Quick 200k Mile Motor

What turbine setup will give a smooth transition into boost ?
(Given that the compressor is well matched for the motor)

<u>Standard thrust bearing</u>
.63 a/r + stageIII wheel
.63 a/r + stageV wheel
.72 a/r + stageIII wheel
.72 a/r + stageV wheel
.82 a/r + stageIII wheel
.82 a/r + stageV wheel
or
<u>Ball bearing or GT series chra</u>
.72 a/r + stageIII wheel
.72 a/r + stageV wheel
.82 a/r + stageIII wheel
.82 a/r + stageV wheel ?

I know the a/r will <u>delay</u> the response, but as you can see, I am lost on what wheel stage does. I am thinking the highest stage (V) would also delay the response, but kick-in hard only in the highend (which I dont want).

There is not enough info on turbine maps. Only turbine maps Ive found were in the GT series. Can someone guide me into looking at the others?

Quick 200k Mile Motor

I forgot to add.. "with equal length manifold"
that'll definitely change the turbine response

You_Get_Vapors

try a .60 trim..........in both the compressor and turbine

Dee

Do you have any idea what you are talking about?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by You_Get_Vapors &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">try a .60 trim..........in both the compressor and turbine</TD></TR></TABLE>

What motor? Rev limit? Intended usage?

For a street driven 1.9~2.0l VTEC motor an AR.63 stageIII is sufficient. You will get good throttle response, a flatter torque curve and excellent power to 8k~8400rpm. For a weekend street/strip fighter the AR.82 stageV will give loads more topend and a peakier power curve. Use as large a DP and exhaust as possible with either setup. BB setups commonly allow a user to step up to the next larger exhaust housing while seeing very little change in where boost begins to build. Sometimes the larger housing will spool faster because of the BB option. Notice I said 1 size larger.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=153810

Quick 200k Mile Motor

bump

Boostfed

I personally like the .82 A/R Stage V set up, it will give you top end, a little more lag but if you're racing it it's ok when you shift you should still be in the powerband esepcially with the displacement you are looking for. Good luck

JM Performance

any opinions on the stage II wheel? thats what i'm running, but I never hear anything about it.

austrian type-R

the GT Series also have .63 a/r available

Quick 200k Mile Motor

Im trying to stay away from that. GT series spools up too easy = no traction.
Imo, any GT series .63 a/r or lower would be perfect for burnouts.

SiRkid

thats why I have .82

Quick 200k Mile Motor

I searched around.. it seems like spool up to full boost will occur earlier than I thought. On a <u>standard 270deg thrust bearing</u> T3 stageIII .63 a/r, what is the typical full boost rpm (1.9-2.0 liter)? I heard 3800rpm, and 4500rpm.

Im confused probably because the 2 different trim wheel sizes for stageIII: .76 & .69 trim.

TurboSedan

I would try the .63 AR turbine with a stage II wheel. It should be a good compromise between quick spool and top-end power.

SiRkid

in canuk sir's car his t3/to4e 57 trim (.63 a/r) hits full boost(9psi) by 3700 rpm on a stock b16.

Quick 200k Mile Motor

you mean on stock b16 head or stock longblock (1595cc)?
3700 rpm is too low
how about if he went with the .82 a/r?

austrian type-R

lol, why is that too low?! IMO it could be even better since 9psi is not much. I get full boost of 18psi on 4200rpm with .63 a/r standard T-Series Turbo T3/T04e. 1.8ltr B18C5 9:1 cr. I want quicker response and spool tho

Dee

A little common knowledge...

spool fast = dropoff fast

When you have a high revving DOHC motor you need to think about using a turbo setup that give boost throughout the entire power range instead of concentrating V8-like torque. Most DOHC Hondas don't produce noticeable power until the 3500rpm mark so a turbo that spools in the 3000~3700 and gives full boost in the 3700~4400 range is just fine for a street driven setup. Small housings with small trims will starve an engine and fall on their face in the 8k rpm range. With that being said, the best bet would be an AR. 63 stage III setup. If you really want lots of lowend/midrange power then a SC setup would be a better choice.

To get better response/spool from an AR.63 use the largest DP that will fit in your engine bay. Stay away from the stage II blade.


