Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday April 18, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Proven Power Bragging

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-07-2013, 09:16 PM   #176
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Ugh oh, sounds like maybe an upgrade for the Vadermobile! Low mount short charge pipes, bigger turbo! Hmmm
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 02:55 AM   #177
OVeRBOOSTn
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 192514
Join Date: Oct 2008
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: TURBOTRIX Racing
Vehicle:
04 STi PTE6765
10.1@138mph / JR Tuned

Default

Looks awesome Chris keep up the good work!!!
OVeRBOOSTn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 12:44 PM   #178
spintheground
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 239638
Join Date: Feb 2010
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: VA Beach
Vehicle:
2007 WRX TR UGM
02 MR2 EGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post


I will get a reply headed your way once I get a decent chunk of time to put some thought into.

I appreciate it!
spintheground is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 12:37 PM   #179
Tyrial
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 284392
Join Date: May 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: North Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
2011 STI Limited
Plasma Blue Pearl

Default

Updates?
Tyrial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 07:09 PM   #180
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Thanks guys.

Almost done waiting on build parts.

GTX3576-R came in... it had the wrong compressor housing. For some reason I got the small 3" housing Sent the housing back and when the 4" comes in I will have it machined to be reduced down to 3"

Anyone know why this ^ makes any sense?
KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 08:42 PM   #181
Layvon
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 195711
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cadillac MI
Vehicle:
STi 04/05/06/07
JBP / OBP for now

Default

Bigger hot side for top end, smaller cold side for spool?
Layvon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 10:42 PM   #182
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

^ Let me rephrase that... Why would I send back the 3" housing for the 4" housing only to custom reduce it back down to 4"?
KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 12:16 AM   #183
chris keefe
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 270312
Join Date: Jan 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: NEW BEDFORD MA
Vehicle:
2005 wrx sti
CGM/ PEARL WHITE

Default

Something to do with air speed in terms of velocity? Compress more air through a smaller hole at higher speeds?

So basically its like changing compressor A/R without actually changing compressor A/R? Low boost setup?

Last edited by chris keefe; 03-12-2013 at 12:22 AM.
chris keefe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 12:42 AM   #184
1cleenwrx
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 170542
Join Date: Jan 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: HAMPTON,VA
Vehicle:
08 AGILEbuilt-STI
93Soarer/01RSTI/06SPEC-B

Default

Hmmmm......I am very interested.
1cleenwrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 12:49 AM   #185
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Why do you have to reduce it to 3"? It would be best if you could maintain the 4" all the way into the compressor. Junior kind of lectured both Layvon and I about not reducing intakes/ inlets to the compressors as you force the compressor to work harder.

I'm psyched that you are going to test the GTX3576 for the low mount! That should be a great turbo for the low mount. Fast spool and probably close to 500 WHP on pump gas!
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 01:18 AM   #186
azn2nr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35276
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Vehicle:
2006 2.5i clone
438/420 whp

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
^ Let me rephrase that... Why would I send back the 3" housing for the 4" housing only to custom reduce it back down to 4"?
ill take offset inlet for 500 alex
azn2nr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 08:25 AM   #187
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris keefe View Post
Something to do with air speed in terms of velocity? Compress more air through a smaller hole at higher speeds?

So basically its like changing compressor A/R without actually changing compressor A/R? Low boost setup?
Not really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1cleenwrx View Post
Hmmmm......I am very interested.
Cool!

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
Why do you have to reduce it to 3"? It would be best if you could maintain the 4" all the way into the compressor. Junior kind of lectured both Layvon and I about not reducing intakes/ inlets to the compressors as you force the compressor to work harder.

