+ RPMs on 1.9L displacement. Expect full spool between 4200 and 5000 RPMs. I marked several points corresponding to the following on a twin-turbo setup:

P2/P1=2.8 or about 26 psi at 7800 RPMs producing 59 lbs. of air per minute for the G25-660 or 1062 HP (lower limit) on pump/race gas or 1180 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 1298 HP (lower limit) on E85/Ethanol or 1416 HP (upper limit) on E85/Ethanol.
P2/P1=3.1 or about 31 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 67 lbs. of air per minute for the G30-770 or 1206 HP (lower limit) on pump/race gas or 1340 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 1474 HP (lower limit) on E85/Ethanol or 1608 HP (upper limit) on E85/Ethanol.

*Converted into WHP* (HP/1.2 on an AWD setup):

G25-660:
Pump/Race gas: 885 WHP (lower limit), 983 WHP (upper limit)
*E85/Ethanol: 1082 WHP (lower limit), 1180 WHP (upper limit)*

G30-770:
Pump/Race gas: 1005 WHP (lower limit), 1117 WHP (upper limit)
*E85/Ethanol: 1228 WHP (lower limit), 1340 WHP (upper limit)*


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gn0m4 said:


> Hi man,
> 
> *could you help me to compare G25-550 .49, 6258 and 6758 .64 with a 1.6 displacement engine?*
> Thanks in advance !


I already posted my analysis of these turbos on 1.6L displacement before. Below I re-posted these maps along with a comparison between the G25-550 and the EFR 7163 on 1.6L displacement. Check previous pages of this thread for a detailed commentary on this setup. Or, you can just read directly from the maps below.


----------



## odem (Jan 18, 2017)

hello. i already did ask you about turbo comparison for my car like 1,5years ago which was really helpful. 
i now upgraded everything a bit.
still porsche 997 twinturbo.
its now 4,1l displacement. we kept the stock stroke but changed to 106mm bore.
so thats a good 2l per turbo...which is still pretty measly lol. and 3 cylinders - no twinscroll.
i upgraded the fuel system to dual injectors per cylinder so i can run ethanol, at least e85-e90.
out of experience with those engines we did build already we can run up to 3bar or 43psi of boost if needed on ethanol.
we will also use WMI to cool charge air.
the only bottle neck is my transmission. its a tiptronic. with this my limit is 7.300rpm.
car will be used for 1/2mile events mostly or roll race where i can use antilag provided by syvecs ECU.
so my goal would be the max usable horsepower possible and over 200mph at the 1/2mile.
i know i need at least minimum 1400hp to achieve this. more is better. i know it will be laggy but i still need some usable powerband.
so maybe some math can help to see which options i have.
there are several turbos that can achive those numbers. 
from garret gtx3582 gen2 or the new g30/35 900 series. 770 maybe to small already.
precision is also interesting! but unfortunately they dont provide any compressor maps.
when you compare both brands...garrett has the bigger compressor wheels and precision the bigger turbine.

gtx3582 gen2. 66/82 68-62
gtx3584rs. 67/84 68-62
pt6466 gen 2 64/86 74-66
pt6266 gen 2 62/86 74-66
pt6062 gen 2 60/82 71-62


----------



## PZ (May 9, 2002)

mainstayinc said:


> In case anyone is interested, below is the G25-660 and EFR6758 overlaid with 2.0L displacement (2008 CC's). The surge line improves to 1700 to 2200 RPMs with a recommended boost target of P2/P1=3 or about 29 psi at 6400 RPMs producing the same output as above.


 Love your responses and knowledge. I would like to know how the GTX2863 would look with a 2008CC. Stock head AUG, built block, so stock redline. I am looking for great torque, but also power. I am set for intercooling and do not want to run W/M injection.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Pontxio said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I carefully studied the camshaft for the S1000RR engine and am in the process of putting together a Catcams-style camshaft card for you with some suggestions. Here is a preview for you (see below). The top green lines are your cams (notice the overlap). The bottom black cams are the turbo cams I use in my engine (Catcams 3660) for reference. I'll try to put together the completed camshaft card for you sometime in the next week. I just don't have time to discuss or complete at the moment.
> ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PZ said:


> Love your responses and knowledge. *I would like to know how the GTX2863 would look with a 2008CC. Stock head AUG, built block, so stock redline.* I am looking for great torque, but also power. I am set for intercooling and do not want to run W/M injection.


\

Thanks! Below I overlaid the GTX2863R with 2.0L displacement (83mm bore x 92.8mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 2008 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1500 to 2000 RPMs. You can expect full spool on 2.0L displacement no later than 3500 to 4000 RPMs. I marked a couple of points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.2 or about 17.5 psi at 6600 RPMs producing 41.5 lbs. of air per minute or 415 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 374 HP (lower limit) on a less efficient setup.
P2/P1=2.55 or about 22.5 psi at about 6000 RPMs producing 43.5 lbs. of air per minute or 435 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 392 HP (lower limit) on a less efficient setup.










Overall, I think this setup will have nice torque down low with 400+ HP potential.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

odem said:


> *[1]hello. i already did ask you about turbo comparison for my car like 1,5years ago which was really helpful. *
> i now upgraded everything a bit.
> still porsche 997 twinturbo.
> [2]*its now 4,1l displacement. we kept the stock stroke but changed to 106mm bore.
> ...


[1] Yes, I remember. Here is a link to your original post.
[2] That sounds like a killer setup. Glad to hear you can run E85/Ethanol. That will seriously increase the potential of this setup. Are you still running Mahle pistons (106mm bore)? In order to make 1400 HP at the crank, you will need a turbo that can produce 70 to 78 lbs. of air per minute on pump/race gas or 64 to 67 lbs. of air per minute on E85/Ethanol on a twin-turbo setup. Below I overlaid the G30-770 and the second generation GTX3076R (which was one of the turbos we looked at on your previous setup) on 2.0L displacement (106mm bore x 76.4mm stroke x 6 cylinders / 2 = 2023 CC's). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) for the G30-770 improves by a few hundred RPMs over the second generation GTX3076R. However, you really don't gain much more up top, with the G30-770 producing an additional two (2) lbs. of air per minute over the older Garrett. That's still impressive for a 71mm compressor turbo though. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.1 or about 31 psi at 7300 RPMs producing 67 lbs. of air per minute or the following:

1206 HP on pump/race gas (lower limit: 67 lbs. x 9 x 2 turbos)
1340 HP on pump/race gas (upper limit: 67 lbs. x 10 x 2 turbos)
1407 HP on E85/Ethanol (lower limit: 67 lbs. x 10.5 x 2 turbos)
1474 HP on E85/Ethanol (upper limit: 67 lbs. x 11 x 2 turbos)










EDIT: Below I overlaid the G35-900 and the second generation GTX3582R on 2.0L displacement. As you can see, these two turbo are almost identical with the G35-900 having a slightly better surge line (+200 RPMs) and the GTX3582R having a little more potential up top on 2.0L displacement. I marked point corresponding to P2/P1=3.5 or about 36 psi at 7300 RPMs producing 74 lbs. of air per minute or the following:

1332 HP on pump/race gas (lower limit: 74 lbs. x 9 x 2 turbos)
1480 HP on pump/race gas (upper limit: 74 lbs. x 10 x 2 turbos)
1554 HP on E85/Ethanol (lower limit: 74 lbs. x 10.5 x 2 turbos)
1628 HP on E85/Ethanol (upper limit: 74 lbs. x 11 x 2 turbos)










**You may want to consider the second generation GTX3582R with the more efficient RS turbine from the GTX3584RS. That setup will be more efficient and allow you to extract more power out of the 82mm compressor wheel. Talk to user Gulfstream from Gøteborg, Sweden who runs this setup on 2.0L displacement. Talking about the GTX3584RS, below I overlaid this turbo with 2.0L displacement. I marked a point I marked point corresponding to P2/P1=3.6 or about 38 psi at 7300 RPMs producing 74 lbs. of air per minute or the following:

1386 HP on pump/race gas (lower limit: 77 lbs. x 9 x 2 turbos)
1540 HP on pump/race gas (upper limit: 77 lbs. x 10 x 2 turbos)
1617 HP on E85/Ethanol (lower limit: 77 lbs. x 10.5 x 2 turbos)
1694 HP on E85/Ethanol (upper limit: 77 lbs. x 11 x 2 turbos)


----------



## PZ (May 9, 2002)

Thanks again. It looks like a good match for the price. The G25-550 would be sweet, but much more costly.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PZ said:


> Thanks again. It looks like a good match for the price. The G25-550 would be sweet, but much more costly.


Yes, I think it a very good match for 2.0L displacement.


----------



## calder (Jun 8, 2003)

Wish I would've waited and went with a G25-550 but here is my GTX2867 gen 2 build on a 20AE GTI! Still working on tuning but the spool is out of this world..

Fully built head, valve job, p&p etc.
Supertech Valves
IE Springs + Retainers
Cat 3651 Cams
GTX2867r
DW 750cc Injects
DW Fuel Pump


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

calder said:


> Wish I would've waited and went with a G25-550 but here is my GTX2867 gen 2 build on a 20AE GTI! Still working on tuning but the spool is out of this world..
> 
> Fully built head, valve job, p&p etc.
> Supertech Valves
> ...




Super sweet AWIC setup!!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

calder said:


> Wish I would've waited and went with a G25-550 but here is my GTX2867 gen 2 build on a 20AE GTI! Still working on tuning but the spool is out of this world..
> 
> Fully built head, valve job, p&p etc.
> Supertech Valves
> ...


Super clean! :thumbup:


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Hi John 

Firstly thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge. It’s greatly appreciated. 

It looks like you and I have a similar project car. I have a haldex converted mk1 caddy pickup with a 20v 2.1l (83mm bore , 95.5mm stroker) engine to go in. My plan was to use a hta3582 for drag racing. But now I’m nearly at the point of engine going in and I’m wondering if it will pay for me to hold out for g30-900 or g35-900.

Due to the nature of the longer stroke, I’d initially plan to set Rev limit to8k max.

I have wmi and plan to run primarily on e85. Any chance you’d be able to do a comparison of the g30’s and g35-900 for my use.

Any advice given is appreciated.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Hi John
> 
> Firstly thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge. It’s greatly appreciated.
> 
> ...


I'll be happy to do that. Compare the G35-900 and what other turbo? Your post was came through scrambled ("*comparison of the g30’s and g35-900 for my use*").


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Thanks for the reply. Not sure why my post got a bit scrambled. 

I’ve been thinking either g30-900 or g35-900. I’d also be interested what that compared to my existing turbo a hta 3582.

Thanks again!


----------



## PinnacleTuning (Oct 13, 2019)

mainstayinc aka john, 

hey I posted before that I had a gtx3576r and what my plans where with stock displacement 1.8t. (quickly, je pistons, ie rods, spa twin scroll top mount t3 manifold) after talking to you I decided to sell the turbo. luckily I did sell it. 

my question is, I have a budget of, 1200 bucks. possibly a few hundred dollars more if need be. what twin scroll turbo would you buy if you were in my shoes? by using this thread, and much thanks to you I have narrowed my search down a bit. also keep in mind that my current turbo, the td06, comes into full boost(25psi) at 4500. I want the quickest spooling turbo possible. 

top of the list is as follows 

price-931 dollars
borg warner s252sxe
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
https://agpturbo.com/borg-warner-s252-sx-e-52-61-12709095019/

price-894
Borg Warner S257 SX-E 57/61
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
https://agpturbo.com/borg-warner-s257-sx-e-57-61-12769095003/

price-1099
Borg Warner / AGP S256-RS Turbocharger
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
https://agpturbo.com/borg-warner-agp-s256-rs-turbocharger/

price-1777
GEN2 - Garrett GTX2867R
atp turbo Divided .82 A/R T3
https://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/mercha...=GRT-TBO-785&Category_Code=GG2-2867-T3divided

price-1295 dollars 
agp cw 5257b
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
ball bearing option
https://agpturbo.com/agp-turbo-cw-5257b/

price-749 dollars
agp cw 5457b
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
journal bearings
https://agpturbo.com/agp-turbo-z2-5457b-billet/

price-849 dollars
AGP Turbo Z2 5457E Billet
agp t3 twin scroll hot side .75 a/r 
journal bearings
https://agpturbo.com/agp-turbo-z2-5457e-billet/





if anyone has recommendations I am all years... thank you so much in advance...


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

If you want spool your best bet is the gtx 2867 in that list, imho. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## PinnacleTuning (Oct 13, 2019)

I know the gtx2867r gen two is the best turbo out of that list but my budget is 1200 right now. is there anything close to the gtx2867r in that list? maybe the s252sxe? for me to come up with another 600 bucks is a grind but if it truly is the best by a long shot, then I will do what I need two. 

maybe john, 
can over lay the top two picks out of that list.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PinnacleTuning said:


> I know the gtx2867r gen two is the best turbo out of that list but my budget is 1200 right now. is there anything close to the gtx2867r in that list? maybe the s252sxe? for me to come up with another 600 bucks is a grind but if it truly is the best by a long shot, then I will do what I need two.
> 
> *maybe john,
> can over lay the top two picks out of that list.*


Below I overlaid the BW S252 SXE (RED) and S257 SXE (BLUE) on stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 1781 CC's). As you can see, the S252 SXE will spool a couple hundred RPMs faster than the S257 SXE and is capable of about 62 lbs. of air per minute or 620 HP on a highly tuned setup on pump/race gas or 558 HP on a less efficient setup. Your 500 HP goal is easily attainable with E85 and/or water-methanol injection. However, both of these turbos will spool later as compared to your current TD06-20G turbo.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Thanks for the reply. Not sure why my post got a bit scrambled.
> 
> I’ve been thinking either g30-900 or g35-900. I’d also be interested what that compared to my existing turbo a hta 3582.
> 
> Thanks again!


I don't have a compressor map specific to the HTA 3582R so I am not able to make an accurate comparison between that turbo and the G35-900. Does anyone have a link to this compressor map?

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Hi John

It’s an OwenSdevelopement m-spec (motorsport) turbo. I have requested a compressor map from them. If that fails I guess a comparison against a gtx gen 2 would suffice.

Thanks again


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Hi John
> 
> It’s an OwenSdevelopement m-spec (motorsport) turbo. I have requested a compressor map from them. If that fails I guess a comparison against a gtx gen 2 would suffice.
> 
> Thanks again


Super. Thanks!


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Just had it confirmed. OD don’t supply compressor maps (like FP) on their HTA turbos.

They did confirm a gtx3582 would be the most similar though.

So if you could compare a gtx3582 to both the g30-900 and the g35-900. I’d really appreciate it.

Thanks j


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Hi John
> 
> Firstly thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge. It’s greatly appreciated.
> 
> ...





Avit_now said:


> Just had it confirmed. OD don’t supply compressor maps (like FP) on their HTA turbos.
> 
> They did confirm a gtx3582 would be the most similar though.
> 
> ...


Below I overlaid the G35-900 and the second generation GTX3582R on 2.1L displacement (83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke x 4 cylidners = 2067 CC's). Both turbos are very closely matched with the second generation GTX3582R having a slightly better choke line than the smaller but newer tech G35-900. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.3 or about 33 psi and 8000 RPMs producing 78 lbs. of air per minute or 858 HP on E85/Ethanol (78 x 11) on a highly tuned setup or 819 HP (78 x 10.5) on a less efficient setup. For all out power at the drag strip, the second generation GTX3582R has a slight advantage over the G35-900 at your displacement and boost level. If the HTA 3582R is close to the second generation GTX3582R in terms of spoolup and top end, then I think that is a good choice and would not hold out for the G35-900. Also, the G30-900 and G35-900 have the same compressor map.










BTW that sounds like a very cool project. A Haldex converted MK1 Caddy is no easy project! Do you have a build thread or photos you can share?


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Oh wow that’s really interesting! That being the case I will definitely stick with my hta and look at the larger g35-1050 for the future.

I haven’t done a build thread, as it’s been an ongoing project for a few years. Once engine is in with a base map I’ll post up a build thread, which I hope will be in q1 next year.

Thanks again for your insight! It’s greatly appreciated!

At what stage is your build?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Oh wow that’s really interesting! That being the case I will definitely stick with my hta and look at the larger g35-1050 for the future.
> 
> *I haven’t done a build thread, as it’s been an ongoing project for a few years. Once engine is in with a base map I’ll post up a build thread, which I hope will be in q1 next year.*
> 
> ...


Looking forward to your build thread. As far as my build, it's pretty far along. I haven't posted any updates in the last month but progress is being made. I decided to upgrade my MK1 brake master cylinder and brake booster to an MK4 version. That will go nice with my upgrade Porsche 986 front brakes and MK4 rear brakes. I dropped off an adapter at Bill's shop earlier today that will allow me to use OEM brake lines from the BMC to a Wilwood brake proportioning valve (inspired by Derek Spratt's MK1). Here's Derek Spratt's setup with Wilwood proportining valve (he uses MK2 BMC and booster).










The adapters (Edelmann 262012) will allow me to use MK4 OEM brake lines (see below) and convert from M12x1.0 bubble flare to 3/8-24 inverted flare on the Wilwood proportioning valve.










Hydraulic clutch pedal and DBW pedal assembly are already installed. The next step is to re-install the engine and transmission and cut out the center tunnel. Very exciting.


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Ahh lovely stuff. I’ve got a custom pedal box with all the cylinders on top, to free up a bit more space in the bay. Hoping for a 3.5 or even 4” dp from my top mount manifold.

I want 15’s on mine. So limiting myself to 280mm brakes. Will prob go for wilwood midi’s. I’ve got front sub frame from mk2 and rear end from mk4. 5x100’s all round though.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Ahh lovely stuff. I’ve got a custom pedal box with all the cylinders on top, to free up a bit more space in the bay. Hoping for a 3.5 or even 4” dp from my top mount manifold.
> 
> I want 15’s on mine. So limiting myself to 280mm brakes. Will prob go for wilwood midi’s. I’ve got front sub frame from mk2 and rear end from mk4. 5x100’s all round though.


That's a nice setup. 15 inch wheels look nice on the MK1 and there are a lot more tire choices in that size. Our setups sound pretty similar except that I will be using a reinforcement brace to tie the lower control arms together instead of the MK2 sub frame. Looking forward to any pictures you can post.:thumbup:

EDIT: What transmission do you plan to run?


----------



## Avit_now (Nov 7, 2019)

Yeh the front end is something I’m a bit worried about. But I do also have a chromoly cage that goes from rear space frame right to front turrets that are triangulated horizontally and vertically. So I’m hoping to eliminate as much stretch as possible.

15” = More tire choice, but much less wheel options with 5x100. But I’ve got a set of 15x9 that seem to fit ok.

I’ve got a built 02m with quaife diff a load of strengthening mods and a monster semi helical gearset. With a cg twin plate clutch.

Also have a quaife diff for the rear  

I’ll collate all the pics I have over the last few years and start a thread in the next week or so.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Avit_now said:


> Yeh the front end is something Iâ€™m a bit worried about. But I do also have a chromoly cage that goes from rear space frame right to front turrets that are triangulated horizontally and vertically. So Iâ€™m hoping to eliminate as much stretch as possible.
> 
> 15â€� = More tire choice, but much less wheel options with 5x100. But Iâ€™ve got a set of 15x9 that seem to fit ok.
> 
> ...


Looking forward to that. 

I'm running a G-Force gearset in an 02C transmission with pinion girdle and fifth gear cuff making it a 4-speed. That gets mated to a FEX angle drive from a Škoda Octavia and then to a gen 1 Haldex with Peloquin diff in the rear. I'm also using a twin plate clutch but from Clutch Masters (725). I have hubs that can take either a 4 or 5 bolt wheel allowing me to run both 4x100 or 5x100 wheels. You can always get the hubs drilled for 4x100 if you need more options.

15x9 wheels can take a pretty big tire BTW. I only plan to run 5x8 rims so that limits me to maybe a 225/45R15 tire. But then again this will be primarily a street car at first. I have an 02M backup transmission with a final drive from a Seat Ibiza Cupra TDI I sourced from the UK in case the 02C blows up.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I received the following PM:



Gn0m4 said:


> Morning,
> 
> thanks for your compressor maps in "check out this compressor map and tell me what you think" post.
> I would very gratefully if you could help me with my dilemma.
> ...


That's a nice setup. I think either manifold will work great. As far as the EFR 6258, I overlaid this turbo and the G25-550 with 1.6L displacement (78mm bore x 83.6mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 1598 CC's). As you can see, both turbos will begin to spoolup around 1800 to 2200 RPMs with full spool around 3800 to 4200 RPMs on 1.6L displacement (surge line + 2000 RPMs) or possibly sooner depending on your valvetrain, tuning, wastegate etc. I marked several point corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.7 or around 25 psi at 7000 RPM producing 43 lbs. of air per minute for the EFR 6258 or 430 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 387 (lower limit) on same.
P2/P1=3.0 or around 29 psi at 7000 RPM producing 48 lbs. of air per minute for the G25-550 or 480 HP (upper limit) on pump/race gas or 432 (lower limit) on same.










Either turbo will be a little laggy on 1.6L displacement due to *lack of cubes* but will still be very nice. If you want a really nice setup, then look for a divided cast manifold for the twin-scroll EFR 6258. That could potentially gain you a few hundred RPMs in spoolup over a single-scroll setup. Not sure if they sell an divided manifold for the Mazda B6ZE engine.


----------



## Gn0m4 (May 4, 2009)

mainstayinc said:


> I received the following PM:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks again for your answer.
Should be any noticiable difference between lower and higher mount? I mean because downpipe form difference.
That's the only reason I'm thinking to swap my higher mount oem 6258 to lower one modified 6258.

In other way, would Garrett 2560 be less laggy than 6258? Could you post a graph comparing 2554 and 2560? Thanks!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gn0m4 said:


> Thanks again for your answer.
> *Should be any noticiable difference between lower and higher mount? I mean because downpipe form difference.*
> That's the only reason I'm thinking to swap my higher mount oem 6258 to lower one modified 6258.
> 
> *In other way, would Garrett 2560 be less laggy than 6258? Could you post a graph comparing 2554 and 2560? Thanks!!*


I don't think that there will be much difference between the lower and higher mount manifold as long as your downpipe flows sufficiently. Below I overlaid the GT2560R [RED] and the EFR 6258 [BLUE] on 1.6L displacement. As you can see, the EFR has a better surge line (left side of map) than the older tech GT2560R. You can expect the GT2560R to be more laggy.










Below I overlaid the GT2554R [BLUE] and the GT2560R [RED] on 1.6L displacement for comparison.


----------



## godrifttoday (Nov 28, 2019)

*g25-550 or g25-660*

mainstayinc

Thank you for all the wonderful information on this thread  . I have a KA24det 4 cylinder motor 2400cc and debating on turbo setup my redline is 7000, i currently have a ported head t3/t4 57 trim made 471 on meth and 91 At the moment i only run 14psi which is appx 400 hp , looking to upgrade to a faster spool , debating on g25-550 72. or g25-660 .72 for the added power potential for future needs possibly . wondering if you can plot something out if its worth the extra delay in spool for the 660 ? i would like to know where boost will come on . The car is a track car only , for drifting.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

godrifttoday said:


> mainstayinc
> 
> Thank you for all the wonderful information on this thread  . I have a KA24det 4 cylinder motor 2400cc and debating on turbo setup my redline is 7000, i currently have a ported head t3/t4 57 trim made 471 on meth and 91 At the moment i only run 14psi which is appx 400 hp , looking to upgrade to a faster spool , debating on g25-550 72. or g25-660 .72 for the added power potential for future needs possibly . wondering if you can plot something out if its worth the extra delay in spool for the 660 ? i would like to know where boost will come on . The car is a track car only , for drifting.


Let me check into that and post something later today or tomorrow.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

godrifttoday said:


> mainstayinc
> 
> Thank you for all the wonderful information on this thread  . I have a KA24det 4 cylinder motor 2400cc and debating on turbo setup my redline is 7000, i currently have a ported head t3/t4 57 trim made 471 on meth and 91 At the moment i only run 14psi which is appx 400 hp , looking to upgrade to a faster spool , debating on g25-550 72. or g25-660 .72 for the added power potential for future needs possibly . *wondering if you can plot something out if its worth the extra delay in spool for the 660 ? i would like to know where boost will come on .* The car is a track car only , for drifting.


Below I overlaid the G25-550 and G25-660 on 2.4L displacement (89mm bore x 96mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 2389 CC's). The surge line for the G25-550 comes in between 1000 and 1500 RPMs on 2.4L displacement with full spool between 3000 and 3500 RPMs (surge line + 2000 RPMs). The G25-660 will spool 300 RPMs later on 2.4L displacement. I marked a couple of points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.0 or about 14.5 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 47.5 lbs. of air per minute or 475 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup or 428 HP on a less efficient setup.
P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 7000+ RPMs producing 60 lbs. of air per minute or 600 HP on pump/race gas on a highly tuned setup or 540 HP on a less efficient setup.

I think the G25-660 is a much better fit for 2.4L displacement. The 300 RPMs difference is spoolup is a small price to pay for the additional 100+ HP potential up top.


----------



## Jay-TT660 (Dec 25, 2019)

Hello Mainstayinc

Brilliant thread and very very informative  

I currently have a stock stroke 1.8t ( TT ) running a G25-660 and a few other bits... its making 508bhp @30psi and i see full boost from 4700rpm until 8200rpm on the road , i am currently having a 2.1 stoker built to go in ( 83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke ) and have the option of possibly changing turbos but not sure which one to go for .... options are my current G25-660 0.72a/r or the newer G30-770 0.61a/r . i would like to see boost earlier than i do on the 1.8t setup but defiantly no later . obviously the 660 would give me a lot earlier onset with the 2.1 but what about the 770 compared to my current setup? ... 600bhp+ would be nice but which is the better option on a 2.1 ? car is used mainly on the road with the odd track day thrown in for good measure


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jay-TT660 said:


> Hello Mainstayinc
> 
> Brilliant thread and very very informative
> 
> I currently have a stock stroke 1.8t ( TT ) running a G25-660 and a few other bits... its making 508bhp @30psi and i see full boost from 4700rpm until 8200rpm on the road , i am currently having a 2.1 stoker built to go in ( 83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke ) and have the option of possibly changing turbos but not sure which one to go for .... options are my current G25-660 0.72a/r or the newer G30-770 0.61a/r . i would like to see boost earlier than i do on the 1.8t setup but defiantly no later . obviously the 660 would give me a lot earlier onset with the 2.1 but what about the 770 compared to my current setup? ... 600bhp+ would be nice but which is the better option on a 2.1 ? car is used mainly on the road with the odd track day thrown in for good measure


Let me check into that and post something in the next day or two.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Jay-TT660 (Dec 25, 2019)

Cheers John , i appreciate that 

If its any help i have a speed sensor installed on my current setup and at 30psi @ 8000 rpm its reading 153k rpm... the 660 can do 165k so garret say


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jay-TT660 said:


> Cheers John , i appreciate that
> 
> If its any help i have a speed sensor installed on my current setup and *at 30psi @ 8000 rpm its reading 153k rpm*... the 660 can do 165k so garret say


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jay-TT660 said:


> Hello Mainstayinc
> 
> Brilliant thread and very very informative
> 
> I currently have a stock stroke 1.8t ( TT ) running a G25-660 and a few other bits... its making 508bhp @30psi and i see full boost from 4700rpm until 8200rpm on the road , i am currently having a 2.1 stoker built to go in ( 83mm bore x 95.5mm stroke ) and have the option of possibly changing turbos but not sure which one to go for .... options are my current G25-660 0.72a/r or the newer G30-770 0.61a/r . i would like to see boost earlier than i do on the 1.8t setup but defiantly no later . obviously the 660 would give me a lot earlier onset with the 2.1 but what about the 770 compared to my current setup? ... 600bhp+ would be nice but which is the better option on a 2.1 ? car is used mainly on the road with the odd track day thrown in for good measure


QUICK ANSWER: According to my calculations, you will gain about 350 RPMs in spoolup if you increase your displacement from 1.8L to 2.1L and keep your current turbo. If you upgrade to the G30-770 and increase your displacement from 1.8L to 2.1L, then you will lose about 125 to 150 RPMs over your current setup (1.8L + G25-660). However, you can gain an additional 100+ HP with the G30-770 over your current turbo. IMO a loss of 150 RPMs in spoolup is not much compared to the 100+ HP gain you can potentially have up top.


----------



## Jay-TT660 (Dec 25, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> QUICK ANSWER: According to my calculations, you will gain about 350 RPMs in spoolup if you increase your displacement from 1.8L to 2.1L and keep your current turbo. If you upgrade to the G30-770 and increase your displacement from 1.8L to 2.1L, then you will lose about 125 to 150 RPMs over your current setup (1.8L + G25-660). However, you can gain an additional 100+ HP with the G30-770 over your current turbo. IMO a loss of 150 RPMs in spoolup is not much compared to the 100+ HP gain you can potentially have up top.


Hello John 

Thanks for the reply

that's very interesting , i agree and would be willing to lose the 150rpm to gain much more up top... sounds like a fair deal to me  i imagine with it being a 2.1 over a 1.8 it will have a fair amount more torque while off boost so should in theory drive better anyway and when on boost should hit way way harder


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jay-TT660 said:


> Hello John
> 
> Thanks for the reply
> 
> that's very interesting , i agree and would be willing to lose the 150rpm to gain much more up top... sounds like a fair deal to me  *i imagine with it being a 2.1 over a 1.8 it will have a fair amount more torque while off boost so should in theory drive better anyway and when on boost should hit way way harder*


Yes, absolutely. All my 1.8T are stroked out to 2.1L for that reason. See this link for further discussion: Stroker opinions


----------



## TRAV-KE55 (Dec 28, 2019)

Hi Mainstayc
After abit of advice please. Building a circuit race car for a catagory that requires all turbo cars to use a 36mm intake restrictor 45mm upstream of compressor wheel to limit power.
My intention is to build a 1794cc 4 cyl Toyota engine, 12 to 12.5:1 compression e85 fuel. I've been thinking of a g25-550. 49ar or. 72ar turbo and limit boost to under 18psi to try to keep intake heat down, run a good intercooler and still have some ign timing. Do you think this turbo will be suitable or suggest a alternative.
Regards 
Travis


----------



## TRAV-KE55 (Dec 28, 2019)

Forgot to mention restrictor tends to start holding back 1.8lt engine around 6000rpm mark on engines with high boost levels(25psi ect)
Thanks
Travis


----------



## Jay-TT660 (Dec 25, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes, absolutely. All my 1.8T are stroked out to 2.1L for that reason. See this link for further discussion: Stroker opinions



ah yes i remember coming across that thread a few month back when i was deciding to go storker or not , pretty sure your graphs played a helping hand in deciding which route to go :thumbup: pretty sure it was piston speeds i was researching that took me to the thread... out of interest what rpm are you taking your 2.1 to ? looking forward to the compressor maps when you get the time


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jay-TT660 said:


> ah yes i remember coming across that thread a few month back when i was deciding to go storker or not , pretty sure your graphs played a helping hand in deciding which route to go :thumbup: pretty sure it was piston speeds i was researching that took me to the thread... out of interest what rpm are you taking your 2.1 to ? looking forward to the compressor maps when you get the time


I plan to redline between 8500 and 9000 RPMs on my 2.1L stroker. Although I don't think I will make any additional power beyond 8000 to 8500 RPMs. We'll see.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

TRAV-KE55 said:


> Hi Mainstayc
> After abit of advice please. Building a circuit race car for a catagory that requires all turbo cars to use a 36mm intake restrictor 45mm upstream of compressor wheel to limit power.
> My intention is to build a 1794cc 4 cyl Toyota engine, 12 to 12.5:1 compression e85 fuel. I've been thinking of a g25-550. 49ar or. 72ar turbo and limit boost to under 18psi to try to keep intake heat down, run a good intercooler and still have some ign timing. Do you think this turbo will be suitable or suggest a alternative.
> Regards
> Travis


Let me check into that and post something in the next day or two.


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

Good evening,

may i bother you with a different but similar task this time 



> N42B20, 2,0 l (1995 cm3), 84 mm × 90 mm, 4, 105 kW (143 PS) bei 6000, 200 Nm bei 3750


I´m currently working on the ecu and trans controller of a BMW E46 with a 2L i4 engine. The engine shall be build as a torque monster. The gearbox is rated up to 500Nm, however that´s nothing i expect to break. I would just love to have ~300hp with as fast spool as possible. So a nice little twin scroll charger would be best. Does anyone happen to have some info on the current Golf 7R turbo which seems to be a very good alternative? 

Other then that, any other advice that charger to pick so i´m roughly at 400Nm from down low up to 5000-5500rpm?

Kind regards
Daniel


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

TRAV-KE55 said:


> Hi Mainstayc
> After abit of advice please. Building a circuit race car for a catagory that requires all turbo cars to use a 36mm intake restrictor 45mm upstream of compressor wheel to limit power.
> My intention is to build a 1794cc 4 cyl Toyota engine, 12 to 12.5:1 compression e85 fuel. I've been thinking of a g25-550. 49ar or. 72ar turbo and limit boost to under 18psi to try to keep intake heat down, run a good intercooler and still have some ign timing. Do you think this turbo will be suitable or suggest a alternative.
> Regards
> Travis


I've been trying to post my response from my office computer but for some reason I can't. I'm currently on my wife's laptop which seems to work but I don't have access to my Excel spreadsheet and compressor maps. I will continue to try and post from my office computer. Sorry for the delay. I'm using the Brave browser. Not sure if that has anything to do with it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> Good evening,
> 
> may i bother you with a different but similar task this time
> 
> ...


Sorry. I'm not able to post a response at the moment. My browser (office computer) is not allowing me to respond to your inquiry. I'll try to get that sorted out and post something soon.


----------



## PanosS3 (Jan 2, 2020)

Hello mainstayinc!
Ilove read all the 39 pages of this thread,and iam very impressed of your knowledge and the willing to share it with everyone!!! Like most of the people here, iam looking for an advice to choose the correct turbo.
The car is a EUDM subaru STI 2004 model,EJ257 engine block(100mm bore x 79mm stroke).Opened,widened,2liter heads,+1mm valves and spec c camshafts.
Compression is measured 8,5.Unequal excaust manifold from rogerclark ,and redline is at 8000rpm.
Before a year my turbo was a bolton ATP3071 (very old turbo).The power that i had was 450 hp with a very quick spool, a very good powerband, and boost at 24 psi.
My knew turbo is G25-660,0,92 A/R Vband,i lost some spool(200rpm) and my maximum power went to 530ps at29psi..I am disapointed with that power,i thought that i could reach 580ps at least( on the same dyno dynamics).
I would like to achieve 600 ps with the minimum lag.Can you compare me please the knew G30-770 ,with my current turbo? Do i have to go with 0, 83A/R,or i could go with the 0,61A/R?,boost no mor than 27 psi
Thanks in advance 
Panos


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PanosS3 said:


> Hello mainstayinc!
> Ilove read all the 39 pages of this thread,and iam very impressed of your knowledge and the willing to share it with everyone!!! Like most of the people here, iam looking for an advice to choose the correct turbo.
> The car is a EUDM subaru STI 2004 model,EJ257 engine block(100mm bore x 79mm stroke).Opened,widened,2liter heads,+1mm valves and spec c camshafts.
> Compression is measured 8,5.Unequal excaust manifold from rogerclark ,and redline is at 8000rpm.
> ...


Thanks for your interest. I am finally able to post a response here from my office computer. However, I am not able to use imgur to host pictures at the moment. I get a "Something went wrong with CREATE_ALBUM_FAIL. Please try later" error every time I try to upload a compressor map. I will be busy for the next month or two doing renovations. So, I am not available to post any response or comments here for the time being. Sorry about that. Hopefully, in February or March I will have time to post stuff and imgur will be working by then.

I will try to post updates on my 2.1L MK1 + GTX3584RS project though (assuming a can get imgur to work). So, you can check that out in the meantime. Others can feel free to comment here in this thread if they want.

-John (mainstayinc)


----------



## inline6ST (Feb 9, 2020)

Hi John (mainstayinc),

Thoroughly enjoyed reading your replies to the variety of turbo questions posted. 

I have a question about a turbo selection for my BMW 135i N54 with inline 6 with 2979cc. Stock engine ran a single turbo custom tubular manifold with v-band connect and single scroll GTX3584RS 0.83 turbine housing for around 500rwkw (670whp). Add 20-25% to convert to USA Dynojet, so approx 840whp on E85 at 30psi. 93 shows approx. 710whp(US) @ 24psi. The GTX3584RS hits 20psi at 4000rpm. Engine blew while tuning and starting to refine the tune and turn it up. 

I have a new engine back in the car with closed deck, 9.8:1 CP pistons 84.5mm bore / 89.6mm stroke, Carrillo rods, billet crank, stage 3 VAC motorsports head, Schrick hi-lift cams, big fueling, big intercooler and straight through 4inch bi-modal exhaust. No restrictions. RPM will be 8100. Anyway, I digress. At 840whp and above we start breaking and use up all sorts peripheral items, so I would like to limit my whp to the odd pull at 840whp (maybe). Happy to run around between 700-750whp max with 93 and 20% E85 blend. I want to increase spool significantly. Twin scroll wont fit my RHD car due to severe space restrictions so stuck with single scroll.

I am considering the gammut from GTX3076R Gen2 (probably too small), GTX3576R Gen2, GTX3582R Gen2. A G30-900 or G35-900 are also of interest.

What do you think looking at the numbers?

Thanks in advance, Mike (inline6ST)


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

inline6ST said:


> Hi John (mainstayinc),
> 
> Thoroughly enjoyed reading your replies to the variety of turbo questions posted.
> 
> ...


Hello. That sounds like a really nice setup. I would seriously consider a twin-scroll setup with any inline 6 cylinder application. Reason being is that they are easy to do (combine cylinders 1, 2, 3 into one scroll and 4, 5, 6 into the other scroll), and they can significantly reduce cylinder temperatures due to better exhaust scavenging. That will allow you to safely run more boost and/or reduce the chance of detonation. Also, if done correctly, they can increase spool time. By "correctly", I mean keep the primary runners as short as possible and the whole unit compact. I had clearance issues with my twin-scroll 2.1L 4 cylinder when I first installed into my 1984 MK1 GTI Rabbit. Solution was to cut out the offending metal on the inner fender and part of the frame rail to make room for the turbo.

As far at the second generation GTX3582R and the G30/35-900, you are only going to gain a few hundred RPMs in spoolup on 3.0L displacement while losing 75 to 100 HP up top. You will increase spool significantly with the second generation GTX3076R/GTX3576R but will lose 225 to 250 HP up top (sorry, I don't have time to put together compressor maps for you). I would stick with the GTX3584RS (in T4 twin-scroll if possible) as having some delay in spoolup will actually help preserve your drive train and bottom end components.

NOTE: If you decide to seriously consider a twin-scroll setup (I don't think you will) then have someone custom fabricate a compact manifold for you instead of buying an off-the-shelf solution. This can be made very compact same as BMW N55 OEM manifold:










EDIT: Interesting article: Twin Scroll vs. Single Scroll Turbo Test


----------



## inline6ST (Feb 9, 2020)

Thanks for your answer, John.

My manifold is custom built on a RHD car. Steering shaft and box are severely restrictive, even for a single scroll. 
Plenty of twin scroll stuff around for LHD as there is room with steering on the opposite side.
Vehicle regulations in Australia are strict and prohibitive so touching frame rails has huge red tape issues with compliance, registration and insurance.

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

inline6ST said:


> Thanks for your answer, John.
> 
> My manifold is custom built on a RHD car. Steering shaft and box are severely restrictive, even for a single scroll.
> Plenty of twin scroll stuff around for LHD as there is room with steering on the opposite side.
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## alexs1 (Mar 8, 2020)

*n55 advice*

Hi John, wanna thank you for amazing advises which helped me a lot in understanding a way to select a turbo.
I would be appreciate for your advice on n55 bmw 3.0 gasoline engine turbo selection.
They are using reverse rotation turbo, in which I wanna cast G25-660 or g30-770 or gtx3076rg2 turbo to have a possibility reach ~600chp with near OEM or better spool.
Having few questions to you.
1. Does gtx3076rg2 has big difference in throttle reaction comparing to smaller but pretty similar g25-660.
2. Can you please overlay g25-660/g30-770/gtx3076rg2 to get visible understanding of benefits and downsides of these candidates.
3. Any recommendations are welcome.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

alexs1 said:


> Hi John, wanna thank you for amazing advises which helped me a lot in understanding a way to select a turbo.
> I would be appreciate for your advice on n55 bmw 3.0 gasoline engine turbo selection.
> They are using reverse rotation turbo, in which I wanna cast G25-660 or g30-770 or gtx3076rg2 turbo to have a possibility reach ~600chp with near OEM or better spool.
> Having few questions to you.
> ...


Thanks for your interest. I wish I had some time to properly address your questions. I just don't have time ATM to put together the compressor maps and other info. Maybe others can address questions 1 and 3.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## inline6ST (Feb 9, 2020)

If its a stock N55 engine and left hand drive then VVT in the US must be close to releasing their single turbo kit with a GTX3076R Gen 2. Motiv single turbo kit is also good with the GTX3076R Gen 2 or the 3576R Gen2. Great turbo choices and bang for buck as they are cheap with the introduction of the G series. G25-660 is too small, G30-770 is the 3071R replacement. Most forums I read indicate they almost behave like the next Gen 2 up in the series, so more like a GTX3076R. However, I still think it may be a little too small for a 3lt inline six but I am far from the go to turbo guy, hence my questions to mainstayinc.

G30-770 might get you happy but I'd chose a GTX 3576R Gen2 or go for the G30-900 for some fast spool and a better top end.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

inline6ST said:


> If its a stock N55 engine and left hand drive then VVT in the US must be close to releasing their single turbo kit with a GTX3076R Gen 2. Motiv single turbo kit is also good with the GTX3076R Gen 2 or the 3576R Gen2. Great turbo choices and bang for buck as they are cheap with the introduction of the G series. *G25-660 is too small, G30-770 is the 3071R replacement.* Most forums I read indicate they almost behave like the next Gen 2 up in the series, so more like a GTX3076R. However, I still think it may be a little too small for a 3lt inline six but I am far from the go to turbo guy, hence my questions to mainstayinc.
> 
> G30-770 might get you happy but I'd chose a GTX 3576R Gen2 or go for the G30-900 for some fast spool and a better top end.


I agree. The G30-660 is too small for 3.0L displacement. The second generation GTX3076R or GTX3576R is a much better fit at your displacement. I took a quick look at the compressor maps for the GTX30/3576R and the surge line comes in at 1200 to 1900 RPMs. So, full spool should be achieved between 3200 and 3900 RPMs if not sooner at 3.0L displacement (surge line + 2000 RPMs). The choke line for this combination comes in at 6400 RPMs giving you a nice 4500 RPM powerband. As inline6ST said, you may want to consider the G30-770. You will gain a few hundred RPMs spoolup with that turbo and have better top end. The G30-900 has the same surge line as the second generation GTX30/3576R at *least on paper* but has way more top end.


----------



## TRAV-KE55 (Dec 28, 2019)

Originally Posted by TRAV-KE55 
Hi Mainstayc
After abit of advice please. Building a circuit race car for a catagory that requires all turbo cars to use a 36mm intake restrictor 45mm upstream of compressor wheel to limit power. My intention is to build a 1794cc 4 cyl Toyota engine, 12 to 12.5:1 compression e85 fuel. I've been thinking of a g25-550. 49ar or. 72ar turbo and limit boost to under 18psi to try to keep intake heat down, run a good intercooler and still have some ign timing. Do you think this turbo will be suitable or suggest a alternative. Regards Travis
I've been trying to post my response from my office computer but for some reason I can't. I'm currently on my wife's laptop which seems to work but I don't have access to my Excel spreadsheet and compressor maps. I will continue to try and post from my office computer. Sorry for the delay. I'm using the Brave browser. Not sure if that has anything to do with it.

Hi John, how did you go? What was your conclusion? 
Regards
Travis


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

TRAV-KE55 said:


> Originally Posted by TRAV-KE55
> Hi Mainstayc
> After abit of advice please. Building a circuit race car for a catagory that requires all turbo cars to use a 36mm intake restrictor 45mm upstream of compressor wheel to limit power. My intention is to build a 1794cc 4 cyl Toyota engine, 12 to 12.5:1 compression e85 fuel. I've been thinking of a g25-550. 49ar or. 72ar turbo and limit boost to under 18psi to try to keep intake heat down, run a good intercooler and still have some ign timing. Do you think this turbo will be suitable or suggest a alternative. Regards Travis
> I've been trying to post my response from my office computer but for some reason I can't. I'm currently on my wife's laptop which seems to work but I don't have access to my Excel spreadsheet and compressor maps. I will continue to try and post from my office computer. Sorry for the delay. I'm using the Brave browser. Not sure if that has anything to do with it.
> ...


My office computer is up and running no problem. A far as the G25-550 on 1.8L with 0.49 or 0.72 A/R, I think that's a great fit. In fact, I don't think you are going to find anything much better than this. I don't have time to post a new compressor map for this setup. But if you search back in this thread, you will find the G25-550 on stock 1.8L displacement (1781 CC's) which is virtually identical to your setup. As far as the 36mm restrictor plate, I am not sure if that is going to effect performance or not. I would have to run a few calculations to be sure. However, I don't think it is going to effect your setup on 1.8L displacement. There are some good calculators out there that calculate limiting port velocity based on the bore, stroke and RPM of the engine. However, since this is a turbo setup, you would have to take into account your boost level. You can do that by finding an equivalent displacement by multiplying by 1 + boost level [1 + 18/14.7 psi x displacement]).


----------



## Gn0m4 (May 4, 2009)

mainstayinc said:


> ....
> 
> If you want a really nice setup, then look for a divided cast manifold for the twin-scroll EFR 6258. That could potentially gain you a few hundred RPMs in spoolup over a single-scroll setup. Not sure if they sell an divided manifold for the Mazda B6ZE engine.


Hi again buddy.
I´m talking with some UK based manifold manufacturers and all of them said to me that T4 TS is too large for a small 1.6 engine that does not poduce a lot of exhaust gas. They think I will actually find worse response times over a manifold with a smaller flange such as a T25.
What do you think?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gn0m4 said:


> Hi again buddy.
> I´m talking with some UK based manifold manufacturers and all of them said to me that T4 TS is too large for a small 1.6 engine that does not poduce a lot of exhaust gas. They think I will actually find worse response times over a manifold with a smaller flange such as a T25.
> What do you think?


The T4 TS is a better fit for 6 and 8 cylinder engines. I have a T3 TS on my 2.1L setup which is a nice fit. T3 TS is better for 4 cylinder applications.


----------



## Oakenvalley (Oct 17, 2019)

Any chance of seeing the G25-660 against S252 SX-E, EFR 7163 and GT 3071 V2 on the Audi 2.2 20V?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Oakenvalley said:


> Any chance of seeing the G25-660 against S252 SX-E, EFR 7163 and GT 3071 V2 on the Audi 2.2 20V?


Unfortunately I am still very busy with renovations and other stuff at the moment. Check back maybe in a month or two.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Oakenvalley (Oct 17, 2019)

No problem, keep safe and stay healthy


----------



## GSXRISSA (Apr 9, 2020)

*GSXR 1000 Turbo*

Very interesting thread, very insightful, thank you John.

I had a go at doing it myself, but I have a feeling my calculations are off, its not something I've done before, and maths isn't my forte.

I am planning a GSXR 1000 turbo street/drag build, as you are already aware, there are a number of complexities when turboing something that comes factory N/A, being a motorbike, there are additional complexities, some of which is packaging.

I've been looking at some of the issues that will be faced, such as plumbing, cooling, oiling, fueling etc... all of which influence turbo choice. My current research has led me to a S200 SX-E 7070 aka S252 with a .82 T3 housing from AGP or a S257 aka 7670 with a .82 T3 rear both v band single scroll.

I have narrowed it down to these turbos for a number of reasons, these will need to be addressed regardless of which turbo I chose. I plan on revving the motor to 14,000-14,500rpm and would like to have a good powerband from at least 8,000rpm

This includes my preference for an oil only turbo, it is difficult enough to get it correctly oiled, let alone adding water which I would not like to do unless there is enough of an advantage to go down that road, also my preference is to not run a water jacketed core without water. These two turbos seem to have a reputation for being reliable and not have issues with oiling which is important.

Intercooling, this is an issue to get working correctly, with most going heat exchangers given the limited space, some dont even run a radiator for this WTA system, rather just 'icing' the tank (works for drag bikes, not street). My currently plans are to NOT run an intercooler and use meth injection (own circuit) instead, so i think it is key to run a larger then would be otherwise required, so that the power achieved is with less pressure (PSI). I aim on running about 5 psi waste gate spring, which will also be low boost without meth injection and about 15psi high boost which will only be run with meth injection.

Aim is to have a setup capable of 350-400 wheel HP on high boost, I plan on having the AFRs at about 11.5-11.8 when on boost.

Please see the table I have prepared, I have used BW Matchbot, I dare say my volumetric efficiencies are off and a number of my calculations may not be as accurate as it could be.

Now I have given you my life story, can you recommend a better turbo for what I want? or do you think the S252 is a good/best option.


----------



## GSXRISSA (Apr 9, 2020)

*Edit, the above image does not show high/low boost quoted however, the blue box is 1 bar boost.

Also the engine will be left a 1 litre.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GSXRISSA said:


> Very interesting thread, very insightful, thank you John.
> 
> I had a go at doing it myself, but I have a feeling my calculations are off, its not something I've done before, and maths isn't my forte.
> 
> ...


Great work! and a very cool project. That will be a killer setup. If I have time, I will check the Matchbot map against my numbers and give you some feedback. Also, there are a number of turbos I would recommend in that range including:

Garrett G25-550
Garrett G25-660
Garrett GTX3071R 2Gen
EFR 7163

350 to 400 WHP should be easily achievable with any of those turbos on 1.0L reving to 14,000-14,500 RPMs.

-John (mainstayinc)


----------



## GSXRISSA (Apr 9, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Great work! and a very cool project. That will be a killer setup. If I have time, I will check the Matchbot map against my numbers and give you some feedback. Also, there are a number of turbos I would recommend in that range including:
> 
> Garrett G25-550
> Garrett G25-660
> ...


Thanks John, I rechecked some of the engine efficiency numbers, I ran the above with 0% intercooling, I dare say it will be a lot better with meth.

I would love to run a new G25 Garrett turbo, but from what I've seen they require quite a lot off boost to get the numbers, also they are water cooled. These are two things I would like to avoid if not necessary. I would be happy with 5psi if it could be ran safely without meth/intercooling and about 1 bar with the meth.

The same issue with the BW EFR turbos, they ate marketed with the iron cores can be run without water cooling, I have heard mixed things though. 

I look forward to seeing your numbers as it has been hard finding information/figures for my setup.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

GSXRISSA said:


> Thanks John, I rechecked some of the engine efficiency numbers, I ran the above with 0% intercooling, I dare say it will be a lot better with meth.
> 
> I would love to run a new G25 Garrett turbo, but from what I've seen they require quite a lot off boost to get the numbers, also they are water cooled. These are two things I would like to avoid if not necessary. I would be happy with 5psi if it could be ran safely without meth/intercooling and about 1 bar with the meth.
> 
> ...


You don't need to run coolant to the turbo. 

I never have on my Garrett's and 240,000+ miles later on my current, runs perfectly. Even Garrett released a statement that it isn't necessary but only a precaution due to people beating on a car then shutting it down immediately....

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## GSXRISSA (Apr 9, 2020)

Vegeta Gti said:


> You don't need to run coolant to the turbo.
> 
> I never have on my Garrett's and 240,000+ miles later on my current, runs perfectly. Even Garrett released a statement that it isn't necessary but only a precaution due to people beating on a car then shutting it down immediately....
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I have heard that from a number of people (engine builders included) however, Garrett says https://www.garrettmotion.com/racin...-a-turbocharger/water-cooling-for-your-turbo/

My preference is to run a oil only turbo if it is about as good as a water jacketed one. However, if there is enough of an advantage to run a ball bearing water jacketed one, I will do so. 

I've been doing some more research and I think going a water to air intercooler/heat exchanger is the way to go considering some of the packaging constraints of the meth injection systems currently available, I may just add meth injection to the setup in the future once I find a reliable enough compact system. 

This again could alter my turbo choice as I would be more comfortable running more boost in the future if I feel the need for more power without having to buy parts twice. 

The bike in question is a 2008 gsxr 1000, I don't think I mentioned this earlier, will be running degree'd factory cam shafts. 

AGP also offer the S252 in a .63 T3 open turbine, this could make it more competitive in my application.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 21, 2019)

Can someone compare the new g30-660 with the old gtx3071gen2? the target is 620 hp from 2.0 engine ( s3 tfsi ) and turbine pressure less than 2 bar. Thanks


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Can someone compare the new g30-660 with the old gtx3071gen2? the target is 620 hp from 2.0 engine ( s3 tfsi ) and turbine pressure less than 2 bar. Thanks


As far as I know, there is not a separate compressor map for the G30-660. Below, is a comparison of the G25-660 [BLUE] versus the second generation GTX3071R [RED] on 2.0L (1984 CC's) I did a while ago.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 21, 2019)

as far i can see both turbo have the same spool but in the end g25 ( g30 ) gives better result. Is that correct?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> as far i can see both turbo have the same spool but in the end g25 ( g30 ) gives better result. Is that correct?


The G30-660 will probably spool about the same as the second generation GTX3071R if I had to guess. Top end will be about the same or maybe slightly better. Also depends on turbine A/R.


----------



## mars2 (Sep 16, 2008)

Hello sorry to bother you.

I have a VW T6 TSI van it's a heavy car with a AE888 gen2 engine ( same as GTI Mk6 EA888 Gen1 with added variable valve lift)
https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=119
I would like if possible to know what max HP I can get with a B&W K04-064 vs EFR6258 with E85.
I have fueling supporting mode for E85 ( LPFP, HPFP and Injectors)
My target is 420 Hp

At what Rpm can I expect full boost.
Thank in advance for the work.


----------



## unoxidyne (Apr 25, 2020)

Hi mainstayinc, great thread and I also admire your consistency in being here for community. 

I have qestion related to 2.0 TFSI EA113, 1:9.2 Wossner forged pistons, and I see many answers for this engine, but have a tough time finding answer to comparison between GTX3071 Gen2 Twin scroll, GTX 3076 Gen2 Twin scroll and single scroll G25-660. I am looking for lowest spool and being able to hit around 550hp, with emphasis on powerband. Also an option, my mechanic actually recommends is GTX3071 Gen 2 with Tial housing, he claims we could get better spool without twin scroll. Just an opinion based on everything you have seen will help immensely. Thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mars2 said:


> Hello sorry to bother you.
> 
> I have a VW T6 TSI van it's a heavy car with a AE888 gen2 engine ( same as GTI Mk6 EA888 Gen1 with added variable valve lift)
> https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=119
> ...





unoxidyne said:


> Hi mainstayinc, great thread and I also admire your consistency in being here for community.
> 
> I have qestion related to 2.0 TFSI EA113, 1:9.2 Wossner forged pistons, and I see many answers for this engine, but have a tough time finding answer to comparison between GTX3071 Gen2 Twin scroll, GTX 3076 Gen2 Twin scroll and single scroll G25-660. I am looking for lowest spool and being able to hit around 550hp, with emphasis on powerband. Also an option, my mechanic actually recommends is GTX3071 Gen 2 with Tial housing, he claims we could get better spool without twin scroll. Just an opinion based on everything you have seen will help immensely. Thanks!


Super busy at the moment. Maybe others can chime in with some answers.

-John (mainstayinc)


----------



## mars2 (Sep 16, 2008)

I fully understand thank's for the answer.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mars2 said:


> I fully understand thank's for the answer.


:thumbup:


----------



## cc6mt (Dec 13, 2013)

mars2 said:


> Hello sorry to bother you.
> 
> I have a VW T6 TSI van it's a heavy car with a AE888 gen2 engine ( same as GTI Mk6 EA888 Gen1 with added variable valve lift)
> https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=119
> ...


Hi there fellow TSI owner, depending on your tuner and your location to source the turbo option you have some options, efr 6758 would be better choice (in my opinion) vs efr 6258 for over 400hp.

K04-64 will not get you more than ~350 flywheel hp from what I've read on forums but there are some upgraded k04 like tte 420 and tte 480 which have upgraded internals to get over 400hp.
Look up online for these turbo and some vendors show maps comparing stock to upgrade hp/tq delivery.

You can scroll up few pages and find the map that was done for my request on efr 6258 for tsi gen 1 engine and read how quick the efr turbo spools.

I chose to go with efr 6258 since i don't plan to go over 400hp (fwd cc gen1) while not having delayed spool vs k04-064 upgrade that has been shown to max spool in order to make 350ish hp and engine exhaust valves can float due to a slightly weaker exhaust valve spring on some tsi gen 1 engines which will not be an issue with less restrictive efr6258 turbo.
My goal is 350whp without upgrading the fuel system.

Due to covid'19 I'm still not tuned so can't tell you much from my experience.


----------



## alexro999 (May 23, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> The EFR 7163 in a twin-scroll configuration will definitely be more responsive and spool quicker than the G25-660 single-scroll. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement (1998 CCs). As you can see, the surge line for the twin-scroll EFR 7163 is 500 RPMs further to the left than the single scroll G25-660. You can expect the EFR 7163 to start to spoolup 500 RPMs sooner than the G25-660 with full spool coming in below 4000 RPMs. I marked two points as follows:
> 
> P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 47 lbs. of air per minute (350 KW) on pump/race gas
> P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 54 lbs. of air per minute (400 KW) on pump/race gas
> ...


Thank you for your help. 
I chose the g25-660
Just want to let you know I made 405rwkw on 29psi on e85 and we have run out of fuel. 
This turbo has much more left in it. Very very impressive


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

alexro999 said:


> Thank you for your help.
> I chose the g25-660
> Just want to let you know I made 405rwkw on 29psi on e85 and we have run out of fuel.
> This turbo has much more left in it. Very very impressive


:thumbup: Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## mars2 (Sep 16, 2008)

cc6mt said:


> Hi there fellow TSI owner, depending on your tuner and your location to source the turbo option you have some options, efr 6758 would be better choice (in my opinion) vs efr 6258 for over 400hp.
> 
> K04-64 will not get you more than ~350 flywheel hp from what I've read on forums but there are some upgraded k04 like tte 420 and tte 480 which have upgraded internals to get over 400hp.
> Look up online for these turbo and some vendors show maps comparing stock to upgrade hp/tq delivery.
> ...


Thank's for your answer.
Like I said I will be on 100% E85. I have Golf 7R injector, VIS stage 2 HPFP and AEM 340L/H E85 LPFP.
The max my fueling mode can supply on E85 is a bit more than 400HP
So may be the K04-064 can come close to 400Hp on E85. K04-064 is plug and play.
Or I could goto this EFR/K04 Hybrid: https://www.turbozentrum.de/search-eng?qs=EFR+vag+tfsi

PS: my Engine is EA888.2 ( TSI Gen2) the one with variable valve lift. I don't know if those have the weak exhaust valve spring.


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

Hey John - hope you're doing well. Wanted to see if you could plot another turbo as I'm interested in upgrading to the new G series and want to see a comparison between the G25-660 v. G30-770 on my set-up. Not that it matters for your charts but I have upgraded my injectors from 850cc to 1050cc. My tuner (Dave at Motoza Performance) said based on what he's seeing, I'm flowing 46lbs/min so based on the compressor map for a GT3071r, I am nearing my existing turbos limits - even though I have Al's V2 wheel which flows more. Your previous charts are below, Thanks in advance!!

Original Post from John: I received a PM from Nick aka vdub18njp:


I re-read through your build thread. That's a great project. CA 91 octane is not the best for a turbo car, but WMI should help out quite a bit. I don't have a map specific to Arnold's V2 compressor, so your turbo will be slightly different. Quite a few people run or have run his V2 GT3071R with great success. Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the second generation GTX3071R on 1848 CC's (82.5mm bore x 86.4mm stroke). The second generation GTX3071R is capable of an additional 100 HP over the original GT3071R. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.0 or about 29 psi at 7000 RPMs producing just over 55 lbs. of air per minute or 550 HP on pump/race gas or 650 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup. The surge line (left side of map) for the second generation GTX3071R comes in 425 RPMs later than the GT3071R. However, Arnold's V2 compressor wheel may have a surge line similar to the second generation GTX3071R. In that case, you may not lose that much spoolup going to the second generation GTX3071R.










Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the second generation GTX3076R on 1848 CC's if you want to step up to a bigger turbo. The surge line I (left side of map) for the second generation GTX3076R comes in 650 RPMs later than the GT3071R. I marked a couple of points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=3.4 or 35 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP on pump/race gas or 756 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.
P2/P1=3.1 or 31 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 65+ lbs. of air per minute or 650+ HP on pump/race gas or 780+ HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.










You may also want to consider the G25-660. Below I overlaid the GT3071R and the G25-660 on 1848 CC's. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are virtually identical between the older GT3071R and the G25-660. So you can expect not to lose any spoolup going to the new-tech Garrett. However, the G25-660 is capable of an additional 100 HP over the GT3071R. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.2 or 32 psi at 7000 RPMs producing 59 lbs. of air per minute or 590 HP on pump/race gas or 710 HP on a well-tuned Ethanol/E85 setup.



















I really like the G25-660 on your setup. I don't think you will be disappointed if you decide to go this route.

-John (mainstayinc).[/QUOTE]


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Cjtaylor1985 (Nov 9, 2018)

Having spent a good amount of time reading this thread, countless other reviews and build threads i've narrowed it down to two potential turbos based upon my budget and power goals:

Gen 2 GTX2867R 0.72 V-band
G25-660 0.72 V-band

Ideally i'd have the 550 in that list, but isn't available from the manufacturers i'm in contact with.

I've got a rebuilt engine (standard bore) with IE rods, Supertech valves and springs etc, should be more than up to the power goal of approx 450 crank HP. This car will be my daily driver, but will be using it for the odd hill climb and track day. So looking for good spool and not necessarily top end peak power. 

What can i expect from these two turbos? Will there by much difference in spool? Appreciate i'm not going to be pushing either turbo to it's max!

Thanks in advance for your help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Cjtaylor1985 said:


> Having spent a good amount of time reading this thread, countless other reviews and build threads i've narrowed it down to two potential turbos based upon my budget and power goals:
> 
> Gen 2 GTX2867R 0.72 V-band
> G25-660 0.72 V-band
> ...


Sorry. Still super busy here. I posted this comparison a while back. Should still be here in this thread. Those turbos have almost identical surge lines. So, you can expect similar spool. However, the G25-660 is capable of an additional 100 HP up top. Go with the G25-660. Check previous pages of this thread for an overlay of the compressor maps.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

I've read previous analysis on G25-550vs660 on 1.8T (2.0 stoker), but I have little bit specific question, if someone could advice me, because I am somewhere between 550 and 660. Not sure.

Setup and things to consider:
- 1.8T 2.0 Stroker with higher compression (1.5bar max boost will be used, even 1.4bar is an option)
- built head, can handle anything, but I would be very happy with power up to 7500rpm if possible (the lowest I would take is 6500, if low end/spool justifies it).
- stock cams, power after 6500rpm will not be optimal compared to different cams, but spool should be pretty good because of compression/stock cams
- Intercooler is not very big 550x230x65 core, (8.2L, but good flow) - on Audi A4 bigger than that needs a lot of cutting. So lower EGT/AIT would be welcome, otherwise I will need bigger IC.
- goal: safe and reliable 420HP-450HP at crank with widest power band and response possible, No WMI, just 98-100RON.

1. Which one, G25-550 vs G25-660 on this setup and requirements.
2. What will be going on from 2000-4000rpm?
3. I need help with reading compressor map, if someone can explain it. How does pressure drop comes to equation. Specifically Pressure Ratio p2/p1 and flow. Let's say I have 5psi (0.3bar) drop from turbo to engine (piping, IC, etc...)? Does that mean bigger turbo is needed, and we look at aprox 2.8bar of p2/p1 on the graph to get 1.5bar in the engine, what flow do we get then (is it 2.5bar flow at that specific rpm on the graph)? Because all these recommendations are in ideal setup without pressure drop.

EDIT - I have to make decision in day or two between 550/660


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

This has been covered. A lot guys running 10:1, bottom line, it's helps. Cat 3660 cams loose no spool, best all around cam. Built head won't do anything but allow you to rev and quality valves don't over heat and fail. 

If you're going higher than 10:1 you'll be in need of more octane all the time. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

OK, I decided to use stock cams anyway, and rev limit is decided to be at 7200rpm. That's all for longevity reasons, I did head work to refresh it, I like to leave some headroom and have safest possible setup.

So, g25-550vs660 for 2.0 stroker, 1.5bar max boost, and 7200rpm limit? I am worried that at 1.5bar I won't have any advantage up top compared to 550, but 660 would be in peak efficiency with same flow as 550. Can't pull a trigger yet on either of them.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> OK, I decided to use stock cams anyway, and rev limit is decided to be at 7200rpm. That's all for longevity reasons, I did head work to refresh it, I like to leave some headroom and have safest possible setup.
> 
> So, g25-550vs660 for 2.0 stroker, 1.5bar max boost, and 7200rpm limit? I am worried that at 1.5bar I won't have any advantage up top compared to 550, but 660 would be in peak efficiency with same flow as 550. Can't pull a trigger yet on either of them.


Here's a re-post of a comparison I did between the G25-500 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement. As you can see, at P2/P1=2.5 or 1.5 bar boost and 7000 RPMs, the G25-550 is at its choke point (ignore the dark red lines at P2/P1=2.4/7000 RPMs). Whereas the G25-660 still has very good efficiency. I definitely recommend the G25-660 on 2.0L displacement as that will give you more room up top. You will only lose several hundred RPMs in spoolup but I think it's worth it.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

Thank you, I was about to choose 550, to enjoy more responsive turbo. But makes sense to go with 660, to get extra power up top to 7200, maybe I will push it little bit more, and have it running more efficiently most of the time. Just I am coming from k05-15 turbo on stroker (this had crazy response and spool, below 2000  ), and also k04-064 hybrid. Lets see 660 now...

Summary for 2.0L - 22PSI

*G25-550*
+ better spool by about 400rpm
+ better torque/power curve from 2000-4000rpm
+ slightly better transient response (smaller wheel)
- pushed to absolute max at 6500-7000

*G25-660*
+ better efficiency all around, especially from 6000 and up
+ easier on intercooler/system, better EGTs/AITs
+ about 2-4 lbs/min more flow at top end (for 7200rpm limit or so)
+ potential of more flow of 6-7lbs/min with higher boost or 1000 rpm more at 22psi.
- somewhat compromised 2000-4000rpm range

How does this translate to driving feel, no idea .


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> Thank you, I was about to choose 550, to enjoy more responsive turbo. But makes sense to go with 660, to get extra power up top to 7200, maybe I will push it little bit more, and have it running more efficiently most of the time. Just I am coming from k05-15 turbo on stroker (this had crazy response and spool, below 2000  ), and also k04-064 hybrid. Lets see 660 now...


I think you will be very happy with that setup.:thumbup:

EDIT: I have the first generation GTX2867R on my 2.1L daily driver also 67mm exducer same as G25-660 and pretty much get instant spool with that setup. But... the G25-660 is so much better.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

Yes, I've read your impressions on GTX2867R, and used that as guidance too. Great, these compression maps are very helpful, TTE turbos for example, do not provide maps, and you have no idea what is going on. 
I have TTE480 (k04-64 hybrid) now, it is probably constantly out of efficiency after 6000 at 1.5bar, its max flow could be around 44lbs/min, not sure, they do not say. Most setups compensate that with WMI.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> Yes, I've read your impressions on GTX2867R, and used that as guidance too. Great, these compression maps are very helpful, TTE turbos for example, do not provide maps, and you have no idea what is going on.
> I have TTE480 (k04-64 hybrid) now, it is probably constantly out of efficiency after 6000 at 1.5bar, its max flow could be around 44lbs/min, not sure, they do not say. Most setups compensate that with WMI.


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta: Clear your inbox! Can't Pm you.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

What volumetric efficiency do you use for 1.8T 20V in these charts, also does stroker 2.0 has better VE? They play a big factor.

I found this for 1.8T 20v, is it possible that ti is close to 120% at 22PSI at 6500rpm?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> What volumetric efficiency do you use for 1.8T 20V in these charts, also does stroker 2.0 has better VE? They play a big factor.
> 
> I found this for 1.8T 20v, is it possible that ti is close to 120% at 22PSI at 6500rpm?


I use 100% VE to keep things simple. However, that can easily be changed by adding a VE table into the calculations. By definition, a turbo car on boost has greater than 100% VE (assuming open throttle). A stroker engine will have slightly better VE due to an increase in piston velocity through out the RPM range.

As far as the chart you posted, the VE numbers don't look quite right to me. For example, at kPA = 175 (25.4 psi absolute pressure or about 11 psi boost pressure) and 4500 RPM, VE = 101%. That's about the same as a well-tuned normally aspirated (non-turbo) car with tuned exhaust headers. That number should be in the 150 to 175% range.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

Thanks, I was checking BW calculator and EFR turbos. Their calculations seems little bit different but not by much.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Vegeta: Clear your inbox! Can't Pm you.


Yeah, sorry lol I'm slow 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> I use 100% VE to keep things simple. However, that can easily be changed by adding a VE table into the calculations. By definition, a turbo car on boost has greater than 100% VE (assuming open throttle). A stroker engine will have slightly better VE due to an increase in piston velocity through out the RPM range.


I compared your graph of EFR 7163 on 2.0L and Borg Warner Calculator, using VE 100.


Your graphs shows about 5 lb/min more flow for the same RPM. Or about 900rpm earlier, achieves the same flow. That is quite a lot, can you see what is different and more accurate? Still all comparisons are good to compare turbos themselves, but it can change a choice for correct turbo size based on displacement. since your graph maxes out turbo almost 1000rpm earlier. Seems like VE plays a big role there. Based on dynos, your graphs looks realistic. Just curious what is different.

EDIT. When I put 115% VE on BW site, then I get similar flow as your graph.


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

Hello John,

may i bother you again with my question?!



> N42B20, 2,0 l (1995 cm3), 84 mm × 90 mm, 4, 105 kW (143 PS) bei 6000, 200 Nm bei 3750


I´m currently working on the ecu and trans controller of a BMW E46 with a 2L i4 engine. The engine shall be build as a torque monster. The gearbox is rated up to 500Nm, however that´s nothing i expect to break. I would just love to have ~350hp with as fast spool as possible. So a nice little twin scroll charger would be best. Does anyone happen to have some info on the current Golf 7R turbo which seems to be a very good alternative?

Other then that, any other advice that charger to pick so i´m roughly at 400Nm from down low up to 5000-5500rpm?

Kind regards
Daniel


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> I compared your graph of EFR 7163 on 2.0L and Borg Warner Calculator, using VE 100.
> 
> 
> Your graphs shows about 5 lb/min more flow for the same RPM. Or about 900rpm earlier, achieves the same flow. That is quite a lot, can you see what is different and more accurate? Still all comparisons are good to compare turbos themselves, but it can change a choice for correct turbo size based on displacement. since your graph maxes out turbo almost 1000rpm earlier. Seems like VE plays a big role there. Based on dynos, your graphs looks realistic. Just curious what is different.
> ...


That's interesting. I can check into that and maybe add VE into my calculations. I can also add intercooler efficiency since that also effect the numbers. But that will take some time which I don't have at the moment. Maybe in the coming months. We'll see.


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

Trying to wrap my head around it  Seems like the EFR 7163 not only is an amazing option for my 3L, it seems it´s kinda interesting for my 2L i4 (at least if my assumptions are kinda ok) :heart:

What kind of formula are you using to calculate from the engine displacement to airflow values? I´ve been doing it manually with the matchbot, which is kinda pain in the a**.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> Trying to wrap my head around it  Seems like the EFR 7163 not only is an amazing option for my 3L, it seems it´s kinda interesting for my 2L i4 (at least if my assumptions are kinda ok) :heart:
> 
> What kind of formula are you using to calculate from the engine displacement to airflow values? I´ve been doing it manually with the matchbot, which is kinda pain in the a**.


I wish I had time to discuss. But now is not a good time for me. Super busy here doing renovations and other stuff. Definitely interested, though, in looking at the matchbot plots at some point in the future. Just can't do it now since that requires a lot of my time and attention.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

16V-Sauger said:


> Trying to wrap my head around it  Seems like the EFR 7163 not only is an amazing option for my 3L, it seems it´s kinda interesting for my 2L i4 (at least if my assumptions are kinda ok) :heart:
> 
> What kind of formula are you using to calculate from the engine displacement to airflow values? I´ve been doing it manually with the matchbot, which is kinda pain in the a**.


Why don't you try BorgWarner matching tool. It has many stuff. Just I am not sure what VE to use.


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

Nenad22 said:


> Why don't you try BorgWarner matching tool. It has many stuff. Just I am not sure what VE to use.


That´s what i also di, but i fell in love with the way John presents and illustrates the engine airflow compared to the compressor map 

http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/afterm...wts=400&pt6_wd=83&pt6_wd2=74&pt6_wrsin=92044&


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> I wish I had time to discuss. But now is not a good time for me. Super busy here doing renovations and other stuff. Definitely interested, though, in looking at the matchbot plots at some point in the future. Just can't do it now since that requires a lot of my time and attention.


What's this matchbot?

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Vegeta Gti said:


> What's this matchbot?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/afterm...wts=400&pt6_wd=83&pt6_wd2=74&pt6_wrsin=92044&


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I didn't even realize that is what is what literally called. Jesus, I've been playing with it for weeks lol

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

Hello there

Currently I build my engine with 
94 stroke and 88 bore evo X on kelfords 274 11.5 ported etc.
Using now efr9174 full v band and i m thinking if i swap it with new efr 9274 whats the benefits or the disadvantages ?
Car is revving 9200rpms and I made with only 27 psi 620 whp dynojet on 93 pretty easy and I m thinking to use race gas and 45 psi .

I would appreciate if you can help me and whats yr opinion ?

Thanks


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Evoxlimited said:


> Hello there
> 
> Currently I build my engine with
> 94 stroke and 88 bore evo X on kelfords 274 11.5 ported etc.
> ...


You should ask your tuner more specifically. 

Limited to 27 due to knock?? Out of fuel? Or of turbo? All of the above? Define race gas...100...105...110...112 114 116.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

That was on pump gas but I m going to use racing fuel and I m going g to turn up the boost snd I m m thinking to upgrade with 9274 before the tuning


----------



## napkin (Mar 8, 2008)

Hey John, can you compare my engine from post 928, gtx3076 vr5 turbo to the new g30-770 and -900.
i am looking for a bit more power / same power with lower boost and was thinking about an upgrade


----------



## evangelos84 (Jul 5, 2020)

*g25-660 ar 0,72 , efr7163 t4 twinscroll ,efr7064 t4 twinscroll on 2.0 tsi*

hello very good job john your knowlegde are second to none.
so i have a golf mk6 gti 2.0 tsi engine fully forged,i wonder what route should i go for up to 550ps crank with full boost as much more as i can at low rpm, until 7600-7800 rpm
id like to compare full boost and top end between g25-660 ar 0,72 , efr7163 t4 twinscroll ,efr7064 t4 twinscroll .
also which will be more responsive between 2.000-4.000 rpm?i vote efr twinscroll..
thanks in advance keep the good work


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

Efr7163 I think its the best turbo you can use , I have tried g series but I think the transient response of 7163 its unique


----------



## evangelos84 (Jul 5, 2020)

Thank you for your replay, i realize that also g25-660 cames with t4 twinscroll... so the debate is g25-660 twinscroll vs efr7163 twinscroll, has anyone try twinscroll g25?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

evangelos84 said:


> Thank you for your replay, i realize that also g25-660 cames with t4 twinscroll... so the debate is g25-660 twinscroll vs efr7163 twinscroll, has anyone try twinscroll g25?


Sorry, guys. I'm just super busy ATM. I'm not able to post anything for now.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

I have one question about reading compressor maps, efficiency. Example:

- If both turbos show flow of 50 lbs/min at 7000rpm
- first one does it at 75% efficiency and other at 70%.

How does that translate to power, AIT, EGT, is it a big difference?


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Lots of info on the internet guys. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## PotatoFlakeSTi (Jul 16, 2020)

First off, I've enjoyed reading through this spectacular thread, thank you for helping everyone out. I see you've been busy and not been on here for a bit, but I am hoping to get some input. G30-770 vs G30/35-900 at altitude.

My engine is an EJ257, 2.5L, bored to 99.75. closed deck/built. Only head stuff is valve springs and titanium retainers, revving to 7200.

I am at approximately 6000ft and currently making "460whp" corrected on a high reading dynojet with a Blouch Dom 1.5xtr 10cm^2 on E85 at 25.5psi. (114.3mph trap speed at 9200density altitude)

I'd like to make 625+whp on this dyno (probably around 700flywheel HP) but don't want to sacrifice toooooo much spool.

Thanks in advance to anyone who can help me decide.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PotatoFlakeSTi said:


> First off, I've enjoyed reading through this spectacular thread, thank you for helping everyone out. I see you've been busy and not been on here for a bit, but I am hoping to get some input. G30-770 vs G30/35-900 at altitude.
> 
> My engine is an EJ257, 2.5L, bored to 99.75. closed deck/built. Only head stuff is valve springs and titanium retainers, revving to 7200.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the compliment! I wish I had time to put some information together for you. It's just not possible at the moment. It looks like the G30-770 will just barely get you to 625 WHP if you weren't at altitude. The G30/35-990 will definitely get you there much easier even at altitude with only a few hundred RPMs loss in spoolup. I posted a comparison of the G30-770 and G35-990 on 2480 CC's sometime around 10/2019 I think. That might be helpful.

Sounds like a very cool build BTW.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## PotatoFlakeSTi (Jul 16, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for the compliment! I wish I had time to put some information together for you. It's just not possible at the moment. It looks like the G30-770 will just barely get you to 625 WHP if you weren't at altitude. The G30/35-990 will definitely get you there much easier even at altitude with only a few hundred RPMs loss in spoolup. I posted a comparison of the G30-770 and G35-990 on 2480 CC's sometime around 10/2019 I think. That might be helpful.
> 
> Sounds like a very cool build BTW.
> 
> -John (mainstayinc).


John, you're welcome... I'd say it's a well deserved compliment.

I appreciate your advice, based on your information and comparing compressor maps, figuring out correct pressure ratios at this altitude it seems you're spot on.

Picking the G30-900 with the "middle ground" 0.83 AR, if spool ends up being a big issue I'll probably switch to the 0.61 AR since my head isn't built for super high revs anyhow.

Car is a 2011 Blurple Hatchback STi.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PotatoFlakeSTi said:


> John, you're welcome... I'd say it's a well deserved compliment.
> 
> I appreciate your advice, based on your information and comparing compressor maps, figuring out correct pressure ratios at this altitude it seems you're spot on.
> 
> ...


Sounds like a very cool project. :thumbup: G30-900 with the 0.83 A/R is a very nice turbo combination.


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

John

Whats yr opinion between 9174 vs 9274 on 2.2 evo?


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

mainstayinc said:


> Nice! Looking forward to dyno numbers.


Hi. So the long time passed. So what we have on Dyno is 673 crank and 850nm on 2.2 bar from 1000 to 5000 and 2.3 bar from 5000 to 6500 from 6500 to the end 2.2 bar again. The Dyno was cutting the top end on the graph but in reality it goes flat to the end of 7500. Engine is fully forged with pistons (CR 9.3) and rods and head is ported with stage 1. Cams are stock and valves are stock also. Base fuel is 100Ron + WMI 1100cc (60 ethanol 40 water) Ignition is 16.5 and AFR is 0.84 middle and 0.81 top end. Boost is controlled by Cortex EBC. The G30-900 hot side is 0.83 and it is literally maxed out on that boost. We will test do we have any restriction on the exhaust cat-back but even if we have it would be about 700hp. I am plan to change the turbo to G35-1050 on 0.83 ar because I want minimum 750 crank with the ability to expand to secondary fuel rail.










Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

matheria said:


> Hi. So the long time passed. So what we have on Dyno is 673 crank and 850nm on 2.2 bar from 1000 to 5000 and 2.3 bar from 5000 to 6500 from 6500 to the end 2.2 bar again. The Dyno was cutting the top end on the graph but in reality it goes flat to the end of 7500. Engine is fully forged with pistons (CR 9.3) and rods and head is ported with stage 1. Cams are stock and valves are stock also. Base fuel is 100Ron + WMI 1100cc (60 ethanol 40 water) Ignition is 16.5 and AFR is 0.84 middle and 0.81 top end. Boost is controlled by Cortex EBC. The G30-900 hot side is 0.83 and it is literally maxed out on that boost. We will test do we have any restriction on the exhaust cat-back but even if we have it would be about 700hp. I am plan to change the turbo to G35-1050 on 0.83 ar because I want minimum 750 crank with the ability to expand to secondary fuel rail.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's pretty impressive for 2.5L displacement. Thanks for sharing! Looking forward to seeing results from the G35-1050.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Evoxlimited said:


> John
> 
> Whats yr opinion between 9174 vs 9274 on 2.2 evo?


I'm not super familiar with those turbos. Anyone else?


----------



## napkin (Mar 8, 2008)

matheria said:


> Hi. So the long time passed. So what we have on Dyno is 673 crank and 850nm on 2.2 bar from 1000 to 5000 and 2.3 bar from 5000 to 6500 from 6500 to the end 2.2 bar again. The Dyno was cutting the top end on the graph but in reality it goes flat to the end of 7500. Engine is fully forged with pistons (CR 9.3) and rods and head is ported with stage 1. Cams are stock and valves are stock also. Base fuel is 100Ron + WMI 1100cc (60 ethanol 40 water) Ignition is 16.5 and AFR is 0.84 middle and 0.81 top end. Boost is controlled by Cortex EBC. The G30-900 hot side is 0.83 and it is literally maxed out on that boost. We will test do we have any restriction on the exhaust cat-back but even if we have it would be about 700hp. I am plan to change the turbo to G35-1050 on 0.83 ar because I want minimum 750 crank with the ability to expand to secondary fuel rail.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



really nice. exactly what i am looking for. can you tell some boost/rpm points, so that i can see when the turbo is fully kicking in? thx


----------



## Evoxlimited (Sep 15, 2019)

I m on 9174 efr and the only choice is between 9274 or 9280 hard to choose


----------



## matheria (Nov 3, 2018)

Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk


----------



## mullherb (Jul 29, 2020)

Hi guys,

also am looking for an upgrade, and also was thinking of using a G35-900 for the TTRS 8S (2.5l, stock bore, pistons and conrods reinforced). But looking at the compressor map, the turbo seems rather small. A friend of mine is running the G35-1050 and with our pump fuel it got 880hp crank at 2.5 Bars (so thats the efficiency that we get out of our fuel/engine). Was actually wanting better spool than that and around 100hp less but the compressor map of the G35-900 seems to me that it will flow more like 700hp with our engines and fueling. Actually it seems to be very similar powerwise to the GTX3582R (just little better spool). So my question was, if the EFR 8474 could be a good alternative and how it compares spoolwise to G35-1050 and G35-900 and GTX3582R. Thanks a lot 🙂 

to the questions above: G30 and 5 cylinder probably doesnt work well because you create too much exhaust gases, hence I would always suggest a G35-900...


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

Hey John.. if you have time could I see the difference between a G25-660 and a G30-770 for my build? You did one for me before but I was comparing GTX to the new G series. Thanks in advance!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mullherb said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> also am looking for an upgrade, and also was thinking of using a G35-900 for the TTRS 8S (2.5l, stock bore, pistons and conrods reinforced). But looking at the compressor map, the turbo seems rather small. A friend of mine is running the G35-1050 and with our pump fuel it got 880hp crank at 2.5 Bars (so thats the efficiency that we get out of our fuel/engine). Was actually wanting better spool than that and around 100hp less but the compressor map of the G35-900 seems to me that it will flow more like 700hp with our engines and fueling. Actually it seems to be very similar powerwise to the GTX3582R (just little better spool). So my question was, if the EFR 8474 could be a good alternative and how it compares spoolwise to G35-1050 and G35-900 and GTX3582R. Thanks a lot 🙂
> 
> to the questions above: G30 and 5 cylinder probably doesnt work well because you create too much exhaust gases, hence I would always suggest a G35-900...





vdub18njp said:


> Hey John.. if you have time could I see the difference between a G25-660 and a G30-770 for my build? You did one for me before but I was comparing GTX to the new G series. Thanks in advance!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


I'd really like post a response but I'm super busy. Work is taking priority ATM.


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

mainstayinc said:


> I'd really like post a response but I'm super busy. Work is taking priority ATM.


No worries at all! Just wanted to see if I could get an idea of power and all. 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdub18njp said:


> No worries at all! Just wanted to see if I could get an idea of power and all.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## vdub18njp (Feb 26, 2009)

John - whenever you have time I'd love to see your data points. Considering the at the 0.83 A/R.. and might pull trigger on next week. Have a great weekend!

Here's the link to my build:
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/to...3&share_fid=7951&share_type=t&link_source=app

https://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?7956753-1-8BT-Build-in-Nor-Cal#/topics/7956753









Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Excellent thread. I'm 12 pages deep into this rabbit hole in search of a best bang turbo to replace the f23 that died on me today. I've got rods, pistons, and engine bolt ons for pretty much whatever but would like to keep this repair budget friendly. Ima keep digging on in here but I am leaning towards one of the diesel turbos so far. I mainly want a highway machine.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Looking at the Holset HY35 7 blade. Assuming this graph is spot on for the 1.8t stock displacement. Comes on decent and has a lot of potential on the top end.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Evoxlimited said:


> Hello there
> 
> Currently I build my engine with
> 94 stroke and 88 bore evo X on kelfords 274 11.5 ported etc.
> ...


You'll have a lot more lag and maybe 100 more hp on the top end. Running race gas you could hit 1000whp. Full boost around 6200 rpm maybe? I don't recall seeing a map for the 3rd turbo you mentioned. You are currently at a 67mm. The 9274 is a 72mm and the 9280 an 73mm which flows 110lbs vs 105.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Nenad22 said:


> I have one question about reading compressor maps, efficiency. Example:
> 
> - If both turbos show flow of 50 lbs/min at 7000rpm
> - first one does it at 75% efficiency and other at 70%.
> ...


It makes a difference in combustion mainly. The efficiency is how well the compressor creates that denser air without creating too much heat. An intercooler is made to keep those temps down but the higher the efficiency the better. In your example above that 70% efficiency at 7000rpm (30psi) may create air coming out of the turbo at 170 degrees while the 75% efficiency turbo will push air out at 140. The intercooler does the rest to cool it back down before the intake if you have one. Cars without intercoolers usually run low boost for this reason as they cannot run too much without creating a lot of heat which could cause detonation. This is not accurate of course but just an example. When efficiency drops below 60 percent that charge air could be 200 degrees. That's called choke and at that point the turbo no longer effectively compresses the air.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

Thanks for good explanation, I am getting better picture now. So that also means better timings can be achieved without knock. For example, I had TTE480 setup, on 2.0 stroker, and tuner had hard time going much above 22Psi, I was getting knock. We settled at 22Psi to be safe (and somewhat lower timings). So I am curios how well will g25-660 cope with the same system at that pressure.


----------



## Tj0754 (Dec 28, 2019)

I’ve removed my 1.8t engine and have fitted a
Mk4 r32 engine , I’m looking at fitting rather a Garrett g30 770 or a twin scroll precision 6766 but not sure which would be the best option and how do I tell
What ar would be best for that size engine


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Tj0754 said:


> I’ve removed my 1.8t engine and have fitted a
> Mk4 r32 engine , I’m looking at fitting rather a Garrett g30 770 or a twin scroll precision 6766 but not sure which would be the best option and how do I tell
> What ar would be best for that size engine


Scroll back through here and look at the compressor graphs with the larger displacement engines factored in to get a real good idea. *Go to the r32 tech forum and ask there.* Twin k04s would put you at 2x the 1.8t more or less.


----------



## Tj0754 (Dec 28, 2019)

I’ve asked on the r32 but it’s quiet on there, I will have a look back through the maps, doesn’t seem to be any on the precision turbos online do they not release them? I’m not going twin turbo it will only be one turbo not sure weather single or twin scroll yet


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Tj0754 said:


> I’ve asked on the r32 but it’s quiet on there, I will have a look back through the maps, doesn’t seem to be any on the precision turbos online do they not release them? I’m not going twin turbo it will only be one turbo not sure weather single or twin scroll yet


I found absolutely nothing for the HX30W I am about to bolt to my 1.8t. I looked everywhere and came up with a couple of YouTube videos that helped push me to it. Look at everything, JDM, domestic, drifters, everything that is say 3.0-3.4L displacement. This will give a good idea of what it'd do. Look for any dyno sheets that'll show when it builds boost and when it peaks. Dyno sheets with a boost plot will be very helpful. Looks for videos with the boost gauge in it while showing the tach and speedo. If you can get a dyno, boost use, and a 1/4 mile slip from the same car then you're golden.

Check both of the other vr6 forums and the Forced Induction forum. A quick search but no read showed some interest.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Beware that there are many variations of that HX30 holset. If it's the 12CM AR version expect it too be laggy. If not it should be similar to a Garrett GT2871R. Don't expect the full 450HP though on the small housing. Maybe 350 at moderate boost.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Tj0754 said:


> I’ve asked on the r32 but it’s quiet on there, I will have a look back through the maps, doesn’t seem to be any on the precision turbos online do they not release them? I’m not going twin turbo it will only be one turbo not sure weather single or twin scroll yet


Precision does not release their maps. The 6766 is way bigger than the G30. If you want power then it's a good choice. I have it on my 2JZ and it doesn't hit full boost until 5k rpm. For daily driving I would much rather prefer a G30 sized turbo with a smaller AR. Unfortunately they weren't around for me to decide back then:/


----------



## Tj0754 (Dec 28, 2019)

What size ar you running at the minute?


----------



## Tj0754 (Dec 28, 2019)

JOutterbridge said:


> Tj0754 said:
> 
> 
> > I’ve asked on the r32 but it’s quiet on there, I will have a look back through the maps, doesn’t seem to be any on the precision turbos online do they not release them? I’m not going twin turbo it will only be one turbo not sure weather single or twin scroll yet
> ...


What size ar you running at the minute? And is that a twin scroll your using?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Beware that there are many variations of that HX30 holset. If it's the 12CM AR version expect it too be laggy. If not it should be similar to a Garrett GT2871R. Don't expect the full 450HP though on the small housing. Maybe 350 at moderate boost.


It’s not the HX35 but the HX30. This has a 6cm turbine housing. If both of the videos are true, then this is one of the most highly missed turbos of the 1.8t. I’m expecting high 300bhp and if anything over 400 would nice. Especially for half of the RPM range. 

HX30 on a 1.8t swap. Listen how early and easily it comes on. 
https://youtu.be/NKkZEM_rrFw

Look at how late it stays on this one. 28ish PSI at 7000rpm. 
https://youtu.be/6saxdcBzago

Another one showing 3800rpm or so full spool backing up that 2 step launch. Needle bounces and stays high even after bumping the rev limiter. 
https://youtu.be/Q4mQprHtzeI


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Holset ‘Super’ HX30W. Gonna be a week at the least to get it on. I’ve got a lot to do life wise as well. Unless I feel like pulling an all nighter.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

FrankenTurbo f23 vs Holset Super HX30.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Nenad22 said:


> Thanks for good explanation, I am getting better picture now. So that also means better timings can be achieved without knock. For example, I had TTE480 setup, on 2.0 stroker, and tuner had hard time going much above 22Psi, I was getting knock. We settled at 22Psi to be safe (and somewhat lower timings). So I am curios how well will g25-660 cope with the same system at that pressure.


You might not be able to run much more boost but you may get more power. If you live in a hot climate compressor discharge can be 250 to 500 degrees before hitting the intercooler. Higher boost means more heat and heat soak. Less boost and more timing is what makes peak power in some cases. Here is a link for reference. In the winter turbos perform much better as you can imagine.

https://www.focusst.org/threads/turbo-compressor-outlet-temp.36515/


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Tj0754 said:


> JOutterbridge said:
> 
> 
> > Tj0754 said:
> ...


It's a T4 twin scroll. 1.01 or 1.15 if i recall, not sure. T3 has the smaller A/R options


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Brake Weight said:


> FrankenTurbo f23 vs Holset Super HX30.


Beautiful Holset there I found the specs on it. Compressor inducer 44mm exducer 73mm. 6X6 blade? Turbine 40mm inducer 67mm exducer. 6CM 12 blade. Should flow 300 to 350 HP. It will be better at mid to high boost levels. Check out a map of the Garrett GT2560R to get an idea, you have a better turbine I believe.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Beautiful Holset there I found the specs on it. Compressor inducer 44mm exducer 73mm. 6X6 blade? Turbine 40mm inducer 67mm exducer. 6CM 12 blade. Should flow 300 to 350 HP. It will be better at mid to high boost levels. Check out a map of the Garrett GT2560R to get an idea, you have a better turbine I believe.


Yes. It’s slightly larger. I didn’t open it to measure but the larger intake gives it away. I think I can do more than 350bhp but it won’t hurt my feelings as long as it’s a wide power and and not just 2k worth of RPMs making 400+. It was set up with a 35psi wastegate, too. I got it down to about 22/25psi with a 1/2 turn of preload on the shaft. It opens good at 30psi but I’m not gonna trust it just yet. I’ve located a suitable replacement already. Something I can put an MBC on. 

I need to shorten the 3” downpipe maybe 6-8” and get a U pipe and 90* turndown to mate up to the downpipe. 4 welds and have a flanged connection. 









The outlet is nearly the same spot. I may need to remove a little section of intercooler piping and add a coupling for now. It didn’t want to fit back there. Ended up removing the dogbone and tilting the engine back to get enough room. Compressor is a finger from the firewall and I need to reroute the heater hoses just to get them off of the compressor. I believe I can get 4” 90* coupling on the intake and clear them but I’d like them underneath. Plus I need some more crankcase Vent To Street hose as the old one fell off. 3/4” on the drain line as well.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Beautiful Holset there I found the specs on it. Compressor inducer 44mm exducer 73mm. 6X6 blade? Turbine 40mm inducer 67mm exducer. 6CM 12 blade. Should flow 300 to 350 HP. It will be better at mid to high boost levels. Check out a map of the Garrett GT2560R to get an idea, you have a better turbine I believe.


Mine is 46/78 on the compressor and 52/65 on the turbine. So slightly larger on both accounts. It should be better than the gt2560r. I was thinking around 42#/min but can't find the evidence now. I want to say I saw that on a one of the 4bt diesel forums somewhere. I've ran several online boosted engine "calculators" and honestly 36-42#/min is where I want to be. That'll be 25-30psi roughly out to 7000rpm. Nice 90* fall weather and looking at 360hp/280tq. Once it cools off to the 70s the numbers go up about 20/20.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Yeah that's a good size. You should definitely get around 350 and up to 400 if you run 25lbs or a little more boost.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> Yeah that's a good size. You should definitely get around 350 and up to 400 if you run 25lbs or a little more boost.


I really hope it all holds together. I'm so close I to having all the parts together I can't stand it. Realized I never ordered a return drain flange for the engine side and it'll be 5-7 days shipping. Long wait to crank it up but I do have CV boots to change in the meantime as well as some fender rolling/pulling.


----------



## kiki_yb (Aug 28, 2020)

*gt3071 remplacement*

Hi mainstayinc,
Thanks to share your knowledge, It's very interesting to read you!

Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice. 
My engine is a ford cosworth YB:
4 cyl 90.8mm bore x 77mm stroke
RV8.3
on 98 pump gas with big intercooler

I'm actually with a GT3071r with ar0.63 (tubular single scroll manifold) wich is very worn, I have my full boost (24psi) at 4000rpm whearas before it was much sooner. At this pressure, the engine produce about 460 crank HP but also lot of EGT. I'm revving at 7200rpm

I'd like to have far better spool and if possible 500HP
I'm look both G25-550 and g25-660 with AR0.72

G25-550 seems to be perfect but I'm wonder if it will be at her limit with excessiv EGT
for the G25-660, I'm affraid that it should too lazy for me

Thank you in advance for your time and help.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

kiki_yb said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> Thanks to share your knowledge, It's very interesting to read you!
> 
> Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice.
> ...


That sounds like a cool setup. I'm not able to put any graphs together or give advice at the moment. Maybe other people can advise.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

kiki_yb said:


> Hi mainstayinc,
> Thanks to share your knowledge, It's very interesting to read you!
> 
> Like most of the people here, I'm looking for an advice about my turbo choice.
> ...


I would like to start off by saying Jon has continually put forth more effort and help than most everyone in here combined has done. 

With that, some, in not most, of you need to READ the thread and give him some breathing room. Most things people are asking/reasking in the recent posts HAVE BEEN POSTED/ASKED AND ANSWERED IN THIS THREAD. 

Do the research. It will be very beneficial for you to learn the data and do the work on your own. 

For instance, @kiki_yb your gt3071r question, its been covered previously in this thread, for iirc, 3 different engines outside of VAG. I have multiple posts over the last 10 years about this turbo(the billet upgrade on my car and a buddy's rb25) and its capabilities...

Have you looked into pagparts V2 billet wheel and rebuild? Raise compression to 10:1? Cams and lighter valve train? What injector size are you running? If you're running say 630cc you're too small and should be atleast 1000cc, with that, you can utilize more fuel up top to lower egt's. What exhaust manifold, Intake manifold and tb and can they be injuries, etc? You can also start running an e20 or 30 blend. 

You can obtain more power and better spool with the right ingredients in the recipe. So much can go into utilizing the turbo data that join provides from hundreds of people here. 

Don't get all upset and have some butthurt reaction. This thread is incredibly comprehensive and job has covered around 60-70 turbos and 3 times that in configurations with engines, even outside of the VAG family. 

So do your part and start reading. I personally have this thread with a quick link on my home page on my phone because the data is so fukn good in here and you can gather info about many many setups.


So I'd like to say thank you Jon. You're awesome. You've gone beyond.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I would like to start off by saying Jon has continually put forth more effort and help than most everyone in here combined has done.
> 
> *With that, some, in not most, of you need to READ the thread and give him some breathing room. Most things people are asking/reasking in the recent posts HAVE BEEN POSTED/ASKED AND ANSWERED IN THIS THREAD. *
> 
> ...



Thanks for those words Chris! Yes, I have posted most combinations here and a little effort going through this thread would definitely answer most people's questions. I hope to have some time in the future to refine my graphs and post more info. But for the time being, I am absolutely swamped prepping at home (LOL) and working on business. But, I pretty much lurk here daily without posting.

-John (mainstayinc).

BTW the MK1 street killer is still moving forward but a little slow right now. I haven't posted any updates in that thread but progress is definitely being made. I hope to post some updates soon.


----------



## kiki_yb (Aug 28, 2020)

I'm Sorry if my question bother you, be sure that before asking it, I think I read all thread 3 times at least (so interesting) but I think I saw this question for more HP goal where the G25-660 is the right choice or for less HP goal which de g25-550 is obvious or for differents cylinders capacity

To respond to your questions, I'm on 850cc injectors, I tried differents things to have better spool like cam timing, spark timing, exhaust manifold insulating.... And to lower high end egt, I already increase fuel but I think I have too much backpressure.

Really sorry if my question is boring its so kind of you to answer everyone even if it doesn't speak about VW.

I'll read an other time the thread and try to synthesize the parts of bringing closer to my case

Thank to you ta have take time to read me and answered me


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

kiki_yb said:


> I'm Sorry if my question bother you, be sure that before asking it, I think I read all thread 3 times at least (so interesting) but I think I saw this question for more HP goal where the G25-660 is the right choice or for less HP goal which de g25-550 is obvious or for differents cylinders capacity
> 
> To respond to your questions, I'm on 850cc injectors, I tried differents things to have better spool like cam timing, spark timing, exhaust manifold insulating.... And to lower high end egt, I already increase fuel but I think I have too much backpressure.
> 
> ...


Your question is not boring at all. We are all looking for ways to increase spool and top end on our setups! As far as choosing between the G25-550 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement, I would go with the G25-660 since you only lose a few hundred RPMs spoolup to the G25-550. However, you gain a lot more up top. I would advise a twin-scroll setup if at all possible. If done correctly, you can increase spool, mid-range and top end. That's what I did with my setup (see below). If you don't want to do a twin-scroll setup, you can always use a quick spool valve on a standard manifold with a divided turbine housing to increase spoolup and retain top end. Give ATP Turbo a call. Even though they don't list a T3 divided turbine housing for the G25-660, they might make that if you ask. That's what I did when I first inquired about the GTX3584RS that I currently use on my setup. I asked if they made a divided turbine housing for the GTX3584RS and they said "No" but later calls convince them to produce the divided housing and viola! they now sell it on their website. As far as compressor maps, I just don't have the time to put anything together these days. And like Vegeta said, most of the turbo/displacement combinations are already posted.










Quick spool valve:


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

That quick spool plate is bad assed looking. I would imagine it performs better than a true twin scroll turbo manifold could.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> That quick spool plate is bad assed looking. I would imagine it performs better than a true twin scroll turbo manifold could.


Depending on the setup it probably performs better than a true TS setup (for spoolup at least). Here is a video I posted before of a Supra. The guy claims to have gained 150 WHP at 3300 RPMs. Check it out (see below). Dyno graph is at the end of the video.






EDIT: If I didn't have a true TS setup then I would have gone the QSV route. Prefer the TS setup, though, since it uses a divided exhaust manifold and has less back flow into the combustion chamber (less heat). That allows you to run higher boost on same octane fuel.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Good stuff right there.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

*BMW S1000rr turbo camshafts*

Good afternoon Mainstayinc. I dont know if you remenber me but on october of 2019 we were talking my bmw s1000 turbo project for my hillclimb formula car. I asked you if ouer election of the garrett g25-550 it will be good and also analyzed the efr 6258 and the efr 6758. After that you recomended to change the NA camshaft for other turbo camshaft and
you started to calculate the design of the cams but I don't think you finished doing it. For personal questions we stoped the project but taking advantage of the covid stop the project is almost finished. Finally whe choose the g25 550 with 0.49 A/R. The engine has already started but i am still interested in the question of camshafts because what we want is to have a spool as fast as possible to be able to have a good touch on the accelerator pedal. I don't want an empty car until 8000rpm and after sudenly comes the power.
I would be very grateful if you could give me a hand.
Thanks so much













mainstayinc said:


> Pontxio said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I carefully studied the camshaft for the S1000RR engine and am in the process of putting together a Catcams-style camshaft card for you with some suggestions. Here is a preview for you (see below). The top green lines are your cams (notice the overlap). The bottom black cams are the turbo cams I use in my engine (Catcams 3660) for reference. I'll try to put together the completed camshaft card for you sometime in the next week. I just don't have time to discuss or complete at the moment.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I've posted many times in here on the topic of cams. 

The 3660 are the best option because there is no loss in spool, torque and power under the curve(there is an increase actually), while getting a smooth midrange increase and a nice raise in to end power and power extension in the ram's. In multiple customer cars I have dyno'd and tuned with them, you won't see the power hold flat to 8k with them, but you won't see the violent fall of at 7200 as you would with stock cams.

Myself and many others with much bigger brains have data on the cams in a thread or two. Also, badger5 has a lovely set of cams as well that he has from cat.

https://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?t=8192649#/topics/8192649



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Sorry for my ignorance but I don't understand what catcams 3660 means. Is that a reference to a specific model? remember that my engine is not a car engine but a motorcycle


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

That's my fault for assuming and not clearly reading this is still the bmw bike engine. 

Are there cams available for the engine?

Do you have data on factory cans and available aftermarket cams?

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Dont worry Vegeta GTI and firstly thanks for your answer. I dont have oem camshft data but i have the option to measure it. I comment that the cams does not attack the valve directly but through a rocker arm with a 1: 1 ratio. I dont know anyone on the market who is dedicated to making designer camshafts for the bmw s1000rr. 
simply alpha racing manufactures specific racing camshafts that still have more lift than oem.
I attached this alpha racing race camshaft drawing


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

sorry im not able to attach pictures so i cant put the camshaft card. I put the link of alpha racing and there will see some information






https://shop.alpharacing.com/shop/i...cts_id=19049&zenid=q6qq6mnoaf2bsreel2ef47unf4


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Pontxio said:


> sorry im not able to attach pictures so i cant put the camshaft card. I put the link of alpha racing and there will see some information
> 
> 
> https://shop.alpharacing.com/shop/i...cts_id=19049&zenid=q6qq6mnoaf2bsreel2ef47unf4


The link posted above and those cams are actually good turbo cams. They will give low and midrange power and not lose much up top. I'm actually concerned with your turbo A/R though. Is your motor stock compression and what redline? I have a feeling the turbo exhaust side will be the real restriction not the cams per say. I couldn't find your stock specs. 

You can even test the bike on stock cams if you are running low boost. What are your power goals? If not too high you can see how it performs up to 6 or 8psi. Then get new cams or water/meth injection if your exhaust backpressure or high EGT's really kill your top end power.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Pontxio said:


> Hi guys. Im new on this forum. My name is Asier and im a owner of a formula hillclimb car. This car have a BMW s1000rr byke engine with 1000cm3 with four cylinder of 80mm bore and 49,54mm stroke. The limit of rpm are 14200. Actually we are building a turbo configuration on this engine reducing the cylinder compresion ratio from 13:1 to 9,5:1, carrillo rods etc etc. The question is that we are going to go with the new GT25 550 garrett turbo and dont know if we are on right direction. I have the two options with
> 0.49 and 0.72 AR. Other byke engines with turbo usually here uses an EFR 6258 or the 6758. What did you think?
> hanks


Update since I found your original post. I see lower compression and meth. Your redline is high for small exhaust housing like that but obviously your bike will be one of a kind. I still recommend trying the stock cams and low boost to see how the bike reacts and rides before switching it up. Turbo cams change the transition of power. The Alpha cams are very aggressive compared to others on the market like Motorrad but they are good for high end hp. I couldnt find the stock cam card though. You chose the smallest turbo and turbine so i expect it to hit hard and early but fall off up top which won't fit those cams well. You're gonna have to do some before and after dyno testing to really dial in how you want the bike to behave.

Here was a cool video I found on the 2018 showing a cam change. If you build engines yourself it won't be much to see but this is the first BMW 1000RR I've seen apart. I enjoyed it quite a bit

https://youtu.be/Lc6jyChNonk


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Good morning JOutterbridge and thanks for your answer. Are you thinking that those alpha racing camshaft are good for turbo option? Remenber that it have much overlap and lift. The choos of the .49A/R is because of we are finding a quick spool to have torque in medium revolutions. On hillclimb races is more important the torque than pik power. Even so the power of this engine will be near 400hp on the turbo version. About the engine specifications in oem version it have an 13.5:1 compresion ratio and 14200rpm redline. Actually on the turbo version the compresion was reduced to 9.5:1 and the redline to 14200rpm. People who turboed s1000rr engines get more or les 380hp on 1 bar pressure but and should never exceeded the limit of 1.5bar pressure. Also we have added 4EGT sensors to control exhaust temperatures and water-metanol injection too. Weg on ELF perfo105 oxigenated fuel too.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

It seems that we both wrote at the same time. The best way like you said is firstly making test on dyno and check where the engine is and later try different things. I have alpha racing race camshafts on other s1000rr engine so i have the possibility to prove it also. If someone explain how i have to attach pictures and videos i can show the project here


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Awesome data!! That's pretty cool too see turbo cams for bikes. So crazy, need to find a wrecked bike and build a kart to put it in and boost it lol

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

If I could add pictures I would show you the atock can specs vs the alphas. For some reason i don't know how to anymore on my phone, it won't let me do anything except delete or send text. No attachments. 

You are right though. The valve overlap is bad when boosted because exhaust backpressure will cause reversion. At low boost its not as big of a deal but it's still not optimal.You will definitely have plenty of torque, I'm just not sure about the peak power or if you'll get past 350bhp.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Good morning JOutterbridge and thanks for your answer. Are you thinking that those alpha racing camshaft are good for turbo option? *Remenber that it have much overlap and lift*. The choos of the .49A/R is because of we are finding a quick spool to have torque in medium revolutions. On hillclimb races is more important the torque than pik power. Even so the power of this engine will be near 400hp on the turbo version. About the engine specifications in oem version it have an 13.5:1 compresion ratio and 14200rpm redline. Actually on the turbo version the compresion was reduced to 9.5:1 and the redline to 14200rpm. People who turboed s1000rr engines get more or les 380hp on 1 bar pressure but and should never exceeded the limit of 1.5bar pressure. Also we have added 4EGT sensors to control exhaust temperatures and water-metanol injection too. Weg on ELF perfo105 oxigenated fuel too.


Yes, too much overlap to be effective on a turbo application! The advertised lift and duration for the Stage 4.1.1 Alpha Racing cams are as follows:

INTAKE: 
Lift: 11.50mm
Duration (at 1mm lift): 256*
Centerline: ?


EXHAUST:
Lift: 9.60mm
Duration (at 1mm lift): 252*
Centerline: ?

This camshaft works great in a high-reving NA application. However, it will struggle to produce power in a turbo setup. Please contact them and ask what are the intake and exhaust centerlines. With that information, I can closely estimate the camshaft profiles and come up with a visual comparison (i.e.: camshaft card). Ideal lift, duration and centerlines for this engine on a turbo setup are as follows:

INTAKE: 
Lift: 8.75 to 9.5mm
Duration (at 1mm lift): 210 to 220*
Centerline: 110 to 115* ATDC

EXHAUST:
Lift: 9.5 to 10mm
Duration (at 1mm lift): 200 to 210*
Centerline: 108 to 112* BTDC

With less lift and duration, valve overlap is minimized and the turbo will work nicely with those cams. The problem with your current setup (in addition to valve overlap) is that the smaller 0.49 A/R turbine might choke off before the NA Alpha cams kick in. That's the "worst of both worlds" IMO. Please ask Alpha Racing if they can make a custom grind turbo camshaft closer to the specs I listed above.

Don't want to complicate things here but I would hate to see you spend money on expensive camshafts and it not work out for ya!


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Stock cams seem to be 204/.204 inches lift with 238°/238° duration and 208°/208° @0.050 duration. Centerline showed 109 BTDC and 111 TDC at max lift but I couldn't verify. I think you have the cam card in the broken picture for the Alphas? We just can't see it. Might have been in your 3rd post.
$255.00

Exhaust side
.209/.209

240°/240°

209°/209°
$371.00

I also recommend custom cams. A good machine shop can do that for you. Just let them know what specs you want and sometimes they will even re grind the stock ones for you to get more lift/duration and change valve overlap. There seem to be a number of motorcycle shops that do cam grinds. It may be expensive (900 to 1600) to get done but your motor will be happier.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^:thumbup:


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Holeshot racing in England used to be make 380hp at 1bar pressure with EFR 6258 with o.64 AR. I hope ouer engine will do this too because seems tha the garrett G25 is better turbo than the EFR








JOutterbridge said:


> If I could add pictures I would show you the atock can specs vs the alphas. For some reason i don't know how to anymore on my phone, it won't let me do anything except delete or send text. No attachments.
> 
> You are right though. The valve overlap is bad when boosted because exhaust backpressure will cause reversion. At low boost its not as big of a deal but it's still not optimal.You will definitely have plenty of torque, I'm just not sure about the peak power or if you'll get past 350bhp.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Thanks mainstayinc. I find de Alpha racing 4.1 camshafts target but im not able to attach pictures. This are de complet date:

lve lift 11,5mm max.
Theoretical valve opening duration at 1mm: 256°
for OEM and alpha Racing piston
111° L.C.
OPEN 17° before TDC
CLOSE 59° after BDC



EX:
Valve lift 9,5mm max.
Theoretical valve opening duration at 1mm: 252° 
for alpha Racing piston
109° L.C.
OPEN 55° before BDC
CLOSE 17° after TDC
Valve clearance
EX: 0.24 - 0,26
IN: 0.18 - 0.20

Alpha racing doen not provide more information. As i said before, i have Alpha racing cams on my NA engine but ill go withh oem ones on the turbo until make some especific ones. I have much curiosity to know if really AR0.49 works goos or not. I have got an AR 0.72 option at home but to use it i have to build new inlet manifold. Im going to put an speed sensor on the turbo but how im going to percive if turbo chok? 









mainstayinc said:


> Yes, too much overlap to be effective on a turbo application! The advertised lift and duration for the Stage 4.1.1 Alpha Racing cams are as follows:
> 
> INTAKE:
> Lift: 11.50mm
> ...


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Thanks for the information. Being honest, in this point spent 1000$ or 2000$ dont mind comparing with all i have spent in electronic, motorsport wiring, engine parts, carcon all aerodinamics etc. Wat i whant is that the engine runs like clockwork. You told that seems there are some motorcycle shops that do cam grinds. Did you know who are they?












JOutterbridge said:


> Stock cams seem to be 204/.204 inches lift with 238°/238° duration and 208°/208° @0.050 duration. Centerline showed 109 BTDC and 111 TDC at max lift but I couldn't verify. I think you have the cam card in the broken picture for the Alphas? We just can't see it. Might have been in your 3rd post.
> $255.00
> 
> Exhaust side
> ...


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

If you are using the speed sensor and electronics i believe you can monitor the choke by seeing the compressor speed. Your tuner can just compare that speed to the Garrett map and know how much power you're making and how efficiently. That's very valuable. 
For Cams just search for custom cams in Google and you might find a shop near you. I've used Crower and GSC before. Delta also does custom cams for North America i believe. If anything you can just email or call the shops and ask them if they can do it for your bike. The turbo A/R change is difficult since it's T25 to V band or T4 or something but with the speed sensor in use you'll know if that needs to be changed when the bike is run for the first time. Sounds like a hell of a climber you're building👍


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Yes the turbo speed sensor will be a very important tool. with the tuner guy we can se how spool with 0.49 AR and if the power and torque are enought we can put the redline just before chok line isnt it? and in case there is not enough power them change to the 0.72 AR. This conversion is to V-band. Other option im considering about cams is to change other s1000 versions. Bmw s1000 model is commercialized in other two versions with the same engine but differnts specs. Those are the s1000r (naked) and the s1000xr (trail). Those model have the same engine, less power and sure it must have different cams but anyway i suppose that it going to have also overlap. Im going to speak with Crower and GSC guys. Also i find Webcamshafts. I think those are in England. 
If all works well, sure this car is going to be hell of a climber. It has all the good that you can have. Motec M150 with PDM15 and E888 extension, autosport wiring, traction control, Turbosmart anti-lag sistem, iced cooled watercooler, Wat-met inyection and else. The problem is tuning everything well and the reliability of the engine.





QUOTE=JOutterbridge;114674125]If you are using the speed sensor and electronics i believe you can monitor the choke by seeing the compressor speed. Your tuner can just compare that speed to the Garrett map and know how much power you're making and how efficiently. That's very valuable. 
For Cams just search for custom cams in Google and you might find a shop near you. I've used Crower and GSC before. Delta also does custom cams for North America i believe. If anything you can just email or call the shops and ask them if they can do it for your bike. The turbo A/R change is difficult since it's T25 to V band or T4 or something but with the speed sensor in use you'll know if that needs to be changed when the bike is run for the first time. Sounds like a hell of a climber you're building👍[/QUOTE]


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Use duckduckgo, your privacy is important

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

what means this? i dont understand







Vegeta Gti said:


> Use duckduckgo, your privacy is important
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Thanks mainstayinc. I find de Alpha racing 4.1 camshafts target but im not able to attach pictures. This are de complet date:
> 
> lve lift 11,5mm max.
> Theoretical valve opening duration at 1mm: 256°
> ...


Working on camshaft card...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is the camshaft card I created for the State 4.1.1 Alpha Racing Cams. The camshaft profiles for the intake and exhaust are a close estimate but may not be the exact profile from Alpha Racing. Based on this profile, the intake and exhaust valves overlap at around TDC. I calculated the valve lift for the intake and exhaust valves to be around 2.5mm at TDC. That means that the intake and exhaust valves are both open 2.5mm at TDC. That allows good exhaust scavenging on an NA application. However, that amount of overlap will cause reversion on a turbo application (on boost) and reduce power. I would like to see that number closer to 0.50 to 1.00mm. That would require less lift and duration. Centerlines are good though.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Very good information mainstayinc. I can't find the oem cam profile. May be tomorrow i will meassure it. My friend have the tool to do it.










mainstayinc said:


> Below is the camshaft card I created for the State 4.1.1 Alpha Racing Cams. The camshaft profiles for the intake and exhaust are a close estimate but may not be the exact profile from Alpha Racing. Based on this profile, the intake and exhaust valves overlap at around TDC. I calculated the valve lift for the intake and exhaust valves to be around 2.5mm at TDC. That means that the intake and exhaust valves are both open 2.5mm at TDC. That allows good exhaust scavenging on an NA application. However, that amount of overlap will cause reversion on a turbo application (on boost) and reduce power. I would like to see that number closer to 0.50 to 1.00mm. That would require less lift and duration. Centerlines are good though.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Very good information mainstayinc. I can't find the oem cam profile. May be tomorrow i will meassure it. My friend have the tool to do it.


Yeah, if you find the OEM profile I can overlay it with the Alpha cams. I would need lift, duration and centerlines. 

EDIT: Acutally, the centerlines for OEM are the same as the Alpha cams (109* Exhaust, 111* Intake). So, I only need lift at 1.0mm and duration.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

All right. Im going to do it tomorrow.
Thanks


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

These is what catcams people answer.


Hi,


We have made BMW S1000rr cams before but not sure they are 100% the same as yours.


With a lot of bike engines there are small differences between camshafts depending on the year they where build so it is important we can compare your oem camshafts with our camshafts.


Some pictures to start with could help in the first fase.

Do you need 1 set or more sets?


What the 3660 FTW means i don't know.




Kin dregards

Raf Liekens


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

I need one more opinion, GTX2867R Gen2 (0.57) vs G25-550 (0.72). what would have better spool, response, power limit, either on 1.8 or 2.0?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> I need one more opinion, GTX2867R Gen2 (0.57) vs G25-550 (0.72). what would have better spool, response, power limit, either on 1.8 or 2.0?


Those two turbos are pretty closely matched but the G25-550 looks slightly better on paper. It also depends on the turbine A/R. Below I overlaid both turbos with 2.0L displacement. G-series is in [BLUE] and the GTX in [RED].


----------



## BoostedHatchback (Jun 21, 2020)

This thread is awesome. I learned a ton reading through the last 58 pages of discussion. Thank you for all the valuable info and explanations.


----------



## NasMK4_2 (Sep 14, 2020)

Good to see vegeta and mainsyc still active in the forums after all these years wow.

Still love this thread, its unfortunate i cant get back into my old account... but wow these new 550's look like a very promising turbo!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

BoostedHatchback said:


> This thread is awesome. I learned a ton reading through the last 58 pages of discussion. Thank you for all the valuable info and explanations.


:thumbup::beer:



NasMK4_2 said:


> Good to see vegeta and mainsyc still active in the forums after all these years wow.
> 
> Still love this thread, its unfortunate i cant get back into my old account... but wow these new 550's look like a very promising turbo!


:thumbup::wave::beer:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

NasMK4_2 said:


> Good to see vegeta and mainsyc still active in the forums after all these years wow.
> 
> Still love this thread, its unfortunate i cant get back into my old account... but wow these new 550's look like a very promising turbo!




Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Those two turbos are pretty closely matched but the G25-550 looks slightly better on paper. It also depends on the turbine A/R. Below I overlaid both turbos with 2.0L displacement. G-series is in [BLUE] and the GTX in [RED].


Thanks, yes I saw comparison, I am curious how much spool is different with AR 0.57 vs 0.71...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> Thanks, yes I saw comparison, I am curious how much spool is different with AR 0.57 vs 0.71...


You can probably get the GTX2867R2 to spool as fast as the G25-550 with the smaller 0.57 A/R turbine housing. However, the G25-550 will be more efficient with the larger 0.71 A/R housing through out the power band.


----------



## Nenad22 (Sep 8, 2019)

Thanks, from some tuners, I got information that 0.57 GTX2867R gen2 is faster spooling turbo than g25 and can do up to 450HP with that AR. But compressor maps show that g25 is better even with 0.72.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nenad22 said:


> Thanks, from some tuners, I got information that *0.57 GTX2867R gen2 is faster spooling turbo than g25 and can do up to 450HP with that AR.* But compressor maps show that g25 is better even with 0.72.


