Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Wednesday April 23, 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 03-13-2013, 12:18 PM   #201
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

OK, you're spooling way faster but to be fair you have a external gate and a 3071 non stock location and he has a stock location internal gated 3076!

I can't wait to see what the 3576 does!!
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
manitou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 12:52 PM   #202
imma_stocker
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 97043
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Tomballer
Vehicle:
08 STI - 02 Z28
07 GSXR - 96 CBR

Default

Only 2 questions here...
When are these going public?
When are you gonna develop a compound turbo setup?
imma_stocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 01:53 PM   #203
reid-o
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 103631
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mililani, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBMotorsport View Post



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

I didn't mean to plumb it in the production pieces. I agree that part isn't necessary. I meant to plumb it in just for your testing. If you can show for example increased shaft speed acceleration or lower EGBP across the curve, then it would help to prove there are gains not quantifiable in the torque curve. It would also point out that the twin scrolls require more extensive avcs mapping. I would think that shaft speed increases at low rpm would be a good indicator of response over a dyno pull. I feel the same way for your current low mount kit, even though the dyno is showing improved spool. This would be interesting to see in your open scroll version, but the data would be less meaningful without comparison data on a traditionally mounted setup.

For example, one of the assumptions about the traditional mounted setups (even the rotated which has the same post header volume as stock) is that the high volume requires a lot of egbp to accelerate the turbine, and going to the 63 hotside helps increase velocity but has a more severe effect on flow as rpm rises as compared to other systems that seem to run fine with small turbine/large compressor. The 4g63 seems to run fine with the 63 for example and they make good power with gtx3076. I was sad to see that the 63 fell off so much on your low mount kit, and that contradicts this assumption. That extra data point would just help to get a bigger picture and the effects different concepts have on final outcome. But if no can, no can. I understand that you have bigger fish to fry.
reid-o is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2013, 02:03 PM   #204
reid-o
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 103631
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mililani, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Black

Default

Wow that cast piece sounds cool!!!! It's really a shame that garret doesn't make more hotside options. I know that they showed prototypes at Sema a few years ago. I helped a friend with an sr20det t3 twinscroll kit. We had all kinds of issues trying to get the bolts into the hot side and the supplied bolts actually penetrated the turbine housing. Once we finally got it all together, my friend wanted to pull the bolts out to cut them down. I wanted to murder him ahhaha
reid-o is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 08:44 AM   #205
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 manitou View Post
OK, you're spooling way faster but to be fair you have a external gate and a 3071 non stock location and he has a stock location internal gated 3076!

I can't wait to see what the 3576 does!!
True, but during spool-up woudn't either WG be closed to promote maximum boost promotion

I can't wait either!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by imma_stocker View Post
Only 2 questions here...
When are these going public?
When are you gonna develop a compound turbo setup?
More testing after the next built motor and bigger turbo goes in.

We looked into a compound setup. It can be done, but the price is astonomical. The bang for the buck just isn't anywhere near a justifiable point. With the little 3071 we have better spool-up characteristics than the VF, which is pretty freaking instant. If you want the BIG turbo AND instantanious power it would be much less costly to go nitros or ALS. Niether I would recommend on the street, but we do work with a hand full of race teams that use ALS, but they are also performing regular engine rebuilds too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reid-o View Post
I meant to plumb it in just for your testing. This would be interesting to see in your open scroll version, but the data would be less meaningful without comparison data on a traditionally mounted setup.

I was sad to see that the 63 fell off so much on your low mount kit, and that contradicts this assumption.
Who's saying we're not collecting that data I won't make it public for the same reason I won't make our header flow data public. Of course those "race" headers with 2" primaries and 2.5 secondaries flow better than ours. Doesn't mean it's a better performing product, but to many, percieve it that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reid-o View Post
Wow that cast piece sounds cool!!!! It's really a shame that garret doesn't make more hotside options. I know that they showed prototypes at Sema a few years ago. I helped a friend with an sr20det t3 twinscroll kit. We had all kinds of issues trying to get the bolts into the hot side and the supplied bolts actually penetrated the turbine housing. Once we finally got it all together, my friend wanted to pull the bolts out to cut them down. I wanted to murder him ahhaha
I can't wait to post some pics, but until I get a piece in my hands I'm very hesitant to. On the Garret hotside thing... I'm sworn to secrecy, but stay tuned
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 09:05 AM   #206
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Also, I've got another member interested in an inlet adapter with accompanying compressor housing modifications. If anyone else is interested now is the time, because they are hugely expensive to make one at a time.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 10:10 AM   #207
slowgenius
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48350
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
04 WRX