I'm psyched that you are going to test the GTX3576 for the low mount! That should be a great turbo for the low mount. Fast spool and probably close to 500 WHP on pump gas!
Not true. At least not according to Garrett. I've read some of the 3" vs 4" housing debates (not sure if I saw Jr's contribution as it was a couple years ago). From what I do remember, there was no direct comparison data available where the compressor housing was changed on the spot with the same features (surge ports, polish, no inlet/filter, etc.). What I have seen is LOTS of assuming '4" is bigger so it has to be better' statements, which might be true for tip-in response when you're driving an 8.9 liter Peterbilt tractor trailor, but means much less when considering ultimate performance.

The actual inlet for most of us bigger turbo people is in the 2.2-2.4" size range. Take a look at the inlet of any 4" turbo and the inlet is anything but a smooth transition. It's actually pretty freaking horrible! So why Chris did the manufacturer's (and performance industry) in their great wisdom move from 3" to 4"? In one word, surge. The surge ports and surge characteristics are greatly improved on the large housings. This provides significant advantages in tunability and power capability lower in the revs where a 3" non-ported housing would have to be tuned around the surge line leaving power potential on the table.

If my logic is making any sense here you can hopefully see where we're going here... Combining the best characteristics of both. A trumpeted 3" inlet with the 4" housing's surge ports. The theory made sense. I passed my designs to Garrett for input and according to software simulations the "Killer B Motorsport Compressor Housing Inlet Adapter" has improved surge capabilities even over the 4" inlet because the surge flow is much less turbulent. As well as marginal improvements in overall flow due to the smooth transition of oncoming air into the wheel.

Now I'm not going to make it sound like it was all planned out this way, because it wasn't. Like many discoveries, I came across it entirely by accident when I decided to reduce the 4" inlet to 3" due to the small clearances around the inlet. It was really rubbing me the wrong way, but I figured if I've got the ear of Garrett engineering they'd be able to guide my path and/or let me know if this would be a problem to the point where I'd pull the plug on this kit. I was pleasantly suprised with the feedback I was given

So there you have it... Or at least an understanding of what we did and why. I don't have back-to-back REAL dyno data to prove it, but I do have a kit on a car that makes more power, and sooner, than any kit I've seen with the same size turbo, fuel type, and comparable mods. The GTX3576 should definitely be interesting... better yet the TS GTX3576 should be even more so

Quote:
Originally Posted by azn2nr View Post
ill take offset inlet for 500 alex
I'll give you partial credit on this one since a reduction in size does make a 1/2" offset from the original size
KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 08:37 AM   #188
Recoil
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 278895
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Olympia, WA
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
PSM

Default

So stoked to see more activity on this thread. This is one of two I'm subscribed to and my face lit up when I saw you posted. Very interested to see what's to come! Great work!
Recoil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 10:41 AM   #189
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Not true. At least not according to Garrett. I've read some of the 3" vs 4" housing debates (not sure if I saw Jr's contribution as it was a couple years ago). From what I do remember, there was no direct comparison data available where the compressor housing was changed on the spot with the same features (surge ports, polish, no inlet/filter, etc.). What I have seen is LOTS of assuming '4" is bigger so it has to be better' statements, which might be true for tip-in response when you're driving an 8.9 liter Peterbilt tractor trailor, but means much less when considering ultimate performance.

The actual inlet for most of us bigger turbo people is in the 2.2-2.4" size range. Take a look at the inlet of any 4" turbo and the inlet is anything but a smooth transition. It's actually pretty freaking horrible! So why Chris did the manufacturer's (and performance industry) in their great wisdom move from 3" to 4"? In one word, surge. The surge ports and surge characteristics are greatly improved on the large housings. This provides significant advantages in tunability and power capability lower in the revs where a 3" non-ported housing would have to be tuned around the surge line leaving power potential on the table.

If my logic is making any sense here you can hopefully see where we're going here... Combining the best characteristics of both. A trumpeted 3" inlet with the 4" housing's surge ports. The theory made sense. I passed my designs to Garrett for input and according to software simulations the "Killer B Motorsport Compressor Housing Inlet Adapter" has improved surge capabilities even over the 4" inlet because the surge flow is much less turbulent. As well as marginal improvements in overall flow due to the smooth transition of oncoming air into the wheel.

Now I'm not going to make it sound like it was all planned out this way, because it wasn't. Like many discoveries, I came across it entirely by accident when I decided to reduce the 4" inlet to 3" due to the small clearances around the inlet. It was really rubbing me the wrong way, but I figured if I've got the ear of Garrett engineering they'd be able to guide my path and/or let me know if this would be a problem to the point where I'd pull the plug on this kit. I was pleasantly suprised with the feedback I was given

So there you have it... Or at least an understanding of what we did and why. I don't have back-to-back REAL dyno data to prove it, but I do have a kit on a car that makes more power, and sooner, than any kit I've seen with the same size turbo, fuel type, and comparable mods. The GTX3576 should definitely be interesting... better yet the TS GTX3576 should be even more so

I'll give you partial credit on this one since a reduction in size does make a 1/2" offset from the original size
LOL, I should have known better than to question your decisions and thought process! I know you're not one to rush into anything without thorough testing! How many miles have you put on this low mount kit now?

We just made a simple 3" intake tube from Vibrant parts, no MAF, velocity stack and big filter! I installed it before my touch up tuning with Junior yesterday. So now I have no restrictions from filter all that way out the dual exhaust!
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 10:49 AM   #190
slowgenius
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48350
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
04 WRX

Default

So would this modification work for all the garret 4" inlet turbos? I am ordering the gtx3076 with the 4" ported cover and im interested if this would help out.

If i understand correctly, is the nasty lip machined off to smooth aiflow in the 4" ported shroud?

OR

Is there a piece added to bell it out?
slowgenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 11:39 AM   #191
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Recoil View Post
So stoked to see more activity on this thread. This is one of two I'm subscribed to and my face lit up when I saw you posted. Very interested to see what's to come! Great work!
Thank you and I share your enthusiasm for what's to come

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
LOL, I should have known better than to question your decisions and thought process! I know you're not one to rush into anything without thorough testing! How many miles have you put on this low mount kit now?

We just made a simple 3" intake tube from Vibrant parts, no MAF, velocity stack and big filter! I installed it before my touch up tuning with Junior yesterday. So now I have no restrictions from filter all that way out the dual exhaust!
A buddy of mine said I need to change the Killer B mantra to "Obsessively Engineered Subaru Performance Products" IIRC, last I looked we had over 12K miles on it, so it's likely in the 14K range now with a couple of events too.

So what were the final results? Any leaps in power or just cleaning things up a bit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by slowgenius View Post
So would this modification work for all the garret 4" inlet turbos? I am ordering the gtx3076 with the 4" ported cover and im interested if this would help out.

If i understand correctly, is the nasty lip machined off to smooth aiflow in the 4" ported shroud?

OR

Is there a piece added to bell it out?
Yes.

Here is a pic of an intouched 4" GT3076




And here's the GTX3071 housing modifications.

CNC milled compressor housing with tapped holes (not thru)



Here's the adapter I designed with feedback from garrett. CNC turned from solid billet aluminum.




And the final product assembled.







I'm going to be making another one of these inlet adapters in the next few weeks so if you, or anyone else, is insterested let me know and I can get pricing.
KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 02:30 PM   #192
reid-o
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 103631
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mililani, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Black

Default

If you're going to be experimenting with twinscroll of the same compressor turbine combination please plumb in a backpressure sensor or if you feel rich a shaft speed sensor. I know you're going to argue that it's not necessary for the average consumer, but your customers are not average anyway. The best test I've seen to date was done on the supra forums, but there were too many variables to draw strong conclusions. It's always good to have other data sets other than outcome data.