Modified by Dee at 11:09 PM 6/12/2003

DIRep972

iTrader: (1)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dee &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> With that being said, the best bet would be an AR. 63 stage III setup. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Well ive driven and raced cars w/ all 3 of these wheel/ar combos. .63/stage 3, .48/stage 2, and .63/stage 5.

and I agree w/ u Dee. stage 3 .63 is the perfect exhaust side set up for 99% of street cars on here. It can provide 10psi by 4000 and 20psi by 5000. It can support 400whp no problem either. and it doesn't feel laggy. most cars on here are looking for 250-400whp so its perfect. I have the .63/stage 3 and V8 cars NEVER get out on me on a punch. Whether it be a 20, 40, or 70 roll it doesn't matter. If the car is reasonably matched the .63/stage 3 will keep u right there with em.

I am against the .48/stage 2 unless its on a 250whp or less car. having 6psi @ 3200 vs. 3800 rarely will make a difference because honda motors don't make power till around 4500 anyways. .48/stage 2 there is really no lag so it kicks *** for a low hp turbo car. It makes it easy to get out on ur competition so they have to fetch u. but it limits ur potential so I would stray away from it.

stage5/.63 felt really laggy to me. it was a 60-1 compressor too and I didn't really like it. trying to luanch the car on the street in 1st gear was pointless. If u luanch it high enough for boost to kick in u spin. Lunch it low enough u bog. I saw the .48ar/stage 2, 200whp, car get out a bus length on the stage 5/.63ar 250whp car many times and the higher hp car had no chance on fetching em until 4th gear.

internet theories are all fine and dandy but how it actually performs is what matters. I am basing most of my opinions on seeing how the cars perform in real life and I vote .63/stage 3

Flamenco-T

just remember guys, anything that is an extra usually takes something out of the equation. Faster spool, that means, you're gonna top off quicker, you may get a normal car off the line, but if you're gonna go through to all 4 gears, you're gonna got cuaght up.

Just like lightened flywheel, it'll rev quciker, but you'll fall out of rev quicker as well when you;re shifting.

FYI, something to consider about.
PS: I have a stage 5 .63 wheel on a Precision SC61

stan

Quick 200k Mile Motor

you guys are great
I can now move a step closer choosing a turbine.

I meant to say that 3700 is too low for hitting <u>full boost</u> ..just my $.02. We all have opposing traction FWD's. That's why it's better to be on one side of the equation (what Flamenco-T said). Anything that spools up at low engine speed sacrifices efficiency at high engine speed. It's been a theory of mine, that early spool (early torque) is never good for FWD, and I stick to that theory to this day. For FWD, it is best to have most of the torque when you're up to speed. You still need a little torque to get out of the hole and not bogg down, but if there is full boost (torque) early in the rpm band, at lower speeds, the tires will break loose. It is much better for majority of torque to be produced up in the band for a FWD.

I rode in quite a few turbo FWD hondas, mostly LS turbos w/ stock G3 LS trannies and most didn't have full traction in 1st through 4th gears. I thought, "How can it be.. no traction with even the largest gearing offered for B-series?"
Because of that, its burned in my mind that FWD traction sucks. If I wasn't here, I'd have a RWD 240 with a SR20det, but I wouldn't know where to look for the support for that setup.. I'd rather follow the wealth of knowledge that is here growing since the market is vast and very affordable to try out new things compared to others.

Anyhow, .63 a/r stageIII seems to what you all prefer, but I'm still confused <u>with no wheel trim sizes given.</u> There are different trim wheels in StageIII. Which do you have? .69 or .76trim wheel?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Flamenco-T &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have a stage 5 .63 wheel on a Precision SC61</TD></TR></TABLE>
did you mean .63 a/r with .69 trim wheel?

Quick 200k Mile Motor

Im a nerd for solving things mathematically before moving on.
So, I'll be glad to see some advice on how to plot on something like this...

Its a turbine map (something rarely mentioned on the boards). It's impossible to find any info on the web on turbine maps. The only turbine maps on the web are for the GT series only (one of them shown above), the others are for industrial gas turbines.