Default

Can you make a group buy around may or so?
slowgenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 10:20 AM   #208
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
True, but during spool-up woudn't either WG be closed to promote maximum boost promotion

I can't wait either!!
Well not necessarily. I'm looking at a 3rd gear log from last week, I'm seeing anywhere from 20%-67% WGDC before peak boost! You definitely make more torque with a bigger external gate and of course have better boost control

Get er done Chris
manitou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 10:51 AM   #209
slowgenius
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48350
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
04 WRX

Default

Doesnt the waste gate crack open before target boost to prevent overboosting? Ideally you should leave the waste gate closed to the last possible moment as target boost is reached right?

The vacuum boost control system could use some redesigning in my opinion. A while back i was in discussion with Moore Performance on a few ideas i had, but i woud have to put money into it that i dont have to see if it worked.

One day i plan on revisiting it, but in mean time i wouldnt be suprised if someone doesnt beat me to it.
slowgenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 11:15 AM   #210
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 slowgenius View Post
Can you make a group buy around may or so?
Likely not

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
Well not necessarily. I'm looking at a 3rd gear log from last week, I'm seeing anywhere from 20%-67% WGDC before peak boost! You definitely make more torque with a bigger external gate and of course have better boost control

Get er done Chris
^ That may be true, but that's because your target boost is lower than peak boost at those RPMs. Tuners do this for one of several reasons. Now if you're running a manual boost controller (which would be a great apples to apples comparison) it will not open one bit until peak boost, that it's set to, is reached but that brings along with it the whole PTFB debate

I share a different opinion on WG size. I prefer the smallest needed for an application, which for Subarus is generally 38mm. The smaller the WG the better the fidelity, or more precise control. It's always easier to regulate a prices amount of flow/volume from a smaller valve than a bigger valve.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 11:29 AM   #211
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

Even running a MBC on an internal wastegate won't prevent the door from blowing open due to high EGBP if the preload isn't set right.
kellygnsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 11:53 AM   #212
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
Likely not



^ That may be true, but that's because your target boost is lower than peak boost at those RPMs. Tuners do this for one of several reasons. Now if you're running a manual boost controller (which would be a great apples to apples comparison) it will not open one bit until peak boost, that it's set to, is reached but that brings along with it the whole PTFB debate

I share a different opinion on WG size. I prefer the smallest needed for an application, which for Subarus is generally 38mm. The smaller the WG the better the fidelity, or more precise control. It's always easier to regulate a prices amount of flow/volume from a smaller valve than a bigger valve.
I was referring to the bigger and more efficient external gate vs. the internal gate. There are 2 schools of thought on the gate size for sure depending on your turbo size and boost levels you are running.

I'm with Kelly on the PL of the internal gate and EGBP. Also the turbulence caused from the traditional SL Subaru internal gate does not help!

Bottom line is that your LM kit with the EWG and smaller turbo has big advantages over the SL bigger IWG turbo with regards to spool. A better comparison would be same gtx3071, same gate, low mount vs stock area rotated location. I know your LM will spool faster but how much more would be nice to see!

My position is that the delta or differential as a percentage in spool characteristics between the turbo locations your LM to SL rotated will get larger as the turbo size increases!
manitou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 09:57 PM   #213
dstroy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 283711
Join Date: May 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Newport
Vehicle:
2012 STI sedan
Black with scratches

Default

Take My Money!
dstroy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 02:24 PM   #214
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
Even running a MBC on an internal wastegate won't prevent the door from blowing open due to high EGBP if the preload isn't set right.
For the sake of debate, lets make a massive assumtion that no one ever sets it up wrong

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitou View Post
I was referring to the bigger and more efficient external gate vs. the internal gate. There are 2 schools of thought on the gate size for sure depending on your turbo size and boost levels you are running.

I'm with Kelly on the PL of the internal gate and EGBP. Also the turbulence caused from the traditional SL Subaru internal gate does not help!

Bottom line is that your LM kit with the EWG and smaller turbo has big advantages over the SL bigger IWG turbo with regards to spool. A better comparison would be same gtx3071, same gate, low mount vs stock area rotated location. I know your LM will spool faster but how much more would be nice to see!