I don't have any comments on your designs and always enjoy your posts. I'm curious about your solutions to single wastegate twinscroll.
reid-o is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 02:50 PM   #193
kellygnsd
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32669
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Rancho C
Vehicle:
2007 2.34LR, EFR7670
LINK G4 hybrid STi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
Thank you and I share your enthusiasm for what's to come



A buddy of mine said I need to change the Killer B mantra to "Obsessively Engineered Subaru Performance Products" IIRC, last I looked we had over 12K miles on it, so it's likely in the 14K range now with a couple of events too.

So what were the final results? Any leaps in power or just cleaning things up a bit?



Yes.

Here is a pic of an intouched 4" GT3076




And here's the GTX3071 housing modifications.

CNC milled compressor housing with tapped holes (not thru)



Here's the adapter I designed with feedback from garrett. CNC turned from solid billet aluminum.




And the final product assembled.







I'm going to be making another one of these inlet adapters in the next few weeks so if you, or anyone else, is insterested let me know and I can get pricing.
That's pretty slick. Did you do any back to back testing against the virgin 4" inlet though?
kellygnsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 07:14 PM   #194
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post

Thank you and I share your enthusiasm for what's to come

A buddy of mine said I need to change the Killer B mantra to "Obsessively Engineered Subaru Performance Products" IIRC, last I looked we had over 12K miles on it, so it's likely in the 14K range now with a couple of events too.

So what were the final results? Any leaps in power or just cleaning things up a bit?

Yes.

Here is a pic of an intouched 4" GT3076

And here's the GTX3071 housing modifications.

CNC milled compressor housing with tapped holes (not thru)

Here's the adapter I designed with feedback from garrett. CNC turned from solid billet aluminum.

And the final product assembled.

I'm going to be making another one of these inlet adapters in the next few weeks so if you, or anyone else, is insterested let me know and I can get pricing.
LOL, obsessive is good with car parts and systems! It shows in the quality of your stuff. Junior and I were just discussing and giving high praise to your work yesterday, were your ears burning? Seriously though, when you look at your mandrel bent headers, the material, the path they follow and the results....well they speak for themselves!!

The compressor flange looks to be v-band compatable, correct?

Not to take anything away from this low mount kit but turbos spool so fast in the stock location or rotated stock location with your headers that it may be difficult to justify the cost of the low mount kit with smaller/ mid size turbos for the gains. I think this low mount will shine, the bigger you go turbo wise because the shorter piping will aid in spool up of the big guys! Kind of like what Junior is doing with the PTE6766 and his soon to be forward facing front mount location. Talk about short and efficient piping! I love what you're doing though and I'll bet the 3576 will shine on your kit!

Think about the waste gate exhaust though, it's a shame to route it back into the down pipe and loose some of the gains. Look at the discussion in the external waste gate muffler thread that we have been having! I'll post up a link here.
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 07:46 PM   #195
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 07:49 PM   #196
reid-o
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 103631
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mililani, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post

LOL, obsessive is good with car parts and systems! It shows in the quality of your stuff. Junior and I were just discussing and giving high praise to your work yesterday, were your ears burning? Seriously though, when you look at your mandrel bent headers, the material, the path they follow and the results....well they speak for themselves!!

The compressor flange looks to be v-band compatable, correct?

Not to take anything away from this low mount kit but turbos spool so fast in the stock location or rotated stock location with your headers that it may be difficult to justify the cost of the low mount kit with smaller/ mid size turbos for the gains. I think this low mount will shine, the bigger you go turbo wise because the shorter piping will aid in spool up of the big guys! Kind of like what Junior is doing with the PTE6766 and his soon to be forward facing front mount location. Talk about short and efficient piping! I love what you're doing though and I'll bet the 3576 will shine on your kit!

Think about the waste gate exhaust though, it's a shame to route it back into the down pipe and loose some of the gains. Look at the discussion in the external waste gate muffler thread that we have been having! I'll post up a link here.
The gains should be everywhere for a given psi of inlet pressure, less energy required to achieve a specific shaft speed, lower overall egbp and less turbulence from the reduced bends. You just may not see it with this turbo and only torque as the indicators. The engine should be happier which is not to say its not unhappy in the stock location.