That's very interesting. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I want to see a few of these .57ar cars in action

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Unluck21 (Sep 17, 2020)

*Turbo choice G25-550 vs EFR7163*

Hi there

I'm landing all the time on this forum with questions about turbo choices, so first: thanks for that!
Also I have seen some compares between the G25-550, G25-660 and EFR7163 so far so good

My question is, how big is the affect of the turbine wheel efficiency?
The G25-550 has a efficiency of 80% and the EFR7163 of 74%
I have here a map of a g25-550 and of the EFR7163 with both on the island of 72%
Both have arround 47/48lb/min with an absolute pressure of 2.7bar
What will here be the difference between those two turbos?

Thanks and sorry for my english 

<a href="https://ibb.co/tYMHn6W"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/ygnNKCb/Map-G25-550.png" alt="Map-G25-550" border="0"></a>
<a href="https://ibb.co/ZTqhqvv"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/pXY3YNN/Map-7163.png" alt="Map-7163" border="0"></a>


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Unluck21 said:


> Hi there
> 
> I'm landing all the time on this forum with questions about turbo choices, so first: thanks for that!
> Also I have seen some compares between the G25-550, G25-660 and EFR7163 so far so good
> ...


Turbine efficiency is important for mass flow at high RPM. Depending on your application neither of these turbos will be great at that flow rate and high RPM. The EFR is around 64% efficient there? It's close to choke. Same with the G25, it's around 68% at that same flow rate. You might need the larger housing A/R to reach the power level you are looking for to ensure you don't cause high backpressure and volumetric efficiency loss.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

*Water metanol injection*

Good night every body. Do any of you have experience with methanol-water injection? I have heard a lot about post turbo injection, pre turbo etc.
Someone can tell me something?
Thank you


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Good night every body. Do any of you have experience with methanol-water injection? I have heard a lot about post turbo injection, pre turbo etc.
> Someone can tell me something?
> Thank you


Yes. Do it if you have a turbo. Snow Performance is one of the bigger brands you can look at. Cooler intake air temperatures and timing can be advanced to make more power.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Thank you. I just bought the snowperformance system because it was the only one that offered 4 nozzles, but I have tried the system abroad and there are things that I don't like.

I have noticed that when the pump stops pumping, the injectors still continue to drip residual water from the circuit.

I have read in the forums that some people use gasoline injectors to be able to have a better injection control.

What can you tell me about this?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

I have an AEM kit with an in-line check valve. I have it about 5” back from the nozzle. Look online for the nozzles with check valves in them to eliminate any residual dripping if you find it being an issue for you.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

I have the check valve mounted but it may be a bit far.
Have you really noticed improvement using the water injection?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> I have the check valve mounted but it may be a bit far.
> Have you really noticed improvement using the water injection?


When the intake manifold goes from too hot to touch longer than 5 seconds to having condensation on it like a cold beer. Yes. It has noticeable improvements. 



https://forums.vwvortex.com/forumdisplay.php?1138-Water-Alcohol-Methanol-Injection


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Ive got a question for those more turbo smarter than myself. 

I purchased a Holset ‘Super’ HX30W based on several YouTube videos and a couple of dyno graphs of a regular HX30W on the 1.8t platform. The question I have is spool speed. Same turbine and 6cm2 housing but the Super has a larger compressor. Would it not spool faster?

Regular HX30W:
turbine 52/65.5
compressor: 69/40.2

Super HX30W: 
turbine 52/65.5
compressor: 78/46

I’m seeing 5psi at 6000rpm with the Super and the YT vids/dyno graphs show spooling around 4400rpm.


----------



## Pontxio (Oct 8, 2019)

Thanks so much. Im going tu study all post








Brake Weight said:


> When the intake manifold goes from too hot to touch longer than 5 seconds to having condensation on it like a cold beer. Yes. It has noticeable improvements.
> 
> 
> 
> https://forums.vwvortex.com/forumdisplay.php?1138-Water-Alcohol-Methanol-Injection


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pontxio said:


> Thanks so much. Im going tu study all post


----------



## HidRo (Sep 19, 2003)

NasMK4_2 said:


> Good to see vegeta and mainsyc still active in the forums after all these years wow.


Exactly what I was thinking!!

Now, a question from me (that might have been debated to the grave).

I currently have a 1.8T (stock bore) with AEB head, and it came with tubular manifold and GTX3582R with Tial 0.82 v-band housing.
I think this will be WAY too much laggy. I had a bone stock 1.8T AGU, and a T3T4 50trim, and full boost was at 4200, and it's a bit on the high side already.

So, I might need to change the turbo down the line.
I was thinking of going SPA T3 manifold (top mount) to ditch the v-band manifold (was already cracked, and was now fixed) and the new turbo...

So, what would the best be? 
I drive the car on the track.
My thinking was going towards G25-550 (need the v-band manifold), GT3071R(0.63 T3 exhaust housing), or something else. I would prefer a ball bearing ( I only have experience with journal, and it kind of sucks  )
Not going after a specific HP number (reached around 400bhp with the 50trim).

Thanks for any inputs!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

HidRo said:


> Exactly what I was thinking!!
> 
> Now, a question from me (that might have been debated to the grave).
> 
> ...


SPA makes a cast T3 divided manifold for the 1.8T engine.










Combine that with a second generation twin-scroll GTX2867R or GTX3071R and external wastegate and you're good! Twin-scroll EFR is a good choice too. Also like the G25-550 and G25-660 but that's v-band only last time I checked.

EDIT: Video...






EDIT: GEN2 - Garrett GTX2867R Turbo w/ Divided .82 A/R T3 Turbine Housing w/3" VBAND










Garrett Gen2 GTX3071R with T3 Divided Housing


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Correct, g series are all vband inlet and gtx2867 doesn't have a good turbine housing in a vband outlet with the inlet. Though treadstone might make one.

I had to machine a turbine housing for a customer. 


The gtx3071 will be the same as the gt35 as far as spool, the gt3071 will see 20psi around 4k.

I say gtx2867 because it's such a great all around tobi in a compact package. The .72 are is perfect. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Correct, g series are all vband inlet and *gtx2867 doesn't have a good turbine housing in a vband outlet with the inlet*. Though treadstone might make one.
> 
> I had to machine a turbine housing for a customer.
> 
> ...


True. I posted some options for the GTX2867R in my (edited) post above with T3 twin-scroll inlet and v-band outlet.

T3 TS inlet ---> V-band outlet FTW!


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

*Recommendation for Twin Turbos*

Need advise, trying to decide which pair to go with, G25-550 or G25-660. This is for a 264ci V6, looking for 800rwhp on race gas/full boost and I'll take what I can get on 93 octane + methanol. Mostly a street driven car so quick spool up is important, engine is built to handle 1000+ hp.

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> Need advise, trying to decide which pair to go with, G25-550 or G25-660. This is for a 264ci V6, looking for 800rwhp on race gas/full boost and I'll take what I can get on 93 octane + methanol. Mostly a street driven car so quick spool up is important, engine is built to handle 1000+ hp.
> 
> Mike


You can use either turbo for that setup. Twin G25-550's will get you to 800 RWHP but I would personally go with twin G25-660's due to the fact that you have plenty of displacement.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> You can use either turbo for that setup. Twin G25-550's will get you to 800 RWHP but I would personally go with twin G25-660's due to the fact that you have plenty of displacement.
> 
> -John (mainstayinc).


Thank you John,

Do you advise a .72 or .92 AR with the 660?

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> Thank you John,
> 
> Do you advise a .72 or .92 AR with the 660?
> 
> Mike


I recommend the 0.72 A/R for quicker spool on a street driven car at your displacement. But check to see if others have had good success with the smaller turbine housing versus the 0.92 A/R.


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

Thank you John,

I will go with the 660's and let you know how it turns out. I noticed a turbo speed sensor is available on the 660's, how would knowing the turbo speed aid me in tuning?

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> Thank you John,
> 
> I will go with the 660's and let you know how it turns out. I noticed a turbo speed sensor is available on the 660's, *how would knowing the turbo speed aid me in tuning?*
> 
> Mike


The turbo speed sensor can help you understand operating points on the compressor map (along with pressure ratio i.e. 'boost pressure' and engine speed). However I think exhaust gas temperature and inlet temperature are more important for tuning.


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

I went through this entire thread and i'm impressed by your work! @mainstayinc 
I have an interesting problem, i hope your insight can solve this.
The fuel in my country is extremely poor. So keeping this in mind which setup would be the most beneficial?
I have a 3L 2JZ and wondering if i should run an efr 8474 or run dual efr 7163? What are the pros and cons of these 2 setups? To give you a perspective, the Gtx3582RS Gen ll maxes out at 450whp on 95+meth on a 2L.
I want like 600whp on our poor pump fuel+meth. What do you think?


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> The turbo speed sensor can help you understand operating points on the compressor map (along with pressure ratio i.e. 'boost pressure' and engine speed). However I think exhaust gas temperature and inlet temperature are more important for tuning.


100% agree here as tuner.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> The turbo speed sensor can help you understand operating points on the compressor map (along with pressure ratio i.e. 'boost pressure' and engine speed). However I think exhaust gas temperature and inlet temperature are more important for tuning.


What are your thoughts on aftermarket knock sensors? My engine is so far from stock the factory sensor would be worthless in my case, but I am thinking of the Plex knock sensor to use for dialing in the methanol injection as I increase the boost. My car is currently at a dyno tune facility getting the FAST XFI dialed in and to my surprise they don't use knock sensors when tuning radical engines, they are focused on providing a safe street tune but to me it seems if you want to turn up the boost you have to have a knock sensor?

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> What are your thoughts on aftermarket knock sensors? My engine is so far from stock the factory sensor would be worthless in my case, but I am thinking of the Plex knock sensor to use for dialing in the methanol injection as I increase the boost. My car is currently at a dyno tune facility getting the FAST XFI dialed in and to my surprise they don't use knock sensors when tuning radical engines, they are focused on providing a safe street tune but to me it seems if you want to turn up the boost you have to have a knock sensor?
> 
> Mike


I recently replaced a knock sensor with an aftermarket unit and it seems to work just fine. So, I don't think there is any issue versus OEM. Strange that a tuner would not use knock sensor for tuning. That's critical for a turbo car as knock resistance of fuel ultimately determines the amount of boost you can run.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Timing more than boost because you can crank boost, but you'll end up pulling all the timing out due to knock, and you'll lower boost at some point to add timing for it to have useful power. So, you will be limited in boost if you can't monitor knock.

If they aren't monitoring knock, then.... how is it a "safe" tune in any form?

Every car is different, 2 cars with the same engine and setup will responds differently to timing, boost levels and fuel types, etc. So if a tuner says "we always do it this way, we know what safe timing is for these cars" you should go else where.

As for aftermarket vs oem sensors, that depends. Are you getting websites more harmonically sites for your engine in regards to frequency need on its characteristics, and if so, can you change that criteria and utilize it with the management your running, etc?
That's how I would personally approach it. What are the pros and cons, ROI for the work and cost, etc.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Timing more than boost because you can crank boost, but you'll end up pulling all the timing out due to knock, and you'll lower boost at some point to add timing for it to have useful power. So, you will be limited in boost if you can't monitor knock.
> 
> If they aren't monitoring knock, then.... how is it a "safe" tune in any form?
> 
> ...


I agree, we'll se how it works out.


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

Tuner finished up today, safe tune was 19psi, 650hp and 590ft/lbs at 6500rpm (with the current BW S300 turbos). The turbos are slooow to spool, they start at 3400rpm and hit 19psi at 4500 rpm, he believes we could get 900 ft/lbs torque if the turbos would be fully spooled up by 3500 rpm. So I am happy with what it did on pump gas and poorly matched turbos, now I just need to sell these new turbos to help pay for smaller ones (G25-660s).

Mike


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> Tuner finished up today, safe tune was 19psi, 650hp and 590ft/lbs at 6500rpm. The turbos are slooow to spool, they start at 3400rpm and hit 19psi at 4500 rpm, he believes we could get 900 ft/lbs torque if the turbos would be fully spooled up by 3500 rpm. So I am happy with what it did on pump gas and poorly matched turbos, now I just need to sell these new turbos to help pay for smaller ones.
> 
> Mike


I may have missed it, but what is in? And which turbos did you use for this tune?

Could I interest you into a Holset? My ‘Super HX30’ comes on around 3000 and full 30psi by 3200 on a 1.8l. You’re 4.33l would be like a 2.2l (x2). I’d guesstimate a 2300/2500 spool up for a pair. They’re supposed to flow 46lb/min each for the non Super, regular version. I’m up to almost 35lb/min with 25psi at 6800 (according to my MAF readings). So there’s more to go for me. BenzForce our of Austin is where I found mine and he could probably find a new pair of the Supers. Likely has a set of the regulars in stock. 

Only issues are there is no flow chart available and it is not watercooled.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> Tuner finished up today, safe tune was 19psi, 650hp and 590ft/lbs at 6500rpm. The turbos are slooow to spool, they start at 3400rpm and hit 19psi at 4500 rpm, he believes we could get 900 ft/lbs torque if the turbos would be fully spooled up by 3500 rpm. So I am happy with what it did on pump gas and poorly matched turbos, now I just need to sell these new turbos to help pay for smaller ones.
> 
> Mike


Those turbos should start spooling between 2000 and 2500 RPMs on 4.3L displacement on a twin-turbo setup. I would check to see if your wastegate is cracking open before full boost or maybe the tune is too conservative. I have a first generation GTX2867R (which is also a 67mm turbo but two generations older than the G25-660) on my 2.1L daily driver and I start to see 7 psi by 2000 RPMs and 26 psi by 3000 RPMs with massive torque. Also, exhaust runner length will effect spoolup. The smaller G25-550 will only gain you 200 to 300 RPMs quicker spool when these two turbos are compared on paper.


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Those turbos should start spooling between 2000 and 2500 RPMs on 4.3L displacement on a twin-turbo setup. I would check to see if your wastegate is cracking open before full boost or maybe the tune is too conservative. I have a first generation GTX2867R (which is also a 67mm turbo but two generations older than the G25-660) on my 2.1L daily driver and I start to see 7 psi by 2000 RPMs and 26 psi by 3000 RPMs with massive torque. Also, exhaust runner length will effect spoolup. The smaller G25-550 will only gain you 200 to 300 RPMs quicker spool when these two turbos are compared on paper.


If you missed my post earlier. Can you kindly please give me your opinion regarding this?

I went through this entire thread and i'm impressed by your work! @mainstayinc 
I have an interesting problem, i hope your insight can solve this.
The fuel in my country is extremely poor. So keeping this in mind which setup would be the most beneficial?
I have a 3L 2JZ and wondering if i should run an efr 8474 or run dual efr 7163? What are the pros and cons of these 2 setups? To give you a perspective, the Gtx3582RS Gen ll maxes out at 450whp on 95+meth on a 2L.
I want like 600whp on our poor pump fuel+meth. What do you think?


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

This was with BW S300 turbos, 83mm comp. 76mm turbine, its a 264ci Buick V6 stage 2 in a Grand National. The inertia of these turbos is just too much for 3 cylinders to spin up. I plan to switch to G25-660's but I had to get the FAST XFI dialed-in and see where I stand today, now I know. I think in race car mode with 116 octane and 27 lbs of boost it would really fly but driving on the street its painfully sloow to spool so I have to swap them out.

Mike


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

This is the most informative thread I have come across for Garrett turbo information, what you guys do with half the engine size applies to me with twin turbos. There is just no information around for what I am doing, to me an engine is an engine so what applies to your engines can be very informative to mine. The only info on the G series turbos I have found is for single turbos so for twins on a V6 its uncharted territory.

Mike


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Buick GN..... I should’ve known. A local guy has one with just a big single and it’s always fun to see and hear. I’ve wanted one for quite some time, BTW.


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

*g25-550 2960 6cyl*

Thank you mainstayinc. Could you give advice and g25-550 iwg comp map for a TWIN TURBO 2960cc 6cyl 87mm 83mm 3L ?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> This was with BW S300 turbos, 83mm comp. 76mm turbine, its a 264ci Buick V6 stage 2 in a Grand National. The inertia of these turbos is just too much for 3 cylinders to spin up. I plan to switch to G25-660's but I had to get the FAST XFI dialed-in and see where I stand today, now I know. I think in race car mode with 116 octane and 27 lbs of boost it would really fly but driving on the street its painfully sloow to spool so I have to swap them out.
> 
> Mike


Ah... That explains it!

EDIT: I've always like the Buick GN. Post some pictures here if you can.

EDIT: Below is a re-post of a boost v RPM graph I posted several years ago on my 2.1L GTX2867R setup. It will give you an idea of what you can expect on a well-tuned 2.1L setup using a 67mm turbo. Here is the full post: gtx2867r spool.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> If you missed my post earlier. Can you kindly please give me your opinion regarding this?
> 
> I went through this entire thread and i'm impressed by your work! @mainstayinc
> I have an interesting problem, i hope your insight can solve this.
> ...





Swiftz32 said:


> Thank you mainstayinc. Could you give advice and g25-550 iwg comp map for a TWIN TURBO 2960cc 6cyl 87mm 83mm 3L ?


Let me check into that. But I'm traveling today so am a little busy ATM.


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

I would post a couple pics but this site is to cumbersome to try and post pictures. Picking the car up from the tuner on Monday and will be pulling the turbos off next week, they would be perfect for a big V8 twin turbo.

Mike


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Hemi8 said:


> I would post a couple pics but this site is to cumbersome to try and post pictures. Picking the car up from the tuner on Monday and will be pulling the turbos off next week, they would be perfect for a big V8 twin turbo.
> 
> Mike


:thumbup:


----------



## panaiotis (Nov 10, 2020)

hello everybody, new guy here! 
I've been visiting this forum for years, looots of useful stuff 👍👍

I would really appreciate if you could help me with chosing a new turbo.
my engine is an italian 1.6lt fully built motor, with racing spec cylinder heahat likes to rev high. currently, I have a journal bearing gt35 .63ar from ebay (EMUSA brand). it's been on the car for several years without any problems. it made 550whp @30psi/6500revs and 60kg trq/5500revs on a strict dyno with 100 Ron gas. no meth, no ethanol. it holds the power from 6500 to 9000revs, but the turbo rans out of breath past 30psi. my engine is built to handle more, so, it's finally time for an upgrade 

the target is 650-700whp @30-35psi with pump gas. my tuner suggests the gtx3582 .63ar gen2, but -from what I hear- I'm also tempted by the gtx3584. I'm already used to some lag, so it's not a very big deal for me. what worries me, is efficiency. 

let's here your thoughts, and if you could do your magic with compressor maps plotting, I would be really grateful 🙏🙏


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

panaiotis said:


> hello everybody, new guy here!
> I've been visiting this forum for years, looots of useful stuff 👍👍
> 
> I would really appreciate if you could help me with chosing a new turbo.
> ...


The GTX3584RS has a super-efficient turbine wheel that is better than the current G-series turbos. If I had to choose between the second generation GTX3582R and the GTX3584RS, I would choose the latter one (the "RS"). But, 1.6L displacement is pushing the limits in terms of small displacement with this turbo. I am running the GTX3584RS on my newest project (My 1984 Rabbit GTI build thread: Haldex + 2.1L + GTX3584RS + E85) but that's 2.1L. You might be able to get some helpful information there as I posted some compressor maps. Also, check out this thread: Thinking gtx3584rs in 1780cc. I posted a compressor map in that thread for the GTX3584Rs on 1.8L. If I have time, I will post a custom map for you on 1.6L but that's not likely soon.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## panaiotis (Nov 10, 2020)

thank you very much for your reply

my engine is very torquey for its displacement, very oversquare (86.4 x 67.4), with 288 cams that allow breathing at high revs, but at the end of the day it's still 1.6. It has plenty of headroom, but I don't want a turbo that's pushing the limits of my displacement.
I will read your links carefully to see if I can extract more info. if you ever find the time for a map plot, I would be grateful.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

panaiotis said:


> hello everybody, new guy here!
> I've been visiting this forum for years, looots of useful stuff 👍👍
> 
> I would really appreciate if you could help me with chosing a new turbo.
> ...


I had some time this morning to put together a map for you. Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3582R with the GTX3584RS. As you can see, the GTX3582R has a slightly better surge line (+150 RPMs). Either of these turbos won't begin to spoolup until close to 5000 RPMs on 1.6L with full boost coming in past 6000 RPMs. I marked two points corresponding to the following:

GTX3582R: P2/P1 = 3.4 or about 35 psi at 10,000 RPMs producing about 77 lbs. of air per minute or 770 HP (670 WHP) on a FWD car.
GTX3584RS: P2/P1 = 3.65 or about 39 psi at 9,000 RPMs producing about 75 lbs. of air per minute or 750 HP (650 WHP) on a FWD car.










Overall, both of these turbos are very large for 1.6L displacement. You can expect to rev past 9000+ RPMs to get the most out of turbos with the GTX3584RS having the most upside potential if you want to rev past 10,000 RPMs.


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Let me check into that. But I'm traveling today so am a little busy ATM.


Still waiting buddy. Hopefully you can solve my issue.


----------



## panaiotis (Nov 10, 2020)

wow, you actually did it!! huuuuge thanks, this map is precious!!

my engine is essentially a racing motor. it can rev beyond 10000 and keep the power until the limiter, but I don't want to risk revving past 9000 with over 30psi on freakin pump gas. so, the gtx3584 is out  

the gtx3582 is also quite large for this displacement, but my engine is built to come alive beyond 5000 and grow stronger as rpms rise, so I'm used to lag and abrupt power delivery at silly rpms. I know I can't max its huge compressor, but according to your map (wich actually validates what my tuner has already explained to me), my hp goal is doable. marginal, but doable 

again, MANY THANKS 🙏🙏


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

panaiotis said:


> wow, you actually did it!! huuuuge thanks, this map is precious!!
> 
> my engine is essentially a racing motor. it can rev beyond 10000 and keep the power until the limiter, but I don't want to risk revving past 9000 with over 30psi on freakin pump gas. so, the gtx3584 is out
> 
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

ill said:


> Still waiting buddy. Hopefully you can solve my issue.




Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Let me check into that. But I'm traveling today so am a little busy ATM.


The fuel in my country is extremely poor. So keeping this in mind which setup would be the most beneficial?
I have a 3L 2JZ and wondering if i should run an efr 8474 or run dual efr 7163? What are the pros and cons of these 2 setups? To give you a perspective, the Gtx3582RS Gen ll maxes out at 450whp on 95+meth on a 2L.
I want like 600whp on our poor pump fuel+meth. What do you think?

I've tried several different groups. No one can seem to give me an answer.
Have to end up spending +$6000 for the turbo, manifold, fabrication and tune, so would really appreciate any kind of feedback/insight towards this.

I'm open to any turbo suggestion from anyone in this forum, need to make +600 with the least lag possible.
Have 272 cams as well. Thank you! eace:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> The fuel in my country is extremely poor. So keeping this in mind which setup would be the most beneficial?
> I have a 3L 2JZ and wondering if i should run an efr 8474 or run dual efr 7163? What are the pros and cons of these 2 setups? To give you a perspective, the Gtx3582RS Gen ll maxes out at 450whp on 95+meth on a 2L.
> I want like 600whp on our poor pump fuel+meth. What do you think?
> 
> ...


Let me look into that and post my response with maps etc. when I get a chance. However, you can make a lot of power on that 3.0L motor. With poor fuel you need to keep temperatures in check. The best setup in my opinion would be a proper twin scroll setup using either the EFR 8474 or the GTX3584RS with a divided 1.06 A/R T4 exhaust housing. A twin scroll setup will allow you to run higher boost and make more power for a given fuel. This guy makes 600 WHP on 2.1L displacement running 36 psi on 93 pump gas with no methanol injection:

Curt Brown 2.15L / S362 SX-E (68mm) / EVO IX / Pump Gas

That's because he has a proper TS setup and is properly tuned. With 3.0L displacement and methanol injection, I don't see any reason you can achieve 600 WHP on your setup. I'll post some compressor maps soon.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> The fuel in my country is extremely poor. So keeping this in mind which setup would be the most beneficial?
> I have a 3L 2JZ and wondering if i should run an efr 8474 or run dual efr 7163? What are the pros and cons of these 2 setups? To give you a perspective, the Gtx3582RS Gen ll maxes out at 450whp on 95+meth on a 2L.
> I want like 600whp on our poor pump fuel+meth. What do you think?
> 
> ...


In order to make 600 WHP on 3.0L displacement, you will have to make 690 HP at the crank. Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS and the EFR 8474 on 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing about 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas. This setup is capable of producing upwards of 900 HP with either turbo at higher boost and RPMs. The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3584RS is about 500 RPMs better than the EFR 8474 with boost coming on between 2000 and 2500 RPMs (if not a little sooner).










So, my recommendation is the GTX3584RS with a T4 Divided 1.06 A/R Turbine Housing (see below) and a properly constructed short or long runner divided exhaust manifold. You will be VERY happy with this setup!










EDIT: For an inline six cylinder like your 3.0L 2JZ, I would use twin-scroll single turbo as mentioned above. For a V-6 application, I would consider using a twin turbo to keep piping short. So, there is not benefit IMO using twin EFR 7163's on your setup. Those would probably be laggier anyway on 1500 CCs (please don't ask me to do a map for that).

EDIT: *Proper* T4 divided manifold.


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> In order to make 600 WHP on 3.0L displacement, you will have to make 690 HP at the crank. Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS and the EFR 8474 on 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing about 70 lbs. of air per minute or 700 HP on pump/race gas. This setup is capable of producing upwards of 900 HP with either turbo at higher boost and RPMs. The surge line (left side of map) for the GTX3584RS is about 500 RPMs better than the EFR 8474 with boost coming on between 2000 and 2500 RPMs (if not a little sooner).


You sir just saved me from spending more money than i should.
If you recommend the GTX3584RS for the 2J over the EFR, what about the there newer G series line up?
I've heard mixed reviews about them, especially the bigger G35 line up.
Do you still feel GTX3584RS would out do a G35-900 / 1050 in terms of getting to that 600whp mark?
From what i know the G series and EFR smaller turbos are the best money can buy, but not a lot of comparison done with the bigger turbos. Maybe when you have more free time you can give me your opinion.
I'm not brand specific even precision would do, so based on your knowledge you can suggest the best turbo for quick spool 600whp.
Or is GTX3584RS the current best in the market as per your knowledge?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> You sir just saved me from spending more money than i should.
> If you recommend the GTX3584RS for the 2J over the EFR, what about the there newer G series line up?
> I've heard mixed reviews about them, especially the bigger G35 line up.
> Do you still feel GTX3584RS would out do a G35-900 / 1050 in terms of getting to that 600whp mark?
> ...


Let me look into that and post my opinion.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> You sir just saved me from spending more money than i should.
> If you recommend the GTX3584RS for the 2J over the EFR, what about the there newer G series line up?
> I've heard mixed reviews about them, especially the bigger G35 line up.
> *Do you still feel GTX3584RS would out do a G35-900 / 1050 in terms of getting to that 600whp mark?*
> ...


The G35-1050 offers no advantage over the GTX3584RS for your power goals. Below, I overlaid the GTX3584RS [BLUE] and the G35-1050 [RED] with 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). As you can see, the surge line (left side of map) of the GTX3584RS is slightly better than the G35-1050. So, you can expect slightly better spool over the new G-series. Further, the twin-scroll setup of the GTX3584RS will be more efficient than the G-series turbo which is only offered in single-scroll the last time I checked. A twin-scroll will keep more heat out of the combustion chamber as compared to a single scroll in most cases. However, if you wanted to make more than 90 lbs. of air per minute or 900 HP, then the G35-1050 is a better choice. You can expect to make an additional 75 HP over the GTX3584RS at P2/p1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 9000 RPMs.










Comparison of the G35-900 to come...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> You sir just saved me from spending more money than i should.
> If you recommend the GTX3584RS for the 2J over the EFR, what about the there newer G series line up?
> I've heard mixed reviews about them, especially the bigger G35 line up.
> *Do you still feel GTX3584RS would out do a G35-900 / 1050 in terms of getting to that 600whp mark?*
> ...


Below I overlaid the GTX3584RS [RED] and the G35-900 [BLUE] with 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). As you can see, the G35-900 has a better surge line (left side of map) as compared to the GTX3584RS. Therefore, you can expect quicker spool with the single-scroll G35-900 (up to +350 RPMs). You can produce as much as 82 lbs. of air per minute with the G35-900 or 820 HP at P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi and 7700 RPMs. This turbo seems to be a good fit for 3.0L displacement in terms of quick spool and 800 HP+ capable. Too bad it is not offered in a twin-scroll!










Precision Turbo does not publish compressor maps so there is no way I can compare.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> You sir just saved me from spending more money than i should.
> If you recommend the GTX3584RS for the 2J over the EFR, what about the there newer G series line up?
> I've heard mixed reviews about them, especially the bigger G35 line up.
> Do you still feel GTX3584RS would out do a G35-900 / 1050 in terms of getting to that 600whp mark?
> ...


You may want to consider the second generation GTX3582R which is virtually identical to the new G35-900. Below, I overlaid the GTX3582R_2 [RED] and the G35-900 [BLUE] with 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are virtually identical for both turbos with the G35-900 possibly having a very slight advantage. Both turbos as able to produce 82 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7700 RPMs. If this were my project, I would choose the second generation GTX3582R in a 1.06 A/R T4 twin-scroll turbine housing.


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

*help!!*

mainstayinc, that info you provided for the 2jz was food for thought! Thanks for another gem! This is my second request. I have (2) G25 550 turbos for my 300ZX twin turbo v6 3L 2960cc . I am curious to see specifically what my rpm surge and drop off is likely to be, as well as my power potential. Car has all breather mods(And other supporting mods), Stock motor, and uses 93 octane. help!! Any maps and advice would be appreciated


----------



## ill (Oct 31, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> You may want to consider the second generation GTX3582R which is virtually identical to the new G35-900. Below, I overlaid the GTX3582R_2 [RED] and the G35-900 [BLUE] with 3.0L displacement (2997 CCs). As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are virtually identical for both turbos with the G35-900 possibly having a very slight advantage. Both turbos as able to produce 82 lbs. of air per minute at P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7700 RPMs. If this were my project, I would choose the second generation GTX3582R in a 1.06 A/R T4 twin-scroll turbine housing.