Oh and.. don't be fooled by the large a/r numbers. Remember what Dee said: "BB setups commonly allow a user to step up to the next larger exhaust housing while seeing very little change in where boost begins to build. Sometimes the larger housing will spool faster because of the BB option. Notice I said 1 size larger". The .94 a/r here probably flows the same as the standard .72 a/r, and the 1.05 a/r is probably the same as the standard .84 a/r.

Quick 200k Mile Motor

Since there is lack of info, I went ahead and experimented..
I treated the map just like a compressor map. There are no efficiency islands like on a compressor map. What you see is <u>efficiency lines</u> at the indicated %. I think of it as a line drawn along the center of an efficiency island.
You want to fall near or on that line when you plot the pressure ratio (boost that you plan to run) vs. the gas flow lbs/min (specific to your motor and the rpm its running in).



The blue dots are the peak hp rpm. The green dots are peak torque rpm. Boost increase works against the efficiency of a turbine? (because more boost = more gas flow to the turbine?). From my plot, it seems the .73trim wheel .94 a/r is best for my setup out of the GT40 turbines (from 12 - 16psi). Like I said, this is just an experiment.. I might be wrong.

Just for reference..
1973cc | 93% VE @ 7800rpm | 101% VE @ 6200rpm (%VE was calculated from a dyno graph)

Rounded figures for the corrected gas flow for each boost setting:

7800rpm @ 16psi, 33 lb/min
7800rpm @ 12psi, 29 lb/min
7800rpm @ 8psi, 25 lb/min

6200rpm @ 16psi, 28 lb/min
6200rpm @ 12psi, 25 lb/min
6200rpm @ 8psi, 22 lb/min

JM Performance

I'm gunna look into this a bit more, but I think you have a few things wrongs.

First of all exhaust gas flow isnt' the same flow as for the compressor. Exhaust flow is air + fuel in lb/min. so say you intake 20 lb/min. and you have 40lb /hr injectors running at 80%. thats another 2lbs per min...not much, but its there.

also i dont think its the same pressure ratio as for the compressor either. I could be wrong but I think its the pressure before vs. after the turbine.

like i said im gunna look into it more.

JM Performance

decent link:

http://www.turbodriven.com/en/...e.asp


some good quotes off of this site:

The turbocharger turbine, which consists of a turbine wheel and a turbine housing, converts the engine exhaust gas into mechanical energy to drive the compressor.
The gas, which is restricted by the turbine's flow cross-sectional area, results in a pressure and temperature drop between the inlet and outlet. This pressure drop is converted by the turbine into kinetic energy to drive the turbine wheel.

The turbine performance increases as the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet increases, i.e. when more exhaust gas is dammed upstream of the turbine as a result of a higher engine speed, or in the case of an exhaust gas temperature rise due to higher exhaust gas energy.

In practice, the operating characteristics of exhaust gas turbocharger turbines are described by maps showing the flow parameters plotted against the turbine pressure ratio. The turbine map shows the mass flow curves and the turbine efficiency for various speeds. To simplify the map, the mass flow curves, as well as the efficiency, can be shown by a mean curve.

For a high overall turbocharger efficiency, the co-ordination of compressor and turbine wheel diameters is of vital importance. The position of the operating point on the compressor map determines the turbocharger speed. The turbine wheel diameter has to be such that the turbine efficiency is maximised in this operating range.

JM Performance

also remember that not all of your gas is going through the turbo....some is going through the wastegate and unfortunatly theres no way to figure out how much.

austrian type-R

you guys are always saying something on hitting full boost at that and that rpm....but it is a major difference if you consider ful boost as 9psi or 18psi. When I say I hit full boost (9psi) at 4000 this is low. When I say I hit full boost (14psi) at 4000rpm, that is way better.

I dont think a GT30 .63 will fall on his face at 18psi, when my T3/T04e .63 .54 does'nt either and make power up to 8500+ rpm.



IMO a stage 5 wheel with .63 a/r on the BB GT30 with an T04e housing and 60 a/r, 52 trim compressor has quick spooling and you get easy 430whp at 18psi. This Turbo is for sure not laggy and you get top end power. Don't you think so?

If you think a stage 5 is laggy on a thrust bearing turbo, it won't be so on an BB, right?