Plus one of the competing theories about the value of features like split pulse is the increased total volume from running two long secondaries to the stock location. One could argue that the increased volume would limit the effect. The idea is not so much low mount as it is reduced header volume while increasing efficiency. It just so happens that most designs will put the collector closer to the ports.
reid-o is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 08:03 PM   #197
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reid-o View Post

The gains should be everywhere for a given psi of inlet pressure, less energy required to achieve a specific shaft speed, lower overall egbp and less turbulence from the reduced bends. You just may not see it with this turbo and only torque as the indicators. The engine should be happier which is not to say its not unhappy in the stock location.

Plus one of the competing theories about the value of features like split pulse is the increased total volume from running two long secondaries to the stock location. One could argue that the increased volume would limit the effect. The idea is not so much low mount as it is reduced header volume while increasing efficiency. It just so happens that most designs will put the collector closer to the ports.
I agree with you Reid but the results Chris has posted of the 3071 are not impressive in spool characteristics and HP. Maybe it's the tune but the gains in spool and response will be bigger with bigger turbos because of the efficiency in the design and volume. My 58 lb stock location turbo acts like a VF on steroids with the Holy header. I think I have a good balance of stuff in my build, you can ask Junior about that. I'm not trying to discourage or discounts what Chris is doing, it's all good but it will get better with bigger turbos!
JMHO
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 09:56 AM   #198
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kellygnsd View Post
That's pretty slick. Did you do any back to back testing against the virgin 4" inlet though?
No. The only thing I can tell you is the turbo sounded more 'chirpy' on light throttle lift and light tip-in felt slightly better. Placebo effect maybe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
The compressor flange looks to be v-band compatable, correct?

Not to take anything away from this low mount kit but turbos spool so fast in the stock location or rotated stock location with your headers that it may be difficult to justify the cost of the low mount kit with smaller/ mid size turbos for the gains. I think this low mount will shine, the bigger you go turbo wise because the shorter piping will aid in spool up of the big guys! Kind of like what Junior is doing with the PTE6766 and his soon to be forward facing front mount location. Talk about short and efficient piping! I love what you're doing though and I'll bet the 3576 will shine on your kit!

Think about the waste gate exhaust though, it's a shame to route it back into the down pipe and loose some of the gains. Look at the discussion in the external waste gate muffler thread that we have been having! I'll post up a link here.
Compressor flange is made for a standard 3" silicone tube. Space is tight and this was really the only option because no hard tubing is used on the inlet.

I can't entirely disagree with the performance of our headers in stock location, but you can't compare your setup here. It's VERY different. You've got the long rod block, built D25 heads (with bigger valves to boot) , I'm going to guess no cat as well and probably a bunch of ther stuff too I've got a SB with forged pistons/rods and higher pressure valve springs in the heads with a catted exhaust. That's it. For comparison sake the kit makes more power sooner in the revs than a 3071 on any other kit (rotated or OEM location) I've seen and similar peak power to the bigger 3076. The bolt-on-ness and combination of streetability (super good spool characteristics) with 400whp capability was the goal. Maybe I'm shooting for the wrong demographic?


Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
I read through ALL of it. Not one single before/after dyno. This would have been great to see. More specifically, a plot showing recirc vs to atm

At 400whp I'm not concerned that I'm leaving a lot on the table power wise going recirc. The EWG has a long dump tube, it's is tied into the exhaust at an pleasurable angle, plus it is tied in after the cat.

So the concern is going above 400whp and still being as quiet as the possible. An additional muffler on the gate is not the path I want to take. I'd MUCH rather run exhaust and EWG into a collector and appropriately size up the exhaust from there, say from 3" to 3.5" (or whater the math says it should be). I know the dual muffled setup works, but for some reason it's not tickling me the right way. More thought required

Quote:
Originally Posted by reid-o View Post
Plus one of the competing theories about the value of features like split pulse is the increased total volume from running two long secondaries to the stock location. One could argue that the increased volume would limit the effect. The idea is not so much low mount as it is reduced header volume while increasing efficiency. It just so happens that most designs will put the collector closer to the ports.
True. The thoery has merit, but I question the effectiveness of 'tratitional rotated twin scroll' setups in Subarus because the secondaries are vastly longer that than the primaries. It seems like the headers were made this way to fit the confines of the available space marketing to the 'must have TS!' market and no one thought to ask "does this setup have gains to warrant the massive price of admission?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
I agree with you Reid but the results Chris has posted of the 3071 are not impressive in spool characteristics and HP. Maybe it's the tune but the gains in spool and response will be bigger with bigger turbos because of the efficiency in the design and volume. My 58 lb stock location turbo acts like a VF on steroids with the Holy header. I think I have a good balance of stuff in my build, you can ask Junior about that. I'm not trying to discourage or discounts what Chris is doing, it's all good but it will get better with bigger turbos!
JMHO
Again... you gotta compare similar setups; pump, stock heads, catted, etc...

Quote:
Originally Posted by reid-o View Post
If you're going to be experimenting with twinscroll of the same compressor turbine combination please plumb in a backpressure sensor or if you feel rich a shaft speed sensor. I know you're going to argue that it's not necessary for the average consumer, but your customers are not average anyway. The best test I've seen to date was done on the supra forums, but there were too many variables to draw strong conclusions. It's always good to have other data sets other than outcome data.

I don't have any comments on your designs and always enjoy your posts. I'm curious about your solutions to single wastegate twinscroll.
Oh I know there's nothing average about Suby owners, we are a quirky crowd In all honesty, that kind of data stays here. Reason being, it opens up a HUGE can of worns. As-is I avoid custom work like it's the plague and providing info like that opens the flood gates to those that want our products "prefect" by "fixing" a miniscule pressure differential across the primaries. I can see the PMs already... "Can you make me a header that doesn't have .00X pressure differential, I need this build to be perfect!" I'd have to lump this in with my ever expanding inbox of "I like the design of your headers, but can you make it with 2" primaries and 2.5" secondaries, I'm shooting for 450whp and those small primaries/secondaries won't flow enough."

For now you'll have to have some faith and trust in that we cross our T's and dot our I's and hopefully the 'outcome data' will be all good.

The TS single WG solution is pretty cool and it might even catch on as a fabrication piece for the DIYers out there. Or at least I think it's cool Our first cast part too. Basically right before the turbine housing it runs a port from each runner to the WG, so the WG port is split into two and runs into the exhaust runners, secondaries. It's tipped at an angle for good flow characteristics (can't say how much I DESPISE WG's stubbed in at 90!). The divider goes into the WG all the way to the WG's valve for minimal cross contamination of gasses. It's made correctly to a T3. I say correctly because I ordered 2 different off-the-shelf T3 flanges and the profiles (specifically the corner radii) did not match the housing . It will also not require the squeezing, hammering or otherwise mashing of tube to fit a T3 flange, because it IS the flange. It goes from round to the rectangular-ish port shape in a nice smooth transition
KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 10:17 AM   #199
manitou
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 193757
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cedar, MI HP Techs MPS-SSLR2.5
Vehicle:
2006 XTI Limited
OBP, Junior tuned 573WHP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post
No. The only thing I can tell you is the turbo sounded more 'chirpy' on light throttle lift and light tip-in felt slightly better. Placebo effect maybe?



Compressor flange is made for a standard 3" silicone tube. Space is tight and this was really the only option because no hard tubing is used on the inlet.