This is a gold mine for the 2JZ bois! You not just answered my doubts but put to rest others i already had in mind! :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ill said:


> This is a gold mine for the 2JZ bois! You not just answered my doubts but put to rest others i already had in mind! :thumbup:


:thumbup: Glad to help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Swiftz32 said:


> mainstayinc, that info you provided for the 2jz was food for thought! Thanks for another gem! This is my second request. I have (2) G25 550 turbos for my 300ZX twin turbo v6 3L 2960cc . I am curious to see specifically what my rpm surge and drop off is likely to be, as well as my power potential. Car has all breather mods(And other supporting mods), Stock motor, and uses 93 octane. help!! Any maps and advice would be appreciated


Let me check into that. It may be a few days since I am getting into the *busy* time of my work week.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Swiftz32 said:


> mainstayinc, that info you provided for the 2jz was food for thought! Thanks for another gem! This is my second request. I have (2) G25 550 turbos for my 300ZX twin turbo v6 3L 2960cc . I am curious to see specifically what my rpm surge and drop off is likely to be, as well as my power potential. Car has all breather mods(And other supporting mods), Stock motor, and uses 93 octane. help!! Any maps and advice would be appreciated


Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1.5L displacement (1480 CCs). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from below 2000 RPMs to 2800 RPMs. On a well-tuned setup with stock cams and good tuning, you can expect the G25-550 to begin to spoolup no later than 2800 RPMs. You can expect full spool to occur no later than 3800 to 4000 RPMs (surge line + 1000 RPMs) assuming your wastegate(s) don't open until full spool is reached. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 35 lbs. of air per minute or 350 HP on pump/race gas or 700 HP on a twin-turbo setup.
P2/P1=2.9 or 27.5 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on pump/race gas or 980 HP on a twin-turbo setup.










So, I estimate the maximum potential of this setup using twin G25-550s to be just under 1000 HP on pump/race gas and 1100 to 1150 on E85/Ethanol.

Nissan 300 ZX Z32 Twin Turbo Specs:


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

Thank you so much. Turbos are in the car and I'm so excited.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Swiftz32 said:


> Thank you so much. Turbos are in the car and I'm so excited.


We all would love to see some feedback once it's running good. Videos, dyno charts, etc.


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

Will do!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Swiftz32 said:


> Thank you so much. Turbos are in the car and I'm so excited.


:thumbup:



Brake Weight said:


> We all would love to see some feedback once it's running good. Videos, dyno charts, etc.


x2!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I like the new look! Way easier on the eyes.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> I like the new look! Way easier on the eyes.


Meh. I'm not a fan of having to learn new formats. We can add likes now...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> Meh. I'm not a fan of having to learn new formats. We can add likes now...


And you can add your own avatar image now. That can be um... dangerous.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> And you can add your own avatar image now. That can be um... dangerous.


 Yes it can.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> Yes it can.


LMAO.


----------



## deavoll (Nov 26, 2020)

Hi mainstayinc, I was hoping i could get some advise on what turbo to get for my car.
Its a 180sx with a 2.0l sr20det
I have just got the car and it has massive turbo and cams at the moment so i want to downsize to a responsive street setup.
The motor has a forged bottom end, greddy intake manifold and currently has a gt3582r
The turbos i have been looking at are:
gtx 2860r gen2 
g25-550
bw 6258 or 6758
Im looking for the best response and around 400hp at the wheels.
I would also like to have the turbo in the stock low mount position.
I was thinking either a sinco equal length manifold or a tomei expreme
I will also get a new set of cams (not sure what size to get yet)
any advice would be great, cheers Troy


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

@mainstayinc, man, when are you going to package this spreadsheet of yours and let us pay you for your work? 

Or, it’s just about Christmas... nudge nudge lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

deavoll said:


> Hi mainstayinc, I was hoping i could get some advise on what turbo to get for my car.
> Its a 180sx with a 2.0l sr20det
> I have just got the car and it has massive turbo and cams at the moment so i want to downsize to a responsive street setup.
> The motor has a forged bottom end, greddy intake manifold and currently has a gt3582r
> ...


For 2.0L displacement I recommend the G25-550 or better yet the G25-660 for 400 WHP. The second generation GTX2867R and the EFR 6758 will get you there too. The second generation GTX2860R and the EFR 6258 are too small for your horsepower goals. Those will get you to the 350 to 375 WHP range.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> @mainstayinc, man, *when are you going to package this spreadsheet of yours and let us pay you for your work?*
> 
> Or, it’s just about Christmas... nudge nudge lol
> 
> ...


I could do that at some point and I would probably distribute for free. I don't mind putting the work into this thread when I have time though. Like anything else, it a _labor of love_ LOL. Once you start getting paid for something you enjoy doing then things change...


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

You rock bro!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> Once you start getting paid for something you enjoy doing then things change...


Absolutely stolen.


----------



## Butcher (Jan 31, 2001)

I'm building a low boost 2.0 8V and was wondering how a GT2560R map would look like. Looking for a quick boost and not more than 200hp.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Butcher said:


> I'm building a low boost 2.0 8V and was wondering how a GT2560R map would look like. Looking for a quick boost and not more than 200hp.


The GT2560R (aka GT28R) should spool very quickly on 2.0L displacement. That was my first _big_ turbo on my 1.8T daily driver before I stroked out to 2.1L. On that setup (1781 CC displacement), I was seeing full spool between 3200 and 3500 RPMs IIRC. Below I overlaid the GT2560R on 2.0L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=1.7 or about 10 psi at 4200 RPMs producing 20 lbs. of air per minute or 200 HP on a well tuned setup with good intercooling. Expect full spool to come in at or below 3000 RPMs.


----------



## coozauto (Nov 27, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> I could do that at some point and I would probably distribute for free. I don't mind putting the work into this thread when I have time though. Like anything else, it a _labor of love_ LOL. Once you start getting paid for something you enjoy doing then things change...
> 
> Always appreciate what you do brother! Maybe you can teach us how this whole thing works so others can help out too. Always feel bad when asking someone to do something that's greek to me.
> That being said can you be kind enough to answer this issue i have.
> ...


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> ......20 lbs. of air per minute or 200 HP on a well tuned setup with good intercooling.


Looking for some opinion. Do you feel pretty comfortable with the lbs/min equating to HP ratio? I'm seeing 260g/s or 33lbs/min by 4500rpm and 38 by 6400 (on data logs) from this Holset hx30. I have also ended up roasting the stock clutch last week so tinkering has halted. Low RPM/high boost horsing around and the old Sachs gave up the ghost. I've nursed it back some to being able to still have a little fun but it won't take the low RPM/high boost torque pulls. I am also in need of some tuning on this new setup, which I think I can get done finally next week. Adding 4bar MAP, 1000cc injectors, and possibly dropping to a 3or3.5bar FPR. I'm expecting an increase in boost and flow up to 42-44lb/min by 6800. Potentially more flow in higher RPMs but hard to say since there are no charts on this turbo specifically. It is considered a "Super" and flows slightly better than the regular one billed at .35kg/s (46lbs/min). So I'm off in some uncharted territory for a gasser but the max flow and 3.0 pressure ratio are just right for me especially since mine flows a little more.

So would a 430hp motor be a good safe guesstimate? I've located my nearest dyno and they happen to do euros as well.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> Looking for some opinion. *Do you feel pretty comfortable with the lbs/min equating to HP ratio?* I'm seeing 260g/s or 33lbs/min by 4500rpm and 38 by 6400 (on data logs) from this Holset hx30.


The number should be between 9 and 10. As in lbs. of air per minute x 9 or 10. I think that 10 is a little optimistic for most people but doable with race gas and good intercooling.



Brake Weight said:


> I have also ended up roasting the stock clutch last week so tinkering has halted. *Low RPM/high boost* horsing around and the old Sachs gave up the ghost. I've nursed it back some to being able to still have a little fun but it won't take the low RPM/high boost torque pulls.


That's exactly how I blew up my stock transmission after upgrading to the first generation GTX2867R and stroking motor. I ended up upgrading to a Bully Performance clutch from Ottawa Clutches and a built G-Force transmission from AP Tuning. That combination has been holding up great for me.



Brake Weight said:


> I am also in need of some tuning on this new setup, which I think I can get done finally next week. Adding 4bar MAP, 1000cc injectors, and possibly dropping to a 3or3.5bar FPR.


If those 1000 CC injectors are Genesis injectors then you are going to be very happy with those. I had them make me a custom 1200 CC injector and that is what I run on my daily driver GTX2867R + 2.1L stroker. I also use a GTS tune with 4 bar MAP sensor and 4 bar FPR with twin Aeromotive 340 fuel pumps for my E85 setup. The GTS tune is very good but not sure if that is still supported. 



Brake Weight said:


> I'm expecting an increase in boost and flow up to 42-44lb/min by 6800. Potentially more flow in higher RPMs but hard to say since there are no charts on this turbo specifically. It is considered a "Super" and flows slightly better than the regular one billed at .35kg/s (46lbs/min). So I'm off in some uncharted territory for a gasser but the max flow and 3.0 pressure ratio are just right for me especially since mine flows a little more.
> 
> *So would a 430hp motor be a good safe guesstimate? *I've located my nearest dyno and they happen to do euros as well.


I think that 46 lbs. of air per minute should make between 415 and 460 HP. So, yes, I think 430 HP on your setup if a safe estimate and very doable.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> Always appreciate what you do brother! Maybe you can teach us how this whole thing works so others can help out too. Always feel bad when asking someone to do something that's greek to me.
> That being said can you be kind enough to answer this issue i have.
> 
> I have a 2.1L Evo running stage 2 cams and full forged internals. I usually do not rev past 8000rpm.
> ...


Let me check into that. Is that the first or second generation GTX3576R? Also, what are the bore and stroke dimensions of 2.1L?


----------



## Hemi8 (Oct 25, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> 👍


Found a great deal on new pair of BW EFR 7163's that will bolt in place of the s300s with very little modification. The lighter wheels tipped me in the direction of the EFR over the Garretts plus saving over 1k didn't hurt either. Big hp numbers are no fun if the turbos won't spool fast and I don't see any data on how fast the Garrett wheels spin up on a V6 twin turbo.

Mike


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> The number should be between 9 and 10. As in lbs. of air per minute x 9 or 10. I think that 10 is a little optimistic for most people but doable with race gas and good intercooling.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No race gas nor e85 locally. But decent inter cooling when combined with my water injection. 

The injectors aren’t Genesis. I want the bigger CC so I could run a lower fuel pressure but wouldn’t mind running my smaller 500cc at 4.5bar. Seems like there would be better atomization under higher pressure.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> No race gas nor e85 locally. But decent inter cooling when combined with my water injection.
> 
> The injectors aren’t Genesis. I want the bigger CC so I could run a lower fuel pressure* but wouldn’t mind running my smaller 500cc at 4.5bar*. Seems like there would be better atomization under higher pressure.


That's a good strategy as long a your fuel pumps can handle the additional pressure (i.e.: flow enough fuel at higher pressure). I am running ID 2000's in my MK1 street killer so I can maintain 3 to 4 bar BFP while running E85.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> That's a good strategy as long a your fuel pumps can handle the additional pressure (i.e.: flow enough fuel at higher pressure). I am running ID 2000's in my MK1 street killer so I can maintain 3 to 4 bar BFP while running E85.


The pump should be good. I haven't looked at the specs in a while but I remember thinking it was good for it. One of those DoucheWerks style drop ins. I love the mk1 you've got going there. I want one of those as well but can never make up my mind as to what power plant. Original block with 4 carbs and big velocity stacks or something more modern.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> The pump should be good. I haven't looked at the specs in a while but I remember thinking it was good for it. *One of those DoucheWerks style drop ins. I love the mk1 you've got going there.* I want one of those as well but can never make up my mind as to what power plant. Original block with 4 carbs and big velocity stacks or something more modern.


The DeatschWerks (DoucheWerks LOL!) pumps are very good. In fact, I am using twin DeatschWerks drop in fuel pumps for the MK1. They flow better at higher pressures as compared to the Aeromotive 340s I have in my MK4 daily driver (GTX2867R + 2.1L).

The main reason I wanted an MK1 is because of weight. Even with the original 100 HP 8 valve engine that thing was quick. Now with a stroked out 20v, turbo and AWD conversion, I am hoping to kill it on the street. I will have to pressure Bill at Schimmel Performance to step up his game and get this project finished.


----------



## coozauto (Nov 27, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Let me check into that. Is that the first or second generation GTX3576R? Also, what are the bore and stroke dimensions of 2.1L?


First Gen
79mm stroke and 92.5 mm Bore


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> First Gen
> 79mm stroke and 92.5 mm Bore


Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3576R and the EFR 8374 with 2.1L displacement (92.5mm bore x 79 stroke = 2124 CCs). As you can see, the older generation and smaller GTX3576R has a better surge line (+600 RPMs) as compared to the EFR. That means you can expect quicker spool with this turbo all other things being equal. However, the larger EFR 8374 is capable of an additional 15 lbs. of air per minute or 150 HP up top as compared to the GTX3576R. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1= 2.8 or about 26 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP on a well-tuned setup with good intercooling for the GTX3576R.
P2/P1= 3.5 or about 36 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 78 lbs. of air per minute or 780 HP on a well-tuned setup with good intercooling for the EFR 8374.










So the question is: are you willing to give up 600+ RPMs in spoolup for an additional 150 HP up top? I would choose the larger EFR 8374 in this case since both turbos will be fairly laggy on 2.1L displacement.


----------



## coozauto (Nov 27, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the first generation GTX3576R and the EFR 8374 with 2.1L displacement (92.5mm bore x 79 stroke = 2124 CCs). As you can see, the older generation and smaller GTX3576R has a better surge line (+600 RPMs) as compared to the EFR. That means you can expect quicker spool with this turbo all other things being equal. However, the larger EFR 8374 is capable of an additional 15 lbs. of air per minute or 150 HP up top as compared to the GTX3576R. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:
> 
> P2/P1= 2.8 or about 26 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP on a well-tuned setup with good intercooling for the GTX3576R.
> P2/P1= 3.5 or about 36 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 78 lbs. of air per minute or 780 HP on a well-tuned setup with good intercooling for the EFR 8374.
> ...


Thank you! I prefer the extra power as well.
That's really helpful!

I saw that you had earlier compared the 8474 on a 3L and the 3582R gen2 was better fit in your opinion. What about the 3582R gen 2 on a 2.lL and also curious about the 8374 on a 3L. I have a friend with a supra who has a 3582R who is willing to swap to my 8374.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> Thank you! I prefer the extra power as well.
> That's really helpful!
> 
> I saw that you had earlier compared the 8474 on a 3L and the 3582R gen2 was better fit in your opinion. What about the 3582R gen 2 on a 2.lL and also curious about the 8374 on a 3L. I have a friend with a supra who has a 3582R who is willing to swap to my 8374.


Let me check into that and post back when I get a chance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> Thank you! I prefer the extra power as well.
> That's really helpful!
> 
> I saw that you had earlier compared the 8474 on a 3L and the 3582R gen2 was better fit in your opinion. *What about the 3582R gen 2 on a 2.lL *and also curious about the 8374 on a 3L. I have a friend with a supra who has a 3582R who is willing to swap to my 8374.


Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3582R and the EFR 8374 on 2.1L displacement. As you can see, the GTX3582R has a better surge line (+450 RPMs) as compared to the EFR. So, you can expect better spoolup with the GTX. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=3.2 or about 32 psi and 8100 RPMs producing 78+ lbs. of air per minute or 780 HP on pump/race gas. So, the GTX is a better turbo as compared to the EFR but requires a little more engine speed (RPMs) to get the most out of the turbo.










More on the 3.0L to come...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> Thank you! I prefer the extra power as well.
> That's really helpful!
> 
> I saw that you had earlier compared the 8474 on a 3L and the 3582R gen2 was better fit in your opinion. What about the 3582R gen 2 on a 2.lL *and also curious about the 8374 on a 3L*. I have a friend with a supra who has a 3582R who is willing to swap to my 8374.


Below I overlaid the second generation GTX3582R and the EFR 8374 on 3.0L displacement (86mm bore x 86mm stroke = 2997 CCs). I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1= 2.7 or about 25 psi and 7000 RPMs producing 81 lbs. of air per minute or 810 HP on pump/race gas for the GTX3582R on a _super-single_ V6 turbo setup.
P2/P1= 3.1 or about 31 psi and 6000 RPMs producing 78 lbs. of air per minute or 780 HP on pump/race gas for the EFR 8374 on a _super-single_ V6 turbo setup.









The second generation GTX3582R is better overall as compared to the EFR 8374 IMO on either 2.1L or 3.0L displacement.


----------



## jimbosz07 (Dec 1, 2020)

Hi mainstayinc, I stumbled in here from some googling and it looks like you are just the turbo sizing guru. I was wondering if I might be able to get a little help from you with a selection for my E30.

Engine is a 2.7 M20 (84mm bore and 81mm stroke). It's a 12 valve inline 6 from the 80s so I have to imagine I'm suffering some inefficiencies.

It's a street car so I'm looking for a responsive 350-400whp and was originally eyeing the BW s252sxe or even the s257sxe, though I was also recommended the Precision 5558 and the GT3071R.I would love if you could work your chart overlay magic for me, especially on the BW turbos. Thanks for your help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

jimbosz07 said:


> Hi mainstayinc, I stumbled in here from some googling and it looks like you are just the turbo sizing guru. I was wondering if I might be able to get a little help from you with a selection for my E30.
> 
> Engine is a 2.7 M20 (84mm bore and 81mm stroke). It's a 12 valve inline 6 from the 80s so I have to imagine I'm suffering some inefficiencies.
> 
> It's a street car so I'm looking for a responsive 350-400whp and was originally eyeing the BW s252sxe or even the s257sxe, though I was also recommended the Precision 5558 and the GT3071R.I would love if you could work your chart overlay magic for me, especially on the BW turbos. Thanks for your help!


Let me check into that and get back to you.


----------



## coozauto (Nov 27, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> The second generation GTX3582R is better overall as compared to the EFR 8374 IMO on either 2.1L or 3.0L displacement.


Thank you! Didn't expect that at all!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

coozauto said:


> Thank you! Didn't expect that at all!


----------



## NEDD (Aug 28, 2018)

Hello again mainstaynic, I have read all of this and have a question. As you talk about 3 liters, I've just build my 1.5JZ (86x86) with 10.5:1 CR running on E85. I put my old EFR 7670 T3 iwg 0.83 open scroll turbo on it, but I'm kind a worry to not over spin it. My goal is 500whp at 1.2 - 1.4 bar and 7000rpm red line with maximum response. Is that seems realistic goal to you without hurting the turbo? Maybe sell it and get G30-770, witch is almost the same compressor wheel or G30-900 with 62mm inducer.
BTW - I did some driving on wastgate spring 1 bar, and 6000rpm. The car feels amazing, torque and response are mind blowing compared to my previous 8.5 CR 2.5 liter 1JZ. It's a drift car, so it will see extended periods on the rev limiter and some abuse. I have herd stories about EFR turbine wheel flying off if pushed beyond maximum rpm, witch I'm mostly worried about. 
So should I stay and be safe with EFR7670 at 500whp or turn it down a bit and call it a day, or go for G30 770 or 900.
How about the spool and response if I go with some of the G's? Thank you for your time, appreciate it!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NEDD said:


> Hello again mainstaynic, I have read all of this and have a question. As you talk about 3 liters, I've just build my 1.5JZ (86x86) with 10.5:1 CR running on E85. I put my old EFR 7670 T3 iwg 0.83 open scroll turbo on it, but I'm kind a worry to not over spin it. My goal is 500whp at 1.2 - 1.4 bar and 7000rpm red line with maximum response. Is that seems realistic goal to you without hurting the turbo? Maybe sell it and get G30-770, witch is almost the same compressor wheel or G30-900 with 62mm inducer.
> BTW - I did some driving on wastgate spring 1 bar, and 6000rpm. The car feels amazing, torque and response are mind blowing compared to my previous 8.5 CR 2.5 liter 1JZ. It's a drift car, so it will see extended periods on the rev limiter and some abuse. I have herd stories about EFR turbine wheel flying off if pushed beyond maximum rpm, witch I'm mostly worried about.
> So should I stay and be safe with EFR7670 at 500whp or turn it down a bit and call it a day, or go for G30 770 or 900.
> How about the spool and response if I go with some of the G's? Thank you for your time, appreciate it!


Great questions. Let me look into that and put something together. I am in the middle of some accounting work but should have time next week.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Alexr92 (Dec 7, 2020)

Hello, do you have a map for 1.8t stock bore with g35-1050? And eventually if you can make one with gtx3584/g30-1050 overlaid. Don’t know really what to chose. They seem pretty close. I have a g30-900 maxed out and i’m looking for a upgrade. Your map was very helpful last time when I put the g30. Car is a 1.8t awd , stock bore, 8.5:1 cr, e85. Thanks !


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

jimbosz07 said:


> Hi mainstayinc, I stumbled in here from some googling and it looks like you are just the turbo sizing guru. I was wondering if I might be able to get a little help from you with a selection for my E30.
> 
> Engine is a 2.7 M20 (84mm bore and 81mm stroke). It's a 12 valve inline 6 from the 80s so I have to imagine I'm suffering some inefficiencies.
> 
> *It's a street car so I'm looking for a responsive 350-400whp and was originally eyeing the BW s252sxe or even the s257sxe, though I was also recommended the Precision 5558 and the GT3071R.I would love if you could work your chart overlay magic for me, especially on the BW turbos.* Thanks for your help!


In order to make 400 WHP you will need to make 460 HP at the crank. Below I overlaid the BW S252 SX-E (aka 52mm Enhanced S200SX-E 7070) on 2.7L displacement (2693 CCs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2 or about 15 psi and 6000 RPMs producing 46 lbs. of air per minute or 460 HP. The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1200 to 1800 RPMs on 2.7L displacement. You can expect very quick spool and 500+ HP capable with this setup.










More on the S257 SX-E to come...


----------



## jimbosz07 (Dec 1, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> In order to make 400 WHP you will need to make 460 HP at the crank. Below I overlaid the BW S252 SX-E (aka 52mm Enhanced S200SX-E 7070) on 2.7L displacement (2693 CCs). I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2 or about 15 psi and 6000 RPMs producing 46 lbs. of air per minute or 460 HP. The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1200 to 1800 RPMs on 2.7L displacement. You can expect very quick spool and 500+ HP capable with this setup.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Awesome, I really appreciate your help with this!

I've been taking my best stab at modeling this with BW MatchBot software as well. To be honest I'm not sure how accurate the parameters I have entered really are, and my 252 model does seem to be a little off from yours. Here they are equalized best I can to a .75ar T3 twinscroll housing. 

252:









257:









MatchBot:


BorgWarner MatchBot



Based on my models, and recommendations by others with my engine, I'm getting pointed toward the 257, but maybe my numbers are off. Either way, excited to see how you model the 257 and thanks again so much for the help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

jimbosz07 said:


> Hi mainstayinc, I stumbled in here from some googling and it looks like you are just the turbo sizing guru. I was wondering if I might be able to get a little help from you with a selection for my E30.
> 
> Engine is a 2.7 M20 (84mm bore and 81mm stroke). It's a 12 valve inline 6 from the 80s so I have to imagine I'm suffering some inefficiencies.
> 
> It's a street car so I'm looking for a responsive 350-400whp and was originally eyeing the BW s252sxe *or even the s257sxe*, though I was also recommended the Precision 5558 and the GT3071R.I would love if you could work your chart overlay magic for me, especially on the BW turbos. Thanks for your help!


Below I overlaid the BW S257 SX-E with 2.7L displacement. I marked a point corresponding to P2/P1=2.7 or about 25 psi and 6000 RPMs producing 63 lbs. of air per minute or 630 HP. The surge line (left side of map) ranges from 1200 to 2000 RPMs. This turbo is a good choice for 2.7L displacement for 600+ HP with a few hundred RPMs delay spool over the S252 SX-E.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

jimbosz07 said:


> Awesome, I really appreciate your help with this!
> 
> I've been taking my best stab at modeling this with BW MatchBot software as well. To be honest I'm not sure how accurate the parameters I have entered really are, and my 252 model does seem to be a little off from yours. Here they are equalized best I can to a .75ar T3 twinscroll housing.
> 
> ...


Either turbo would be a great choice for your setup. The S257 SX-E will definitely give you more up top. Choose the S252 SX-E if you want instant spoolup and 500+ HP capable.


----------



## 16V-Sauger (Aug 9, 2005)

16V-Sauger said:


> Good evening,
> 
> may i bother you with a different but similar task this time
> 
> ...





mainstayinc said:


> Sorry. I'm not able to post a response at the moment. My browser (office computer) is not allowing me to respond to your inquiry. I'll try to get that sorted out and post something soon.


Hello John,

may i bother you once again  I´ve started my own calculations on that and came up with the idea of EFR7163 which seems somewhat torqueeeee even on that engine. Any input is highly appreciated.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

@mainstayinc 

Back early last year you did some overlays on 2.3L with the HX35 7 blade and referenced it to a HX30E-7765AX. After looking back at my notes my Super HX30 has a 78/46 compressor and 65/52 turbine. Which is oddly close in size. When you have time would you overlay this Holset HX35 7 blade on stock 1.8t displacement? Or an educated guess as to how far the surge line would slide over for .5L less displacement?









check out this compressor map and tell me what you think


If you're considering a s257, you might as well keep the hx35. The efr is the king of transient response. The g-550 is he next best thing, but until they offer a divided or t-based housing, I don't think they're the ticket just yet. that's pretty much my thoughts at the moment on both the SXE...




www.vwvortex.com


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> Hello John,
> 
> may i bother you once again  I´ve started my own calculations on that and came up with the idea of EFR7163 which seems somewhat torqueeeee even on that engine. Any input is highly appreciated.





Brake Weight said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> Back early last year you did some overlays on 2.3L with the HX35 7 blade and referenced it to a HX30E-7765AX. After looking back at my notes my Super HX30 has a 78/46 compressor and 65/52 turbine. Which is oddly close in size. When you have time would you overlay this Holset HX35 7 blade on stock 1.8t displacement? Or an educated guess as to how far the surge line would slide over for .5L less displacement?
> 
> ...


Let me check into that and get back to you. Looking to post some stuff early next week.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

@mainstayinc

Are you familiar with the turbo manifold pressure concept? I've been delving into my Super HX30 again looking for more info and came across this on a 4BT forum. These are pressures measured on a 4BT diesel turbo manifold running the same turbo as me. I did blow the gasket I had used with a blank on the external wastegate port. Makes more sense now how an exhaust manifold leak will be very detrimental to turbo performance. Lower RPMs it'll be less than a 1:1 ratio but as RPMs climb manifold pressure will be greater than the boost pressure. This also plays into the issue of gassers not being able to use the internal wastegate as easily with Holsets and diesel turbos in general. I was onto this in my thread about the wastegate blowing open but didn't think numbers could be that high in the turbo manifold. Guess I was wrong.










I kept digging and discovered that across multiple forums the consensus for a Super HX30 map was also the one posted here way back. It would be the same that an engineer had sent one of the 4BT guys several years ago before Holset went tight lipped on handing out maps willy nilly. This is also the same map that was given for the HY35 and HX35 7 blade compressors. The real world variances will be in the turbine housings. One of which you have already made a map for previously and if this is correct then I will be a happy camper when I can get this dialed in. It looks very similar to the onset of mine just that this one is about 400-600rpm to the right. My Super HX30 has a 6cm hotside, the HY35 has a 9cm, and the HX35 has a 12cm. 

Overlaid for a 1.8t.









The Super HX30 map supposedly provided by Holset for the HY/HX35 7 blade compressors.









Found this calculation of AR for my Super30.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> Are you familiar with the turbo manifold pressure concept? I've been delving into my Super HX30 again looking for more info and came across this on a 4BT forum. *These are pressures measured on a 4BT diesel turbo manifold running the same turbo as me.* I did blow the gasket I had used with a blank on the external wastegate port. Makes more sense now how an exhaust manifold leak will be very detrimental to turbo performance. Lower RPMs it'll be less than a 1:1 ratio but as RPMs climb manifold pressure will be greater than the boost pressure. This also plays into the issue of gassers not being able to use the internal wastegate as easily with Holsets and diesel turbos in general. I was onto this in my thread about the wastegate blowing open but didn't think numbers could be that high in the turbo manifold. Guess I was wrong.
> 
> View attachment 56012


Sorry I couldn't respond earlier. It was a very busy week. The Exhaust Manifold Pressure vs. Boost Pressure numbers you posted above seem correct. In almost all cases Boost Pressure will be less than Exhaust Manifold Pressure since there are always losses in translating the drive force of the exhaust into boost pressure (such as friction, heat loss etc.). Obviously that larger the turbine A/R the less Exhaust Manifold Pressure (i.e.: back pressure) as RPMs climb. But the trade off is of course slower onset of boost.



Brake Weight said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> I kept digging and discovered that across multiple forums the consensus for a Super HX30 map was also the one posted here way back. It would be the same that an engineer had sent one of the 4BT guys several years ago before Holset went tight lipped on handing out maps willy nilly. *This is also the same map that was given for the HY35 and HX35 7 blade compressors.* The real world variances will be in the turbine housings. One of which you have already made a map for previously and if this is correct then I will be a happy camper when I can get this dialed in. It looks very similar to the onset of mine just that this one is about 400-600rpm to the right. My Super HX30 has a 6cm hotside, the HY35 has a 9cm, and the HX35 has a 12cm.


That's very interesting.



Brake Weight said:


> @mainstayinc
> 
> I kept digging and discovered that across multiple forums the consensus for a Super HX30 map was also the one posted here way back. It would be the same that an engineer had sent one of the 4BT guys several years ago before Holset went tight lipped on handing out maps willy nilly. This is also the same map that was given for the HY35 and HX35 7 blade compressors. The real world variances will be in the turbine housings. *One of which you have already made a map for previously and if this is correct then I will be a happy camper when I can get this dialed in. *It looks very similar to the onset of mine just that this one is about 400-600rpm to the right. My Super HX30 has a 6cm hotside, the HY35 has a 9cm, and the HX35 has a 12cm.


For comparison I overlaid the 7 and 8 blade variation of the HX35 on 1.8L displacement below.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Alexr92 said:


> Hello, do you have a map for 1.8t stock bore with g35-1050? And eventually if you can make one with gtx3584/g30-1050 overlaid. Don’t know really what to chose. They seem pretty close. I have a g30-900 maxed out and i’m looking for a upgrade. Your map was very helpful last time when I put the g30. Car is a 1.8t awd , stock bore, 8.5:1 cr, e85. Thanks !


