I've been driving my car to work for 2 weeks now Mart. My name isn't jun you derelict. I also said a E46 M3 in stock form. Know why I didn't mention your M3? Because NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR M3. EAD.
Printable View
I've been driving my car to work for 2 weeks now Mart. My name isn't jun you derelict. I also said a E46 M3 in stock form. Know why I didn't mention your M3? Because NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR M3. EAD.
Just move all Mart Densmans posts into his own polluted thread...he clearly has a mental problem and we can clearly see that has been getting worse over the past decade...he needs to be put asleep...kind of like his M3 is most of the time with rebuilds lol.
With how fast he is losing rep he won't need to be moved anywhere soon. I hope he figures it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Commanderwiggin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBKsy...;feature=feedfQuote:
Originally Posted by Twinturbom3
:facepalm
Sick!
I posted this on another forum, thought it would interesting info to add here as well:
"The turbos aren't too small, they just don't fit this engine properly from a flow perspective.
The exhaust housing is not a big restriction, there's still more left in it before it chokes. Corrected mass flow choke point is about 15 lb/min @ a PR of 1.8, which I'm guessing is pretty close to what these turbos are running at on pump fuel. That's 300hp worth of exhaust flow per turbo...which they aren't doing yet. So in this case, we are not "turbine" limited.
Looking at the compressor housing, it can flow a bit more than what is being used, but you need a higher pressure ratio to tap into that.
The issue here is that the compressor STARTs in the middle of it's efficiency range at 4000 RPM which is 76% adiabatic, progresses through 78%, then continues to decrease down to about 65% by redline. In layman's terms, the engine is too big for this turbo. The compressor needs a little bit more flow potential to match the airflow requirements of the engine.
If I was designing a twin turbo system, I would have the target airflow at peak torque fall on the left of the compressor map closer to 70% efficiency, so that as RPM increased the airflow would walk "through" the highest efficiency band of the compressor. The way it is, it's starting the middle and dropping off as RPM increases. On the dyno chart, you could gain another 10-15% at peak power just by matching the compressor side better at the same pressure ratio. (Manifold pressure would be the same, the air flow would just be denser)
Now I'm sure every will say "Just get a billet wheel, and all will be good". That isn't the case, as testing has shown that the new billet wheels make power on larger frame turbos, and that the gains in efficiency scale down as you reduce the compressor size and increase compressor speed. Billet wheels aren't going to solve this issue, the size of the compressor wheel will. In this case, a custom wheel (probably billet by design) and cover would be the solution without having to re-design all the supporting hardware that HPF has built.
BTW, adding meth would help the situation a little bit, but it's not going to change the shape of the torque curve dramatically.
Just my opinion."
So essentially you do not feel the proper sized turbos are being used?Quote:
Originally Posted by PEI330Ci
It's not as simple as it seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky
Compressor maps don't take into account everything that the turbo is attached to that affects it's performance. You can theoretically have a great match, then find that the VE of the engine is different, and it shifts the operating range off the edge of the map.
I'm not going to point fingers, but I know of one very well respected builder who is touting very good numbers from a car on the dyno, and I've found them technically impossible to achieve based on the compressor map. You just can't get XXX power from a turbo if you've got it operating far to the left of the surge line at X.X pressure ratio. I know...I said left of the compressor map....that's what makes it so strange.
Anyway, all I'm getting at is that HPF has probably been excited about getting the RHD system finally working, and has gone a little bit ahead of the normal R&D curve in releasing the kit with only dyno testing under their belt. There will be revisions and changes that I don't doubt will make the LHD guys think twice about the single turbo kits. Chris is a visionary and reads the market exceptionally well, I don't think he's got it wrong in this case....just a little bit "off".
Who and with what motor/turbo?Quote:
Originally Posted by PEI330Ci
I think he has gotten it quite a bit "off" without realizing. The LHD cars have been doing the marketing for all potential RHD owners. They have built in their mind that type of power level and the various staging going up to pretty high powers. They then release a 500whp kit that is at its limit and undersized for the S54 and start marketing it as a excellent package for track use etc. A lot of potential buyers are disappointed with the outcome, I personally know of three that where cash in hand. The error was that the mid frame turbos should have been used as a start point even if it meant many more months development. Sooner or later the customer with the RHD car at HPF is going to want it back and that will be the end of the development for the RHD cars.Quote:
Originally Posted by PEI330Ci
This person is a really valuable source of information for a lot of people including myself, so I'd rather not say exactly what I found. I still respect what his builds do, and they have some great "firsts" coming out of this shop, but the power numbers confuse me. If people compared dyno numbers to compressor maps, they'd see what I mean. That's all I want to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky
You certainly cut to the point, and I respect that.Quote:
Originally Posted by George Smooth
I think the existing RHD power band is suited to street driving where you want a quick kick in the pants, then shut it down before the next stoplight. Track guys want a wide and flat torque curve that's linear; this torque cliff is kind of hard to drive on a road course....although the Rally guys love that type of power.
People can't hold the LHD and RHD cars to the same standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by George Smooth
I understand and respect this. It is still going to bug the hell out of me.Quote:
Originally Posted by PEI330Ci
Sure they cannot once they are released. But up to that point the RHD guys have been using the LHD as a reference in their mind when considering a turbo option or moving onto another platform. Similar affect to when the US guys discovered they where getting a watered down E36 M3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky
In a sense, true, but RHD people needs to understand the design differences and can't expect the same things.Quote:
Originally Posted by George Smooth
Sure, there was also a chance they said they can't or won't do it. I am just expressing the sentiment of a few potential clients I know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky