Notices

.48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-06-2007, 08:50 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
AWDstylez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Plainville, CT, USA
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3

What's everyone's opinion on this? Assuming a t3/t04e 50 or 57 trim, is the .48 a/r too small for a 2.0L? My friend is looking for decent power but still wants to daily drive the car (which coming from her means she wants fast spool). She says she wants to run low 12's with the potential for a high 11, which in a heavy DSM is going to mean high 300's to 400whp. Is the .48 a/r a significant restriction at these power levels? Will it even support that power level without excessive backpressure? Personally I wouldn't run it (I have a .63 on a 50 trim), but she's so concerned about not being too laggy that I thought the .48 might be an opition worth looking at.

Please don't suggest a GT series, obviously that would be the ideal but she doesn't want to spend that kind of money.

And before you say, "Go ask a DSM forum." Let me just tell you that those guys are retards so it's not worth asking there, all I would get is "get a 16g, SBR made 400+whp on one." This is just a general question on what a .48 a/r can and cannot do. Thanks.
Old 03-06-2007, 10:06 AM
  #2  
Junior Member
 
Semnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

.63
Old 03-06-2007, 10:45 AM
  #3  
Junior Member
 
jaggrieger30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO, US
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

.63 b/c the .48 will not support those power levels.
Old 03-06-2007, 10:45 AM
  #4  
Honda-Tech Member
 
rhamlinii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Reisterstown, Maryland, USA
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AWDstylez &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What's everyone's opinion on this? Assuming a t3/t04e 50 or 57 trim, is the .48 a/r too small for a 2.0L? My friend is looking for decent power but still wants to daily drive the car (which coming from her means she wants fast spool). She says she wants to run low 12's with the potential for a high 11, which in a heavy DSM is going to mean high 300's to 400whp. Is the .48 a/r a significant restriction at these power levels? Will it even support that power level without excessive backpressure? Personally I wouldn't run it (I have a .63 on a 50 trim), but she's so concerned about not being too laggy that I thought the .48 might be an opition worth looking at.

Please don't suggest a GT series, obviously that would be the ideal but she doesn't want to spend that kind of money.

And before you say, "Go ask a DSM forum." Let me just tell you that those guys are retards so it's not worth asking there, all I would get is "get a 16g, SBR made 400+whp on one." This is just a general question on what a .48 a/r can and cannot do. Thanks. </TD></TR></TABLE>


First off have you read any compressor map's? That's the reason why most dsm's like the 50 trim turbo, because of it's fairly large efficiency rating. The 57 tim in my opinion , is junk and not worth talking about. That means pump gas at 25psi and all the power that comes with it. 16g's are not bad turbo's, but they will get you to where she wants to go with race gas. I did a 12.8 @104 in a full weight 1g with a 14b, in stage 1 trim. She needs to ask her self if she rather beat on the car, to run the times she want's, or drive the car easy and run decent times. A 7cm, is about a .43 t-3 so a .48 is not going to kill you either. This is all coming from a dsm guy.
Old 03-06-2007, 05:39 PM
  #5  
Honda-Tech Member
 
markaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: toledo, OH, USA
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

I have a .48 turbine side turbonetics t3/t4 and on my 1.9l b18c I maxed the turbo out in the 340whp range.
Spool is good though, since it starts to boost in the 3k range with full boost around 3.5k.
good luck
Old 03-06-2007, 05:55 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
AWDstylez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Plainville, CT, USA
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (rhamlinii)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rhamlinii &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
First off have you read any compressor map's? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Absolutely. That's why I'm running a 50 trim. Any trim over that is a joke (at least for 4G63 boost/flow levels). Glad someone finally agrees with me. I just happened to know someone selling a new 57 trim for pretty cheap, that's why it's an option.

Good to here from the guy above with person experience. I figured the .48 wouldn't be ideal.

So now it's just a matter of explaining to her that you really don't need 350+ hp on tap instantly in order to get to the grocery store. Thanks for the help and anyone else with opinions, feel free to throw them in.
Old 03-06-2007, 08:07 PM
  #7  
Member
 
boosted92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

Jump to an SC61 IMO. The .63 still spools up nice on the street on a larger DSM motor and the top end pull is great. You'll make a lot more pump gas power with it than a 50-trim as well.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bigsnorlax
Forced Induction
6
03-28-2011 07:50 PM
motormike40
Forced Induction
17
09-22-2007 08:00 AM
matmann
Forced Induction
12
04-03-2006 12:53 PM
Azndude1983
Honda Accord (1990 - 2002)
0
02-07-2006 10:26 PM



Quick Reply: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:58 PM.