Below I overlaid the G35-1050 and the GTX3584RS on 1.8L displacement. As you can see, the surge lines (left side of map) are pretty closely matched with the GTX3584RS having a slight advantage below P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi. I marked two points corresponding to the following:

P2/P1=3.5 or about 36 psi at 9000 RPMs producing 80 lbs. of air per minute or 800 HP for the GTX3584RS
P2/P1=3.6 or about 38 psi at 10000 RPMs producing 91 lbs. of air per minute or 910 HP for the G35-1050.










So, there is no real advantage to using the G35-1050 over the GTX3584RS below 9000 RPMs on 1.8L displacement. However, you can see significant gains over the GTX3584RS above 9000 RPMs and 36 psi (+110 HP). That kind of setup would require a proper camshaft setup to get the most out of the G35-1050!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

16V-Sauger said:


> Hello John,
> 
> may i bother you once again  I´ve started my own calculations on that and came up with the idea of EFR7163 which seems somewhat torqueeeee even on that engine. *Any input is highly appreciated.*


I really like the EFR 7163 at least as far as the map is concerned. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 with 2.0L displacement. I agree that a twin-scroll setup would be best if you are willing to fabricate a proper divided manifold for a four-cylinder engine. However, if that's not possible than I recommend a quick spool valve using a standard manifold and a divided turbine housing for faster spool.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> Sorry I couldn't respond earlier. It was a very busy week. The Exhaust Manifold Pressure vs. Boost Pressure numbers you posted above seem correct. In almost all cases Boost Pressure will be less than Exhaust Manifold Pressure since there are always losses in translating the drive force of the exhaust into boost pressure (such as friction, heat loss etc.). Obviously that larger the turbine A/R the less Exhaust Manifold Pressure (i.e.: back pressure) as RPMs climb. But the trade off is of course slower onset of boost.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Noice. Thanks for that and the feedback.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)




----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Here's one.

Precision 6235 t3 .63ar with 82mm pistons, factory crank and 9.25:1 compression

I guesstimate it will be insanely lazy.

Customer wants the turbo to stay, his focus is autox and daily, with drive ability I want to show him that it's not the best nor ideal choice for a 350-400hp car, which is another subject altogether. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Here's one.
> 
> Precision 6235 t3 .63ar with 82mm pistons, factory crank and 9.25:1 compression
> 
> ...


I don't think Precision has a compressor map for that one. However, it looks like the PT6235 is an 82mm compressor (exducer) turbo. It would be similar to the GTX3582R which would be quite lazy on 1.8L displacement. Definitely not good for AutoX or daily driving.


----------



## Ace97 (Feb 21, 2021)

Salut les gars.

J'ai un 1.6T actuellement en gtx2867R gen2 qui prend 7800 tr / min max pour 430cv avec kit méthanol et je suis intéressé par un g30-660 en 0.83 A / R ou un g30-770 en 0.61 A / R qui je pense est énorme pour un 1600cc ..

lequel conviendraitir pour 600 ch au moteur s'il vous plaît avec 30 psi max? avec une bobine avant 5000rpm?

gtx2867R gen2









g30-660









g30-770


----------



## gixercho (Oct 9, 2019)

Hello, could you make a comparison between Borgwarner EFR8374 and EFR8474 turbos for 2JZ 3.0ltr motor. The car will be on full E100 fuel and my target is around 700whp and revlimit 7500-8000rpms.How those two will spool and support that power and rpms. Both with T4 1.05ar Twinscroll housings. Thank you very much!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gixercho said:


> Hello, could you make a comparison between Borgwarner EFR8374 and EFR8474 turbos for 2JZ 3.0ltr motor. The car will be on full E100 fuel and my target is around 700whp and revlimit 7500-8000rpms.How those two will spool and support that power and rpms. Both with T4 1.05ar Twinscroll housings. Thank you very much!


I'm sorry. I will be very busy this spring and won't have time to put any maps together. Maybe someone else can chime in.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Bunko, search for IE cam data before you waste your money. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

gixercho said:


> Hello, could you make a comparison between Borgwarner EFR8374 and EFR8474 turbos for 2JZ 3.0ltr motor. The car will be on full E100 fuel and my target is around 700whp and revlimit 7500-8000rpms.How those two will spool and support that power and rpms. Both with T4 1.05ar Twinscroll housings. Thank you very much!


There won't be much difference between these two. Check the 2JZ forums if you're looking for more info. E100 you can hit 700whp at 30psi. Maybe less if you have long duration cams or higher compression.


----------



## Audi Lancia (Apr 29, 2021)

Hello john

Im in an special car planning to bolt a Bigger turbo for 450 hp crank goal, car weight only 900 kgs. street and ocasional trackday use.
Its al Alfa 4C
4 cyl intecooler
1750cc
bore 83mm
stroke 80.5mm
CR 9,3:1
pump gas

could it be better a g550twinscroll or a efr 6258twinscroll, or efr 7163?
what could be your advise

Cheers,
Fernando


----------



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

Audi Lancia said:


> Hello john
> 
> Im in an special car planning to bolt a Bigger turbo for 450 hp crank goal, car weight only 900 kgs. street and ocasional trackday use.
> Its al Alfa 4C
> ...


6758


----------



## dfahmy7 (Mar 26, 2021)

Hi I have a 2.0 tfsi and was wondering which turbo would be best to reach around 750-800 awhp on e85, the engine is built and I was planning to rev up till 7800-8000rpms

G30-900
G35-1050
Gtx3584rs

Thank you


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

dfahmy7 said:


> Hi I have a 2.0 tfsi and was wondering which turbo would be best to reach around 750-800 awhp on e85, the engine is built and I was planning to rev up till 7800-8000rpms
> 
> G30-900
> G35-1050
> ...


Try the G35 1050 or the GTX 3584rs which is mapped out on this thread probably 20 or 30 pages back. The G30-900 struggles to make 800bhp or 700whp. Unless you get the turbo speed sensor you'll likely ruin it by running off the map at high boost (35+) to reach those numbers. Suburu guys have killed these turbos trying to max them out and running them on the edge, not recommended. Check G30 on the Nasioc forums for more info on 2.0 to 2.3 engines.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Brake Weight said:


> I'm looking at possibly a low boost, low RPM setup on my Toyota 3rz to make it more of a daily driver without having to downshift constantly. Looking at basically a turbo mani, injectors, and possibly a water/meth kit in lieu of an intercooler. 6 psi is about all the stock ECU will handle. 95x95 and 2694cc. Would like this coming on around 2000rpm and top end doesn't matter but 5000rpm would be the max. Quick spool leading to overspeeding is my concern. This turbo would be free to me but I am also looking at other cheap "factory" turbos. I believe this was from a 2.5l Volvo.
> View attachment 86657


I think John will have to map this one out for you considering your goals. That's a small turbo that world barely show up on that map at 6 psi (1.3 pressure ratio?) I'll attach a dyno of the larger td04hl 19t that Volvo also uses. This is 18psi so 2.2 pressure ratio on a 2.0 engine. It fits nicely inside that map and reaches full boost around 2300rpm. Your 3.0 engine likely needs a larger turbo that can actually provide usable air without surge at low boost. You can search the 19t map and compare to the 13t. Overall you might need something larger just with a smaller turbine A/R for response.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> I think John will have to map this one out for you considering your goals. That's a small turbo that world barely show up on that map at 6 psi (1.3 pressure ratio?) I'll attach a dyno of the larger td04hl 19t that Volvo also uses. This is 18psi so 2.2 pressure ratio on a 2.0 engine. It fits nicely inside that map and reaches full boost around 2300rpm. Your 3.0 engine likely needs a larger turbo that can actually provide usable air without surge at low boost. You can search the 19t map and compare to the 13t. Overall you might need something larger just with a smaller turbine A/R for response.


Lol. Changed plans a few days ago and forgot to delete my post until you were quoting it. That turbo is under sized for the task but I think it would do it, barely. But would be over speeding and hot as a firecracker over 3-4000rpm.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Brake Weight said:


> Lol. Changed plans a few days ago and forgot to delete my post until you were quoting it. That turbo is under sized for the task but I think it would do it, barely. But would be over speeding and hot as a firecracker over 3-4000rpm.


Yes. It would be off the map after spooling up so fast. A little bigger and you'd be OK. 54 to 60 mm compressor with a small turbine would work


----------



## LEBGTIMK4 (Sep 13, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and the BW S200 SWE with stock displacement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hello John,
I was reading all your posts in here, can you please show us a comparison of both S200SXE with 52mm compressor wheel (AKA S252) vs S200SXE with 57mm compressor wheel (AKA S257) with turbine housing .75A/R T3 twin scroll (divided) 3.625" V band outlet like this one matched with this twin scroll manifold from SPA Turbo USA on stock displacement for TT mk1 of 1781CC and another one on 1984CC displacement. I might only change the crankshaft to a 95.5 to increase the displacement for better spools up.
I am interested on getting peak boost around 3.8K RPM till red line around 25~27 PSI. I have a water methanol kit with 6nozzles (4 direct injection + 1 post intercooler + 1 Post turbo) to be run with my set up too with AEM stg 2 controller.
thank you in advance,


----------



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

> Brake Weight said:
> I'm looking at possibly a low boost, low RPM setup on my Toyota 3rz to make it more of a daily driver without having to downshift constantly. Looking at basically a turbo mani, injectors, and possibly a water/meth kit in lieu of an intercooler. 6 psi is about all the stock ECU will handle. 95x95 and 2694cc. Would like this coming on around 2000rpm and top end doesn't matter but 5000rpm would be the max. Quick spool leading to overspeeding is my concern. This turbo would be free to me but I am also looking at other cheap "factory" turbos. I believe this was from a 2.5l Volvo.
> View attachment 86657





JOutterbridge said:


> I think John will have to map this one out for you considering your goals. That's a small turbo that world barely show up on that map at 6 psi (1.3 pressure ratio?) I'll attach a dyno of the larger td04hl 19t that Volvo also uses. This is 18psi so 2.2 pressure ratio on a 2.0 engine. It fits nicely inside that map and reaches full boost around 2300rpm. Your 3.0 engine likely needs a larger turbo that can actually provide usable air without surge at low boost. You can search the 19t map and compare to the 13t. Overall you might need something larger just with a smaller turbine A/R for response.


I know it's a little late, but I build a lot of Saab parts, and they use a td04HL on a 2.8L from the factory. The 19t is a common upgrade, as is now the 20, 21, and 22T compressors with the 9-blade turbine wheel. From the factory the turbo is PERFECT for a daily driver. It would be amazing on a 3L if you're not looking for more than 260whp. Even on the big motor, the 19t's still pull in almost 300whp. With the turbine upgrade and 22t compressor guys have hit 350whp. The saab 2.8 headers are extremely restrictive and on e85 with a 20t/9-blade turbine a set of headers picks up over 50whp. For a daily driver non-performance application I wouldn't hesitate to use the td04HL.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I know it's a little late, but I build a lot of Saab parts, and they use a td04HL on a 2.8L from the factory. The 19t is a common upgrade, as is now the 20, 21, and 22T compressors with the 9-blade turbine wheel. From the factory the turbo is PERFECT for a daily driver. It would be amazing on a 3L if you're not looking for more than 260whp. Even on the big motor, the 19t's still pull in almost 300whp. With the turbine upgrade and 22t compressor guys have hit 350whp. The saab 2.8 headers are extremely restrictive and on e85 with a 20t/9-blade turbine a set of headers picks up over 50whp. For a daily driver non-performance application I wouldn't hesitate to use the td04HL.


Really!?!! I was thinking about maybe 220-240 max. Hmm.


----------



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

Yeah. If you're buying one, go straight for the 19t/9 blade hybrid. If it's free, **** it, run it as is.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Yeah. If you're buying one, go straight for the 19t/9 blade hybrid. If it's free, **** it, run it as is.


The freebie is a TD04HL-13T. It would need a new housing and wheel to make it a 19T.


----------



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

Yeah I've made a few hybrids. It's not worth sinking a any money in to. Especially if it's a 6cm Volvo housing. The Saab stuff is all twin scroll 9cm. It's too small for performance applications but decent enough in stock form


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Yeah I've made a few hybrids. It's not worth sinking a any money in to. Especially if it's a 6cm Volvo housing. The Saab stuff is all twin scroll 9cm. It's too small for performance applications but decent enough in stock form


Gotcha. Any model specific Saabs to look for?


----------



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

The 06+ 9-3 has the td04hl-13t with the twin scroll 9cm housing. They use two separate proprietary turbine inlet flanges and downpipe flange. I make the flanges, or you can cut them off the factory crossover pipes if you can get those. And it's a standard ihi cartridge, so anyone who does wheel upgrades can put standard mitsu wheels, bearings, and shafts in it. The other cool thing is they're internally gated and have an integrated bypass valve. The valve is electronically actuated, but you can swap it out for a cobalt vacuum actuated bypass valve or forge makes a direct swap in valve.

If you browse the Saab Facebook groups you can usually pick up a turbo for about 250-300. Used 19t ones sell for around 500-650.


----------



## kiki_yb (Aug 28, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> The EFR 7163 in a twin-scroll configuration will definitely be more responsive and spool quicker than the G25-660 single-scroll. Below I overlaid the EFR 7163 and G25-660 on 2.0L displacement (1998 CCs). As you can see, the surge line for the twin-scroll EFR 7163 is 500 RPMs further to the left than the single scroll G25-660. You can expect the EFR 7163 to start to spoolup 500 RPMs sooner than the G25-660 with full spool coming in below 4000 RPMs. I marked two points as follows:
> 
> P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 47 lbs. of air per minute (350 KW) on pump/race gas
> P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 7500 RPMs producing 54 lbs. of air per minute (400 KW) on pump/race gas
> ...


Hi, 

since fews month, G25-660 is available with 0.92 T4 twinscroll housing. What do you think about spooling versus efr7163 now?
Will the g25-660 take the advantage above the 7163 on 2.0L engines ?


----------



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

That housing is made for V8 twin turbos or large displacement single turbos, like 3.5l+ where you don't need a ton of compressor but need a lot of turbine flow. It will be a dog on a 2l but will allow you to extract every last bit of power from the compressor. You will probably want 9k rpm or higher to have a reasonable power band.

Like for like I would take the efr over the g2.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

I’m bouncing all over with ideas. Looking at possibly buying cheap Mini Cooper S that has sat up a while and needs a lot of maintenance…and some modding. I’ve got my old FT F23 that needs a rebuild, a ko3 from my GLI, and the Super HX30. The Cooper is a 3.03x3.38. So 77mm bore x 86mm stroke more or less. Was wanting to know how late the HX30 would come on boost and I would like to run it but would consider rebuilding the f23/ko4 with some of the fancy blade setups. Max most of these superchargers do reliably looks like 18-20psi and is a fire breather. Figured a ko4 could do that and a few more pounds and not near as hot. Then my Holset would do 30psi with ease at the sacrifice of hella-lag. I’d guess it’d start around 3400-3600+/- if my 1.8 spools it by ~3000. But for a toy that could be acceptable.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Brake Weight said:


> I’m bouncing all over with ideas. Looking at possibly buying cheap Mini Cooper S that has sat up a while and needs a lot of maintenance…and some modding. I’ve got my old FT F23 that needs a rebuild, a ko3 from my GLI, and the Super HX30. The Cooper is a 3.03x3.38. So 77mm bore x 86mm stroke more or less. Was wanting to know how late the HX30 would come on boost and I would like to run it but would consider rebuilding the f23/ko4 with some of the fancy blade setups. Max most of these superchargers do reliably looks like 18-20psi and is a fire breather. Figured a ko4 could do that and a few more pounds and not near as hot. Then my Holset would do 30psi with ease at the sacrifice of hella-lag. I’d guess it’d start around 3400-3600+/- if my 1.8 spools it by ~3000. But for a toy that could be acceptable.


What year Mini?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> What year Mini?


2003 and sub $1000 if it doesn’t sell before I get to it. Admittedly ‘ran hot’ and has sat for about a year. I’d yank the motor to tear it down to the block and start over.


----------



## JOutterbridge (Apr 23, 2017)

Brake Weight said:


> 2003 and sub $1000 if it doesn’t sell before I get to it. Admittedly ‘ran hot’ and has sat for about a year. I’d yank the motor to tear it down to the block and start over.


I think that year was the 1.6 supercharged motor. It's low compression so probably will be quite lazy until 4k or so. It's tunable with injectors though and a higher rev limiter. You think there's enough space for an HX30?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

JOutterbridge said:


> I think that year was the 1.6 supercharged motor. It's low compression so probably will be quite lazy until 4k or so. It's tunable with injectors though and a higher rev limiter. You think there's enough space for an HX30?


Dude sold it while we were messaging about what could be wrong with it. 

People run that eliminator sized Garretts which is a little smaller in size. 8.5:1 pistons, too and fits the same injector as the 1.8t.

From what I read the S motor can handle 300-350hp and 6spd S trannies good to about 450. NA motors are glass as well as their trannys. Plus the S has a little better tuning since it was already FI but one sensor needs to be fooled to swap to turbo even if boost pressure is similar due to the SC not going vacuum. Throw a high flowing JCW head and some rods at it and 400hp easily with a decent turbo. A square set of 16x8 wheels with 205s stretched looks fantastic to me. 225s on 16x9s and bigger fender flares would be like a go cart. Was looking at some Basset stamped steelies but I don’t think the brakes would clear the 15” wheel. 

I’m a little excited at the prospect of a new platform to play with and will keep tabs on the local sales. Especially a cheaper one (initially anyway) and being a toy that can fit beside the chest freezer in my garage. Looking from 2002-08.


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

So, with an AEB with a stock stroke and 83mm bore, and 550cc injectors. How well would the GT3076R spool? I know the injectors would get maxed, but I’m hoping to move to 850cc or 1000cc injectors eventually. That would be enough fuel for anything I’d ever want to do. I don’t plan on stroking my AEB though. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

I had a friend running that setup in a B5 Avant. Was not liking how late the turbo came on. He was going to go back to small port to help and get a smaller turbo but ended up swapping in the 2.7t with some ko4 upgrades.


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

Big_Tom said:


> I had a friend running that setup in a B5 Avant. Was not liking how late the turbo came on. He was going to go back to small port to help and get a smaller turbo but ended up swapping in the 2.7t with some ko4 upgrades.


Any idea just how late it was coming in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

3076 on a 1.8 stroker 56 trim hits full spool 35-3700rpm. Stock displacement between 37-4100rpm.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> Any idea just how late it was coming in?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I asked him and he said around 4400. He had a 75mm RS4 throttle body as well


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

Big_Tom said:


> I asked him and he said around 4400. He had a 75mm RS4 throttle body as well


Stock Cams,intake, etc? With stock exhaust valve springs they begin to fail with prolonged high RPM. On my AWP it hits full spool at 4100, my engine is fully built so I can let it rev out beyond redline. The 3076 pushes the torque curve to the right a good bit, so a built head/w or w/out cams is almost necessary to utilize the powerband on the street and maintain some reliability.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Big_Tom said:


> I asked him and he said around 4400. He had a 75mm RS4 throttle body as well


This is more accurate for a 3076 on a 2008cc engine, no vvt used and on any landing/tb setup but IE(comes on almost 200rpm later)

Factory displacement is nearly user identical to a3582, around 5k or so. Gt3071r would be 400rpm sooner on either 1.8 or 2.0


Def not 3400. Not one have I seen a billet upgraded or standard 3076 make more than 15psi before about 4200-4400rpm. On track, on dynos and on street. 

Go check the build thread link on the faq, and there is a dyno thread link buried in here but you can search for it also. 



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

GermanPOS1.8T said:


> Stock Cams,intake, etc? With stock exhaust valve springs they begin to fail with prolonged high RPM. On my AWP it hits full spool at 4100, my engine is fully built so I can let it rev out beyond redline. The 3076 pushes the torque curve to the right a good bit, so a built head/w or w/out cams is almost necessary to utilize the powerband on the street and maintain some reliability.


Post a log or video, def want to see

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

JOutterbridge said:


> I think that year was the 1.6 supercharged motor. It's low compression so probably will be quite lazy until 4k or so. It's tunable with injectors though and a higher rev limiter. You think there's enough space for an HX30?


Do you know how we could get Mainstayinc back here?


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

Turbo Ed said:


> Do you know how we could get Mainstayinc back here?


It would be nice, he should get paid for the work he was putting 
into those maps.


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

GermanPOS1.8T said:


> It would be nice, he should get paid for the work he was putting
> into those maps.


Indeed and there are a number of subjects in the area of mapping which I would love to discuss with him here.


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

I learn new **** everyday and I’ve been building my own Turbo cars a long time, just relatively new to the VAG /EURO. JDM and DSM I BUILT IN HIGHSCHOOL AND COLLEGE, this Beestle is my first full overhaul rebuild Track car conversion. Everything else I’ve built was intended strictly for the street . This VW is purpose built To hurt feelings while looking like a half finished Beater the latter half just to add insult to injury. VegetaGTI I should have Logs to throw up for you within a cpl weeks. My large equal runner custom Manifold assists big time In getting the 3076 sent spinning a bit earlier on my small port.


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

When I’m content with my buil do and all is sorted , I’m pulling engine (Gutting the Bay and spraying it in satin White. To help indicate any leaks easier.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Turbo Ed said:


> Do you know how we could get Mainstayinc back here?


Hallo. I am here and check into this forum 3 or 4 times a week. But I don't post anything just lurking ATM. I wish I had more time on my hands to do more posting/analysis but that is just not possible right now due to time constraints. Maybe when life returns to normal in this country I won't have to worry so much about prepping for a worst cast scenario like food shortages, collapse of the USD, forced vaccine poisoning etc. In the meantime projects such as my *Killer MK1 Rabbit* are moving forward slowly but surely. Also thinking about converting my work van to run off of wood/charcoal. 

Check out this guy:






I might have to turbo charge that b*tch once I convert due to *need for speed* on all occasions.

Interesting website: Home | Drive On Wood!


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^Good to see yah man. That wood stuff is pretty cool. I watched this one to gain some clarity.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Big_Tom said:


> ^^Good to see yah man. That wood stuff is pretty cool. I watched this one to gain some clarity.


Yeah that guy is cool. I watched a lot of his videos. Wood gasification is actually not that hard. The trick to running an engine on wood gas is to filter out all of the tar and other nasty components out of the wood gas. Those tend to cause intake valves to stick similar to a direct injection engine. That is why charcoal gasification is much better for an ICE because it is pure carbon and burns very clean. The only drawback is that you have to have the ability to make charcoal.

Here's a guy running his car on charcoal:






I have three different local tree service guys that drop off wood for free. I've cut and split about 6 cords of wood in the last month and plan to make a nice charcoal retort.

EDIT:


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

mainstayinc said:


> Hallo. I am here and check into this forum 3 or 4 times a week. But I don't post anything just lurking ATM. I wish I had more time on my hands to do more posting/analysis but that is just not possible right now due to time constraints. Maybe when life returns to normal in this country I won't have to worry so much about prepping for a worst cast scenario like food shortages, collapse of the USD, forced vaccine poisoning etc. In the meantime projects such as my *Killer MK1 Rabbit* are moving forward slowly but surely. Also thinking about converting my work van to run off of wood/charcoal.
> 
> Check out this guy:
> 
> ...


So good to hear from you again!

My first question is how, through all the analysis you have posted over the years, you appear to have been able to distinguish between split pulse and single entry turbines, as to how they impact upon compressor performance?
Obviously it is common knowledge today of the advantages of a split pulse turbine, particular on 4 cylinders.
I suspect you are also well aware as to how the million dollar gas stands work, which Garrett / BW (and no small manufacturer such as Precision have, which is the real reason there are no maps for their product), use to create the compressor / turbine maps which we all use.
Those gas stands, for all their cost, have no connection between compressor and turbine performance.
Although mapped at the same time, they are steady state devices and acquire the data from each end of the turbo assembly quite separately.

Yet somehow you appear to have been able to connect them.
I really would appreciate hearing just how you do that.
Thanks very much for your time.


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

Turbo Ed said:


> So good to hear from you again!
> 
> My first question is how, through all the analysis you have posted over the years, you appear to have been able to distinguish between split pulse and single entry turbines, as to how they impact upon compressor performance?
> Obviously it is common knowledge today of the advantages of a split pulse turbine, particular on 4 cylinders.
> ...


Not trying to be rude but there’s only one question mark and I’m not very clear on just what the question there actually is. Are you doubting Mainstay? Or just wanting to know how his spreadsheet works or is able to map out an engines response/performance relative to a compressor map? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> Not trying to be rude but there’s only one question mark and I’m not very clear on just what the question there actually is. Are you doubting Mainstay? Or just wanting to know how his spreadsheet works or is able to map out an engines response/performance relative to a compressor map?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Definitely NOT doubting.
Overwhelming curious as to how he does it,
He manages to somehow connect two parameters which I have never seen connected previously, by anyone else.


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

Turbo Ed said:


> Definitely NOT doubting.
> Overwhelming curious as to how he does it,
> He manages to somehow connect two parameters which I have never seen connected previously, by anyone else.


FWIW, there have been loads of folks who have made a practice of sizing turbo’s to an engine via compressor map analysis, the difference here is that Mainstay has been gracious and generous enough with his time to share some of that with us! 

I’d be very interested in seeing something where someone did all their math, sized their turbo theoretically and then took it to a dyno and then compared the real life results to the theoretical. My guess is that it’s ultimately a game of guess work and estimation. With differences in humidity, elevation, engine health and so on, the general formula to calculate airflow, fuel mixtures and output are all relative ultimately. 

Even without the addition of aftermarket parts, you can dyno two difference cars straight from the factory and get different power numbers. They will be close… but rarely if ever exactly the same. Add in injector brand choices, spark plug options and years of use and driving in all the different seasons and that disparity has to be even more varied. 

As far as turbine maps go, from what I’ve seen, Garrett is like the only company I’ve seen to actually provide turbine maps anyways. So there’s only so much data to go on there to start with. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

ExtremeVR6 said:


> FWIW, there have been loads of folks who have made a practice of sizing turbo’s to an engine via compressor map analysis, the difference here is that Mainstay has been gracious and generous enough with his time to share some of that with us!
> 
> I’d be very interested in seeing something where someone did all their math, sized their turbo theoretically and then took it to a dyno and then compared the real life results to the theoretical. My guess is that it’s ultimately a game of guess work and estimation. With differences in humidity, elevation, engine health and so on, the general formula to calculate airflow, fuel mixtures and output are all relative ultimately.
> 
> ...


I apologize as I obviously have not explained my question thoroughly.
I shall have another shot.
Turbos are "mapped" by the large professional manufacturers such as Garrett and BW using very expensive, steady state, (not dynamic) gas stands.
Basically heated air is supplied at pressure, duplicating exhaust gas, to the turbine side, resulting in the turbine flow maps to which you refer as only Garrett supplying. (BW certainly also have them)
At the same time; however, completely separately, the compressor side of the turbo is also mapped resulting in the flow maps with which we are also all very familiar.

Whether the turbine housing is divided ("split pulse" ), or conventional single entry, does not change either the procedure or outcome of the above.

However, I have on a number of occasions noted @mainstayinc quite clearly stating that a certain compressor map he is using for a given analysis, is either on a divided or single entry turbine turbo.
Now, putting aside how he knows that, which is quite separate question; my current question is:-

How does he calculate the effect of the turbine configuration, either divided or single, on his compressor map calculations?

I hope I have now explained with sufficient clarity, as my curiosity as to how he does this has definitely gotten the better of me!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Turbo Ed said:


> Definitely NOT doubting.
> Overwhelming curious as to how he does it,
> He manages to somehow connect two parameters which I have never seen connected previously, by anyone else.


Great question. The only thing I am calculating are the engine speed lines at different pressure ratios. That's based on engine displacement, engine speed, volumetric efficiency and, of course, pressure. That gets converted to lbs. per minute and then overlaid with the manufacturer's compressor maps. I assume perfect intercooling to ambient temperature (20 C) but I provide the equations to adjust for less than ideal temperatures. I can always build that into the calculations but I haven't done that yet. There are other variables that effect the engine speed lines such as camshaft profile, turbine housing A/R, ignition timing etc. Those may effect the engine speed lines a few hundred RPMs to the right or left at a particular point but I like to keep things simple. So what you have is a fairly good estimate of how the turbo is going to perform at your particular displacement under mostly ideal conditions. And, yes, many other people do this turbo sizing math and have more inputs that I do. I can always to back and modify my spreadsheet with additional inputs. But what I think most people are interested in are the surge line and choke lines. That will tell you when you can expect the turbo to come onto boost and when the turbo will max out at a given engine displacement.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Turbo Ed said:


> I apologize as I obviously have not explained my question thoroughly.
> I shall have another shot.
> Turbos are "mapped" by the large professional manufacturers such as Garrett and BW using very expensive, steady state, (not dynamic) gas stands.
> Basically heated air is supplied at pressure, duplicating exhaust gas, to the turbine side, resulting in the turbine flow maps to which you refer as only Garrett supplying. (BW certainly also have them)
> ...


I see. As far as single versus divided turbine housing, some compressor maps are obviously very optimistic in terms of the surge line (left side of map) as compared to a similarly sized turbo from another manufacturer. For example, EFR 7163 has a surge line way to the left as compared to the GTX3071R2. Both are 71mm compressor exducer turbos. The only thing that can account for such a dramatic improvement in surge line IMO is the fact that BW probably used a divided turbine housing when they created their compressor map. That's just a guess. But I am pretty sure that's what is going on with that map.


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

mainstayinc said:


> I see. As far as single versus divided turbine housing, some compressor maps are obviously very optimistic in terms of the surge line (left side of map) as compared to a similarly sized turbo from another manufacturer. For example, EFR 7163 has a surge line way to the left as compared to the GTX3071R2. Both are 71mm compressor exducer turbos. The only thing that can account for such a dramatic improvement in surge line IMO is the fact that BW probably used a divided turbine housing when they created their compressor map. That's just a guess. But I am pretty sure that's what is going on with that map.


Ah Ha!!
Now I see.
However I am afraid to have to inform you that in this instance, your guess is incorrect.

The gas stands which are used to collect the data we all use, (notwithstanding their incredible cost, which, as I said previously, is the REAL reason Precision et al cannot supply flow maps for their product) are steady flow, from a single source. They make no attempt, nor are designed to, utilize Exhaust Pulse energy in their data acquisition, which they would obviously need to do in order for your guess to be correct.