I can't entirely disagree with the performance of our headers in stock location, but you can't compare your setup here. It's VERY different. You've got the long rod block, built D25 heads (with bigger valves to boot) , I'm going to guess no cat as well and probably a bunch of ther stuff too I've got a SB with forged pistons/rods and higher pressure valve springs in the heads with a catted exhaust. That's it. For comparison sake the kit makes more power sooner in the revs than a 3071 on any other kit (rotated or OEM location) I've seen and similar peak power to the bigger 3076. The bolt-on-ness and combination of streetability (super good spool characteristics) with 400whp capability was the goal. Maybe I'm shooting for the wrong demographic?




I read through ALL of it. Not one single before/after dyno. This would have been great to see. More specifically, a plot showing recirc vs to atm

At 400whp I'm not concerned that I'm leaving a lot on the table power wise going recirc. The EWG has a long dump tube, it's is tied into the exhaust at an pleasurable angle, plus it is tied in after the cat.

So the concern is going above 400whp and still being as quiet as the possible. An additional muffler on the gate is not the path I want to take. I'd MUCH rather run exhaust and EWG into a collector and appropriately size up the exhaust from there, say from 3" to 3.5" (or whater the math says it should be). I know the dual muffled setup works, but for some reason it's not tickling me the right way. More thought required



True. The thoery has merit, but I question the effectiveness of 'tratitional rotated twin scroll' setups in Subarus because the secondaries are vastly longer that than the primaries. It seems like the headers were made this way to fit the confines of the available space marketing to the 'must have TS!' market and no one thought to ask "does this setup have gains to warrant the massive price of admission?"



Again... you gotta compare similar setups; pump, stock heads, catted, etc...



Oh I know there's nothing average about Suby owners, we are a quirky crowd In all honesty, that kind of data stays here. Reason being, it opens up a HUGE can of worns. As-is I avoid custom work like it's the plague and providing info like that opens the flood gates to those that want our products "prefect" by "fixing" a miniscule pressure differential across the primaries. I can see the PMs already... "Can you make me a header that doesn't have .00X pressure differential, I need this build to be perfect!" I'd have to lump this in with my ever expanding inbox of "I like the design of your headers, but can you make it with 2" primaries and 2.5" secondaries, I'm shooting for 450whp and those small primaries/secondaries won't flow enough."

For now you'll have to have some faith and trust in that we cross our T's and dot our I's and hopefully the 'outcome data' will be all good.

The TS single WG solution is pretty cool and it might even catch on as a fabrication piece for the DIYers out there. Or at least I think it's cool Our first cast part too. Basically right before the turbine housing it runs a port from each runner to the WG, so the WG port is split into two and runs into the exhaust runners, secondaries. It's tipped at an angle for good flow characteristics (can't say how much I DESPISE WG's stubbed in at 90!). The divider goes into the WG all the way to the WG's valve for minimal cross contamination of gasses. It's made correctly to a T3. I say correctly because I ordered 2 different off-the-shelf T3 flanges and the profiles (specifically the corner radii) did not match the housing . It will also not require the squeezing, hammering or otherwise mashing of tube to fit a T3 flange, because it IS the flange. It goes from round to the rectangular-ish port shape in a nice smooth transition
Chris, You know I a a huge fan and love all my KB stuff! I know you are on the right path with this low mount!! I know it's apples and oranges comparing response and not taking in account for the builds. Yes I have a very different build than most given the power I am making, stock location, TMIC LR 2.5, built heads etc... It would be nice to see your headers on a stock location build, stock heads, 3071, 3076 size turbo.

I still believe your low mount will really shine with the 35r size and bigger turbos. These are the turbos that really need the added help with spool on our Subarus!
manitou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 10:53 AM   #200
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

^ No worries, I love a good discussion/debate

Here's one I found on a quick search. The other car is OEM location and he is running catless. The ATP turbo has an IWG and I am running recirc so I'm not sure what kind of skew needs to be put on that one

KillerBMotorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.