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

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 08:50 AM
  #1  
AWDstylez's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Plainville, CT, USA
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.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 10:06 AM
  #2  
Semnos's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
From: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

.63
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 10:45 AM
  #3  
jaggrieger30's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: St. Louis, MO, US
Default Re: .48 a/r vs .63 a/r T3 (AWDstylez)

.63 b/c the .48 will not support those power levels.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 10:45 AM
  #4  
rhamlinii's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
From: Reisterstown, Maryland, USA
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.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 05:39 PM
  #5  
markaria's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
From: toledo, OH, USA
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
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 05:55 PM
  #6  
AWDstylez's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Plainville, CT, USA
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.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2007 | 08:07 PM
  #7  
boosted92's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 1
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.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bigsnorlax
Forced Induction
6
Mar 28, 2011 07:50 PM
motormike40
Forced Induction
17
Sep 22, 2007 08:00 AM
matmann
Forced Induction
12
Apr 3, 2006 12:53 PM
Azndude1983
Honda Accord (1990 - 2002)
0
Feb 7, 2006 10:26 PM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:07 AM.