Until the relatively recent (in the history of turbocharging) development of the BB cartridge (and the need to sell the massive increased piece price to the vehicle OEM's), the gas stands did not even "sweep" the turbos across the RPM range, something for which I personally fought, within a large unnamed Corp., for years.
(Out of a bank of 20 turbo test cells, *now* a large professional turbo manufacturer may have one or gas stands capable of this, simply for acceleration measurement, not flow map data acquisition)

*NORMALLY*, When both ends are being mapped*, single points*, corresponding to measured Pressure Ratio, Mass Flow and Temperature numbers, are recorded while the rotating group is held at a steady RPM.
These multiple single points are then plotted on a graph and eventually become what we all know as the Flow Maps.

Frankly, whether the turbine housing is divided or single entry, is completely irrelevant to the above exercise.
I cannot explain the BW compressor example which you quote, simply because that is the large professional turbo manufacturer at which I did NOT work.
Which probably tells you where I did!! 

However, I can say, generally speaking, that there is LOT more to compressor surge line routing that simple Inducer / Exducer dimensions, IE TRIM.
Starting with Tip Height and Compressor Housing design, (an often overlooked element of compressor performance), before we get to the REAL science of *wheel blade* *design.*
From the early 90's until the late 00's, this latter variable barely changed.
In the last ten years, within the large professional companies (and not just in the US), it has changed almost beyond comprehension.
Basically a combination of advances in FEA and FDA, coupled with increased acceptability by the vehicle OEMs of improved performance, (read greater cost), materials.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Did you come on here make a screen name, just to **** on this thread??


Whether or not it's to enlighten or help, which could've been done via PM. The data is great, but the approach, could've been more dignified. 

But you've POINT posted on here, which would seem rather pointed in motive. 



His data does correctly lead into proof. 






Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ExtremeVR6 (Sep 6, 2001)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Did you come on here make a screen name, just to **** on this thread??
> 
> 
> Whether or not it's to enlighten or help, which could've been done via PM. The data is great, but the approach, could've been more dignified.
> ...


Kind of seems like it huh… 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Did you come on here make a screen name, just to **** on this thread??
> 
> 
> Whether or not it's to enlighten or help, which could've been done via PM. The data is great, but the approach, could've been more dignified.
> ...


I was looking for his answer, which he very nicely provided.
I have already thanked him for that; however happily do so again.

However, in Turbo mapping, I can assure you, Turbine and Compressor Flow are entirely separate parameters, although recorded at the same time. 

I tired to PM; however was not permitted to as I have less than 10 posts. (You have probably been here so long that you have forgotten that is a requirement for new members )


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

It wasn't a requirement until they changed over.

And I'm aware of the simultaneously collected data.

Though now, I'm interested to see how long you stick around and participate. That's how my answer will be given. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

Vegeta Gti said:


> It wasn't a requirement until they changed over.
> 
> And I'm aware of the simultaneously collected data.
> 
> ...


Simultaneously, *but unconnected*, data, is the relevant point.

I'll stick around as long as it appears that genuine Engineering data, (as opposed to simply guesses and opinions) are valued.
I have absolutely no problem with guesses and opinions, so long as they are clearly identified as such, otherwise they run the risk of misleading the less well informed.

The reason for my original question, (which I would have MUCH preferred to PM), was an attempt to increase my personal knowledge in a field in which I have worked my entire professional life.
I NEVER believe I know it all and I thought that possibly someone had run across an approach of which I was unaware.

Turns out, it was an incorrect guess. Just one of those things.
However, I would have never known, had I not asked.


----------



## Uncle Rodney (Nov 1, 2021)

Turbo Ed said:


> Simultaneously, *but unconnected*, data, is the relevant point.
> 
> I'll stick around as long as it appears that genuine Engineering data, (as opposed to simply guesses and opinions) are valued.
> I have absolutely no problem with guesses and opinions, so long as they are clearly identified as such, otherwise they run the risk of misleading the less well informed.
> ...


Personally, I’d like to hear more of your expertise on the topic. The selection of next generation turbos flooding the market in the past 10 years has made plunking down $$$$ and exercise in shear anxiety for some of us


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

Uncle Rodney said:


> Personally, I’d like to hear more of your expertise on the topic. The selection of next generation turbos flooding the market in the past 10 years has made plunking down $$$$ and exercise in shear anxiety for some of us
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


One of the reasons I don't make recommendations here is that I have an acknowledged bias.
I.E. I worked for one of the Big Two for quite a few years and have subsequently only used their product in Hi PO applications even after leaving the Corporation.
So, no brand recommendations from me.
However, I am prepared to make a couple of generalized comments, if you feel they are of any use.
1) When either of the Big Two release a new model range, saying that it it is superior to an older one, *it really is.
*Neither of those companies are in the consumer products business, releasing new models just to get the consumer to purchase the latest model.
They make their money supplying the OEM's (their performance business is not much more than a PR exercise) and car companies need to see genuine improvements, believe me.
I have sat in too many of those meetings to think otherwise.
I was in Application Engineering, not Aerodynamics; however I know how hard those guys worked to achieve even a 1% improvement.
When you read of someone saying an older model is superior to a new one in a particular application, there is more to it than that.
If the new model is not showing better results, you need to be finding out *WHY,* as a lot of very clever people spent a lot of time and money to improve the product.
If you cannot see the benefits, it is worth your time to find out exactly why you aren't seeing the appropriate results.
In other words, I would always buy the latest model of whichever Turbo brand you wish to use.

2) In my opinion, never purchase Performance Turbo product outside the top Four. 
Garrett
Borg Warner
IHI
Mitsubishi
Many small companies selling product in their own name use components from one (or more) of the above and then sell complete turbo assemblies as their own.
If this floats your boat, knock yourself out; however just try to make sure of the origin of the parts within your turbo.
The components of a gasoline performance turbo are subject to serous mechanical and thermal stress and you *REALLY* need to know they are up to the task.

Just my 2 cents worth, as you did ask,


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I know nothing, I'm a complete retard. I just collect data, sir through it and disseminate it into actionable and applicable changes, etc where I can. Then try to share it. 

In your last post, I fully agree. I don't believe older models are superior, they may be stout and reliable, but their performance shows their age for sure. I also personally don't use anything but Garrett or BW, occasionally a precision if its a really big model. 



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

Uncle Rodney said:


> Personally, I’d like to hear more of your expertise on the topic. The selection of next generation turbos flooding the market in the past 10 years has made plunking down $$$$ and exercise in shear anxiety for some of us
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Actually, I can think of another generalized, non brand specific, comment I think I can make without controversy.

Wherever possible, use what we used to call "Split Pulse", now commonly called "divided", turbine housings.

Definitely with any single turbo on any inline four or six cylinder.
Even on horizontally opposed four or six cylinder, if you cannot afford to do it the correct way, with twin turbos.
( Twins on a Subbie looks very cool, works amazingly; however, hard to package with LHD)

Hard to package on a V8 without a Flat Plane crank; however unless the ridiculous " Power Adder" number rules are in play, any conventional crank V8 should be using undivided turbine housing, twin turbos, anyway.
If you want to see how a V8 SHOULD be done, just look at the McLarens.
Flat plane cranks AND divided turbine housings. Seriously State of the Art.

If you want to look at how the matching exhaust manifold should be designed, in order to divide the exhaust pulsation according to firing order, just look at the manifold from the current AMG M139 four cylinder engine.
THAT is literally about as good as it gets.

Trust this helps.
If you have any other specific questions which I can answer without bias, happy to respond.


----------



## Turbo Ed (Aug 22, 2021)

Uncle Rodney said:


> Personally, I’d like to hear more of your expertise on the topic. The selection of next generation turbos flooding the market in the past 10 years has made plunking down $$$$ and exercise in shear anxiety for some of us
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I thought of something else worth keeping in mind when doing you own custom install.

Everyone uses boost gauges obviously.

Some people install thermocouples to read exhaust gas temperature, which is excellent; however they need to be installed in the* turbine entry port* of the turbocharger and if if you have a split pulse turbo, you need two separate ones. (You can buy twin readout single digital gauges)

There is increasing use of a "Turbo Tacho", or an instrument to read the speed of the rotating Group within the turbo.
Most modern performance turbos have provision for mounting the sensor in the compressor housing.
This is certainly an excellent idea, as you can over rev a turbo as easily, if not more so, as overrevving an engine.
* With just as disastrous results.

However, you rarely hear anyone talk about measuring the backpressure in the exhaust manifold.*
The Tractor Pull guys with the triple turbo 100 PSI + boost installs definitely do and the gauge manufacturers servicing that market do offer such exhaust back pressure gauges; however outside that market one rarely hears about it.
I have asked some big name automotive Tuning Shops selling high dollar components, what back pressure numbers they see with their high end packages and you can tell from their response that they have no idea. 

So, there are a number of simple ways to measure the backpressure in your exhaust manifold.
Use a gauge built for that purpose by the guys in the Tractor Pulling industry.
Use any old pressure gauge you can find, just remembering to have at least 6' of tube between your exhaust manifold and the gauge or pressure sensor , or it won't live long with exhaust gas temp.

For a simple indicator of turbo matching accuracy, you want a single sensor port at you turbine entry.
If you are really conscientious and want to check out how good a job you made of exhaust manifold construction, you will place senor port at each exhaust port of the cylinder head.
Obviously if your exhaust manifold is excellent all these pressures will be close to identical.

However, back to the turbine matching.
In an ideal world, you would always have at least 10% more boost than back pressure.
Notice I said, "at least", if you can achieve better than that, so much the better.
The best I have ever achieved is around 20%. 
IE at 30 PSI boost, the particular application never saw more than 24 PSI back pressure. 
Trust me, that is not easy to achieve and the application was a Road Race vehicle, with a power band between 5,500 and 8,000 RPM.

In a high performance road car, with a 2,000 to 7,000 RPM power band, if you can achieve parity at engine peak HP, you will have done very well.
That will take an excellent exhaust manifold, (along the lines of the current AMG M139), correct cam timing / ECU calibration and a correctly matched variant of current state of the art Turbo.

*However, you will never know if you don't measure it!! (Exhaust Back Pressure, that is)*


----------



## michaelz23 (Nov 20, 2021)

Hello all, first post! I have been lurking here for many years studying mainstayinc's great turbo content.

@mainstayinc I would love to get your insight before I downsize my car's turbo from GTX3582 Gen 2 to a GTX3576 Gen 2.

Fuel will be straight E85 only.

Planning to run 3 settings, 26psi, 32psi, 38psi (this last setting will depend on whether the tuner deems it to be safe or not).

Car in question, sorry it's not a VW product, it's actually a Nissan S15 Silvia with a built SR20 block and a more efficient VE head (basically Nissan's version of VTEC) so it will rev quite high with 2 different cam profiles and continue to make power deep into the 8000rpm range.

Still 2L capacity, slightly bigger than stock 1998cc SR20 but not by much, estimated approx 2022cc
Currently running a GTX3582 gen 2, twin scroll 0.83 rear housing, true twin wastegate manifold with 2x 44mm Tial wastegates

Thankfully, I have existing data that may help to see how far off we are from theoretical vs actual whp.

The setup is proven, hub dyno tuned with 4 settings:
19psi - 442whp
25psi - 543whp
33psi - 640whp
36psi - 678whp

Below is the highest boost power graph but measured in kW and 33psi is due to measuring post intercooler with a 3psi drop.










I've been driving this around and it's been reliable. Full boost from approx 4700rpm and pulls all the way to 8500rpm. On paper this all sounds great but in reality, it could be improved. Great when it's on boost however, the transient response is quite poor. Between each shift, it takes approx half a second before it's back to full boost and it's not often I have enough road to stretch its legs. The car is predominantly a street driven sleeper but I'd like it to spool up faster. Still stock body, running 265/35/18 semi slicks which is the widest I can fit.

The way the car is, even with 80 tread wear semi slicks, from 25psi and above, it wheelspins and bangs the limiter all through 2nd gear. I'm happy to dowsize the turbo, drop some power for a bit more response without changing the entire setup. GTX3576 gen 2 core is the easiest since it will fit straight into the existing exhaust setup.

If you can assist with individual 3582G2 and 3576G2 maps with estimated power at the 3 boost settings listed that would be a huge help. An overlaid map of both would also be amazing to see too.

Happy to lose around 100whp, ideally make a max of 600whp with full boost around 4200rpm instead of the current 4700rpm.

Many thanks,
Michael


----------



## Cauf61 (Dec 19, 2021)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I know it's a little late, but I build a lot of Saab parts, and they use a td04HL on a 2.8L from the factory. The 19t is a common upgrade, as is now the 20, 21, and 22T compressors with the 9-blade turbine wheel. From the factory the turbo is PERFECT for a daily driver. It would be amazing on a 3L if you're not looking for more than 260whp. Even on the big motor, the 19t's still pull in almost 300whp. With the turbine upgrade and 22t compressor guys have hit 350whp. The saab 2.8 headers are extremely restrictive and on e85 with a 20t/9-blade turbine a set of headers picks up over 50whp. For a daily driver non-performance application I wouldn't hesitate to use the td04HL.


 Hello I am looking for a turbo for my mercedes 6cyl 3.0l 24V engine project. The goal is to find much more torque in low and mid revs, not peak Hp. It is going to be a low pressure ( 6-7 psi max) project as daily driver with also minimal air cooler and engine adaptations.Going to use a Microsquirt ECU for fuelling, ignition,boost and knock control This engine can hold easily 100Hp per cyl. It should spool at 1700-2000 rpm already. My daily use is 1500-5000 rpm. This looks like an very interesting turbo. Am I correct ?


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

michaelz23 said:


> Hello all, first post! I have been lurking here for many years studying mainstayinc's great turbo content.
> 
> @mainstayinc I would love to get your insight before I downsize my car's turbo from GTX3582 Gen 2 to a GTX3576 Gen 2.
> 
> ...


Look into a quick spool flapper before reworking and spending extra money on a different turbo setup. Mainstays has a setup on one of his cars he posted way back. 

Here’s a cheap home made version.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Cauf61 said:


> Hello I am looking for a turbo for my mercedes 6cyl 3.0l 24V engine project. The goal is to find much more torque in low and mid revs, not peak Hp. It is going to be a low pressure ( 6-7 psi max) project as daily driver with also minimal air cooler and engine adaptations.Going to use a Microsquirt ECU for fuelling, ignition,boost and knock control This engine can hold easily 100Hp per cyl. It should spool at 1700-2000 rpm already. My daily use is 1500-5000 rpm. This looks like an very interesting turbo. Am I correct ?


For a gasser look into the Holset HX35 and HE351. They both are t3 flanged and not into their efficiency islands completely so heat would be minimal.


----------



## Cauf61 (Dec 19, 2021)

" and not into their efficiency islands completely so heat would be minimal" Sorry but this i do not understand completly. Grts


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Hello I’m looking for suggestions on a turbo for a 2.0L Stroker. The car will be street driven and I would like to have the headroom to make 500 wheel. I have been looking at the g25 660 and the s200sxe. Is 500 wheel too much to ask for a g25 660 and how does spool rpm compare between the s200sxe and the g25 660? If I were to go with the s200sxe it would be twin scroll since I have a twin scroll manifold.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

2L stokers have been covered several times. Should be maps available as well.


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Brake Weight said:


> 2L stokers have been covered several times. Should be maps available as well.


Yeah sorry the search function on my Tapatalk app is being wacky last time when I searched s200sxe there was only 2 or 3 results. I searched again through the forums website search and there’s more results. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

You should be able to locate it by scrolling on this thread , use the “back to top” button,then scroll down until you come to it. Honestly your goals are well within the realms of the Holset HE 351/HX 35, HY 35.


----------



## GermanPOS1.8T (Aug 26, 2019)

Pictured here is “Back to top” button


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

GermanPOS1.8T said:


> You should be able to locate it by scrolling on this thread , use the “back to top” button,then scroll down until you come to it. Honestly your goals are well within the realms of the Holset HE 351/HX 35, HY 35.


I see them now I appreciate it. I’m open to making less than 500 wheel. I’d want to keep the car somewhat streetable to an extent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

You talking awhp or fwhp?

Even bored and stroked up to 2008cc, hitting 500 "wheel" requires more than just a "big turbo"

A g25-550 will not hit 500 wheel, without a well orchestrated symphony of other things. 

Cams
Injectors
Management
Fuel type
Intercooler
Competent calibration
Intake manifold
Quality exhaust manifold
Fab work. 


While it spools well, it won't make that power. The g25-660 still spools great and has the ability, still needs those supporting mods. 


So you need to ask yourself why you NEED 500 "wheel" in a street car and what things you're willing to sacrifice to get it. Money is something you will spend a lot of, time is another... etc. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^ Bro you knocked that out the park! Almost exactly what I was thinkin when I read the post


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Vegeta Gti said:


> You talking awhp or fwhp?
> 
> Even bored and stroked up to 2008cc, hitting 500 "wheel" requires more than just a "big turbo"
> 
> ...


Very well said. The cars fwd. When it comes down to it I don’t need 500 hp. I’ve got all the a decent amount of parts stacked up. Megasquirt stand-alone, Manifold, wastegate oem gaskets, coated Bearings, arp hardware etc etc. But you make a good point, I think I was hoping to achieve 500hp just to say the car makes 500hp as dumb as that sounds. Since the cars apart it hard for me to stop myself from buying something and saying why not while it’s apart lol. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

My car is strictly for the streets, never really track it... Everything thats on it now is for daily driving purposes. Mid 300s whp is where I like it. Could make more power but I like where I'm at. Refreshing all my shifter components at the moment and fitting a new intercooler amongst a couple others. Once I'm done I'll put it on the dyno and see whats up


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Big_Tom said:


> My car is strictly for the streets, never really track it... Everything thats on it now is for daily driving purposes. Mid 300s whp is where I like it. Could make more power but I like where I'm at. Refreshing all my shifter components at the moment and fitting a new intercooler amongst a couple others. Once I'm done I'll put it on the dyno and see whats up


Hell yeah man sounds sweet! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Honestly. Just enough to beat pony cars is what made me happiest. Power to weight. Mid 300s can do that in a mk4 chassis. 400 is better. On a redlight dig they’d pull a little due to more traction but 4-5-6 I’d start walking away. It wasn’t much, but it was honest work. Now I’m looking to transfer that to a B6 platform next year and polish on it. Quattro should give me the dig now.


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Brake Weight said:


> Honestly. Just enough to beat pony cars is what made me happiest. Power to weight. Mid 300s can do that in a mk4 chassis. 400 is better. On a redlight dig they’d pull a little due to more traction but 4-5-6 I’d start walking away. It wasn’t much, but it was honest work. Now I’m looking to transfer that to a B6 platform next year and polish on it. Quattro should give me the dig now.


All the while looking better than the pony cars. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

Brake Weight said:


> Honestly. Just enough to beat pony cars is what made me happiest. Power to weight. Mid 300s can do that in a mk4 chassis. 400 is better. On a redlight dig they’d pull a little due to more traction but 4-5-6 I’d start walking away. It wasn’t much, but it was honest work. Now I’m looking to transfer that to a B6 platform next year and polish on it. Quattro should give me the dig now.


 I'm also looking into a b6/b7. Taking the 2.0 out and swapping in a 1.8


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Big_Tom said:


> I'm also looking into a b6/b7. Taking the 2.0 out and swapping in a 1.8


Or you could just get a b5 a4. I am bias though 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Puttguy (Jan 30, 2020)

Daredoole said:


> Or you could just get a b5 a4. I am bias though
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


B5 is the best looking A4 (IMO). 

Sent from my SM-N9750 using Tapatalk


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Puttguy said:


> B5 is the best looking A4 (IMO).
> 
> Sent from my SM-N9750 using Tapatalk


I couldn’t agree more. They are timeless


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

B5 is def an option as well for sure. One of my best friends has a few b5s... a4 and s4... Always liked those cars price is right now too. I want the B7 for the newer body TBH. already got the stuff for a 1.8 swap on deck


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Big_Tom said:


> B5 is def an option as well for sure. One of my best friends has a few b5s... a4 and s4... Always liked those cars price is right now too. I want the B7 for the newer body TBH. already got the stuff for a 1.8 swap on deck


Yeah I get that 100%. B7 is a good option since it has usable cup holders 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Daredoole said:


> Yeah I get that 100%. B7 is a good option since it has usable cup holders
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


One of my biggest complaints. My B6 has a 1.8t. ThT was the deciding factor really.


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Brake Weight said:


> One of my biggest complaints. My B6 has a 1.8t. ThT was the deciding factor really.


valid reason.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Don't use megasquirt.. so many superior plug and play units out there l

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Darepoole (Sep 3, 2019)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Don't use megasquirt.. so many superior plug and play units out there l
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I'm gonna be using a custom plug and play mega squirt 3. I can send you the info on it and you could give me your opinion. All the other aeb pnp options I found were well over or around 1k


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

Daredoole said:


> Yeah I get that 100%. B7 is a good option since it has usable cup holders
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Truuu. I tell people all the time, bottled drinks only in my Mk4 lol


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the G25-550 with 1.5L displacement (1480 CCs). The surge line (left side of map) ranges from below 2000 RPMs to 2800 RPMs. On a well-tuned setup with stock cams and good tuning, you can expect the G25-550 to begin to spoolup no later than 2800 RPMs. You can expect full spool to occur no later than 3800 to 4000 RPMs (surge line + 1000 RPMs) assuming your wastegate(s) don't open until full spool is reached. I marked two (2) points corresponding to the following:
> 
> P2/P1=2.5 or 22 psi at 6500 RPMs producing 35 lbs. of air per minute or 350 HP on pump/race gas or 700 HP on a twin-turbo setup.
> P2/P1=2.9 or 27.5 psi at 8000 RPMs producing 49 lbs. of air per minute or 490 HP on pump/race gas or 980 HP on a twin-turbo setup.
> ...


Hey, mainstayinc. It has taken me a year to get my a on the road due to other obligations. But , haha I'm back at it. My 300zx TT g25-550 .72 is
is spooling as you predicted. I can hear spool up beginning around 2300 rpm. The twin g25-550 turbos make a T51 whistling type of sound even though that is not a feature that I requested. Still, it's gratifying. 👍 so this is a follow up and a thanks going out to you as well as Brake weight for the support and encouragement. I will post a video. 300ZX g25-550 .72 Spoolin ZLordcity


----------



## Swiftz32 (Nov 4, 2020)

Swiftz32 said:


> Hey, mainstayinc. It has taken me a year to get my a on the road due to other obligations. But , haha I'm back at it. My 300zx TT g25-550 .72 is
> is spooling as you predicted. I can hear spool up beginning around 2300 rpm. The twin g25-550 turbos make a T51 whistling type of sound even though that is not a feature that I requested. Still, it's gratifying. 👍 so this is a follow up and a thanks going out to you as well as Brake weight for the support and encouragement. I will post a video. 300ZX g25-550 .72 Spoolin ZLordcity


More to come


----------



## dgardner0076 (Jan 7, 2022)

anyone ever turbo'd a Yamaha Waverunner with it's 1.8L 4 cylinder? G25-660? or G30-660?


----------



## LebTT (5 mo ago)

mainstayinc said:


> Below I overlaid the BW S252 SXE (RED) and S257 SXE (BLUE) on stock displacement (81mm bore x 86.4mm stroke x 4 cylinders = 1781 CC's). As you can see, the S252 SXE will spool a couple hundred RPMs faster than the S257 SXE and is capable of about 62 lbs. of air per minute or 620 HP on a highly tuned setup on pump/race gas or 558 HP on a less efficient setup. Your 500 HP goal is easily attainable with E85 and/or water-methanol injection. However, both of these turbos will spool later as compared to your current TD06-20G turbo.


Sorry to dig this thread out But the compressor map here are wrong one and not as described.
The red one is for S200sxe 7670 AKA s257 and the red one is for EFR 7670
These are the right compressor maps for the S252 and for the S257


----------



## LebTT (5 mo ago)

mainstayinc said:


> Below is the BW S200SXE 7670 aka "S257". The total output for this turbo is slighly more (+1 lb. per minute) than the standard S200SXE. However, the surge line is about 400 RPMs higher. My recommendation as far as engine speed and boost targets are the same however. P2/P1=3.1 (30 psi) at 7200 RPMs at 1998cc displacement.


the above is the compressor map of BW EFR 7670 and not for the S200Sxe
Check this out from BW website.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LebTT said:


> Sorry to dig this thread out But the compressor map here are wrong one and not as described.
> The red one is for S200sxe 7670 AKA s257 and the red one is for EFR 7670
> These are the right compressor maps for the S252 and for the S257


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LebTT said:


> the above is the compressor map of BW EFR 7670 and not for the S200Sxe
> Check this out from BW website.


----------



## LebTT (5 mo ago)

mainstayinc said:


>


Hi John, since we brought this thread from dead again.
At what RPM should i expect full boost with a S200SXE 7670 AKA S257sxe, on 1.8T mk1 TTquattro stroked to 1984cc displacement built bottom and head, head small port and NA cams with all supporting mods? i am targetting 2 ~ 2.2 bar of boost. the turbne housing will be twin scroll .75A/R with a twin scroll Exhaust manifold and external WG for sure.
thanks


----------



## Jonas Maurstad (4 mo ago)

I hope this mammoth turbo thread still has som life left in it🙂. Just joined to ask this question. 
I have a radical prosport race car with a hayabusa 1300 engine. I plan a turbo conversion and have come to the conclusion that I should buy a BW s252 sx-e with 0.83 t4 twin scroll turbine. (exducer 61mm)

Engine revs to 10500 wossner 9.5:1 98 octane gas.

Am I in the ballpark or should I go back to the drawing board?


----------



## Jonas Maurstad (4 mo ago)

Jonas Maurstad said:


> I hope this mammoth turbo thread still has som life left in it🙂. Just joined to ask this question.
> I have a radical prosport race car with a hayabusa 1300 engine. I plan a turbo conversion and have come to the conclusion that I should buy a BW s252 sx-e with 0.83 t4 twin scroll turbine. (exducer 61mm)
> 
> Engine revs to 10500 wossner 9.5:1 98 octane gas.
> ...


I forgot the say that I am looking for a sort of reliable 350 crank horsepower.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jonas Maurstad said:


> I hope this mammoth turbo thread still has som life left in it🙂. Just joined to ask this question.
> I have a radical prosport race car with a hayabusa 1300 engine. I plan a turbo conversion and have come to the conclusion that I should buy a BW s252 sx-e with 0.83 t4 twin scroll turbine. (exducer 61mm)
> 
> Engine revs to 10500 wossner 9.5:1 98 octane gas.
> ...


Thanks for the question. That is a very cool project. I can try to give you a pretty good estimate but that depends on whether I can find time to put together some analysis. That may or may not happen anytime soon. We'll see.

LOL my wife already kicked me off of her FB page that I was using to access the Ignitron Users Group because I was spending too much time on cars and not enough time doing things around the house.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

LebTT said:


> Hi John, since we brought this thread from dead again.
> At what RPM should i expect full boost with a S200SXE 7670 AKA S257sxe, on 1.8T mk1 TTquattro stroked to 1984cc displacement built bottom and head, head small port and NA cams with all supporting mods? i am targetting 2 ~ 2.2 bar of boost. the turbne housing will be twin scroll .75A/R with a twin scroll Exhaust manifold and external WG for sure.
> thanks


Maybe others who have experience with the S257 SXE can chime in?


----------



## Jonas Maurstad (4 mo ago)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for the question. That is a very cool project. I can try to give you a pretty good estimate but that depends on whether I can find time to put together some analysis. That may or may not happen anytime soon. We'll see.
> 
> LOL my wife already kicked me off of her FB page that I was using to access the Ignitron Users Group because I was spending too much time on cars and not enough time doing things around the house.


Ha ha my wife is really impressed with my priorities too🙂. I will wait for your valuable input and dont forget to vacuum every once in a while!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jonas Maurstad said:


> Ha ha my wife is really impressed with my priorities too🙂. I will wait for your valuable input and dont forget to vacuum every once in a while!


LOL.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jonas Maurstad said:


> I hope this mammoth turbo thread still has som life left in it🙂. Just joined to ask this question.
> I have a radical prosport race car with a hayabusa 1300 engine. I plan a turbo conversion and have come to the conclusion that I should buy a BW s252 sx-e with 0.83 t4 twin scroll turbine. (exducer 61mm)
> 
> Engine revs to 10500 wossner 9.5:1 98 octane gas.
> ...


First of all, this is a very cool car. Below I posted a stock picture of the Radical ProSport race car.









350 HP is easily attainable with the BW S252 SX-E and 1300 CC displacement with 10,500 RPM redline. Below I posted this setup with the following suggested data points for 350 HP on a well-tuned and properly intercooled engine:

P2/P1 = 2.36 (or about 20 psi) at 8,000 RPMs
P2/P1 = 2.10 (or about 16 psi) at 9,000 RPMs
P2/P1 = 1.89 (or about 13 psi) at 10,000 RPMs











The BW S252 SX-E fits this setup nicely with a surge line ranging from 2,200 to 4,200 RPMs. You can expect full boost no later than 5,000 RPMs with a 0.83 A/R T4 twin-scroll turbine housing and possibly sooner. This turbo/engine combination can make 500+ HP with a proper setup.

Please post more info. on this car if you get a chance. Also, I would be very interested in seeing how this setup performs once the turbo is installed and engine tuned.

-John.


----------



## Jonas Maurstad (4 mo ago)

mainstayinc said:


> First of all, this is a very cool car. Below I posted a stock picture of the Radical ProSport race car.
> View attachment 218021
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you so much. I really appreciate it!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Jonas Maurstad said:


> Thank you so much. I really appreciate it!


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

That Radical Prosport car would be a blast to pilot. Why stop at 350hp unless it’s a class specification? With RPMs that high a compound setup could be easily doable.


----------



## Jonas Maurstad (4 mo ago)

Brake Weight said:


> That Radical Prosport car would be a blast to pilot. Why stop at 350hp unless it’s a class specification? With RPMs that high a compound setup could be easily doable.


A compound setup with maybe a gt28 and a gt35 would be interesting, but weight is a priority in these cars. 350 is already putting heavy strain on chain and driveshafts, so I would think that is a smart limit. The temptation for 500 ho will come, but at least the I know The engine and turbo is up for it. I ordered the s252 sx-e t4 0,83 yesterday. Now I must save up for lots of uprated internals.


----------



## Tomtom97 (2 mo ago)

hi john i need your opinion on the turbos


----------



## Tomtom97 (2 mo ago)

j'ai un montage d'un 2l ea113 full renforcé (83mm course 92.8) je pense entre g25 660 g30 770 ou erf 71/63 pour une puissance de 550 à 600cv vous me conseillez quoi comme turbo


----------