My position is that the delta or differential as a percentage in spool characteristics between the turbo locations your LM to SL rotated will get larger as the turbo size increases!
Allen it was great speaking with you today. During our conversation I had forgot to tell you that I had put some more thought into this whole EWG vs IWG and recirc vs dump to atm. I've come to the conclusion that it's going to depend on the application/design of the WG. In other words a well setup 38mm will outflow a crappy 44mm setup. Same goes for recirc, a well designed recirc can work as well as dumping through a mini-muffler. I think we're all getting hung up on 'the my setup is better than your setup' and getting no where because they are not really comporable, and honestly I don't have an excess of time to prove either setup right or wrong But here's what I'm thinking on the Low Mount while we're here in this thread... I'm going to go atm dump with a mini muffler, OR running both to a reverse collector (expansion chamber, transition or whatever you want to call it) and merging the two together going 3.5" to and out of the muffler. 3.5" total should be plenty big enough to not be a restriction beyond the numbers we'll be seeing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dstroy View Post
Take My Money!
OK OK. We'll let you know when we're ready
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 03:22 PM   #215
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
Allen it was great speaking with you today. During our conversation I had forgot to tell you that I had put some more thought into this whole EWG vs IWG and recirc vs dump to atm. I've come to the conclusion that it's going to depend on the application/design of the WG. In other words a well setup 38mm will outflow a crappy 44mm setup. Same goes for recirc, a well designed recirc can work as well as dumping through a mini-muffler. I think we're all getting hung up on 'the my setup is better than your setup' and getting no where because they are not really comparable, and honestly I don't have an excess of time to prove either setup right or wrong But here's what I'm thinking on the Low Mount while we're here in this thread... I'm going to go atm dump with a mini muffler, OR running both to a reverse collector (expansion chamber, transition or whatever you want to call it) and merging the two together going 3.5" to and out of the muffler. 3.5" total should be plenty big enough to not be a restriction beyond the numbers we'll be seeing.
Yes, good to chat and thanks for this detail!

That sound like a great idea, a 3" down pipe and EWG exhaust, merging into a collector/ expansion chamber and into a full 3.5" exhaust that you supply (or not?). The 3.5" has an area of 30.23 sq in. and a 3" exhaust with a 1.75" gate exhaust/ 44mm gate (use the bigger for calculations) would have an area of 29.77 sq in. so you have the flow covered without loosing the gains of the external gate. Another up side is you control the whole exhaust tract and the performance of that if you supply that!

The downside of the merged turbo and gate exhaust is the added expense to the buyer who may have a nice 3" exhaust but now has to buy your kit with a new exhaust. As well you will have multiple platforms to design the exhaust system for.

Figuring that you dump the gate close to the turbo with a muffler then you could assume the following. The up side of the separate EWG exhaust would be easier to fabricate for you and less costly to the customer. It will flow exactly what it needs without the complication of the merging exhausts.

Down side is the loss of complete control of the exhaust tract using the customer supplied exhaust beyond the down pipe which you would supply.
JMHO
manitou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 04:20 PM   #216
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

^ All valid points
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 09:52 PM   #217
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

Dump to atm and the customer can re-route EWG if they want. That makes it easiest to produce and fits the largest market, correct?

I was going to have ETS custom make me something similar to this but if you introduce your kit some time before this fall then I might just hold out for your setup.
Tyrial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:20 AM   #218
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 Tyrial View Post
Dump to atm and the customer can re-route EWG if they want. That makes it easiest to produce and fits the largest market, correct?
Correct. We may offer a couple options, but we've never been one to take the route of manufacturing convenience, because it's the easy way
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 09:38 AM   #219
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

Just so you guys don't think I'm doing nothing over here. This is something I've always wanted to do. Based on some reading I've done this is a weakness in the cooling system. I don't intend to do any testing on my own to verify, but there is significantly more flow capacity and significantly less turbulence in this piece vs OEM casting.





KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 09:56 AM   #220
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
Just so you guys don't think I'm doing nothing over here. This is something I've always wanted to do. Based on some reading I've done this is a weakness in the cooling system. I don't intend to do any testing on my own to verify, but there is significantly more flow capacity and significantly less turbulence in this piece vs OEM casting.
Very cool Chris! Is this something that you will produce or are thinking of producing? I would be happy to test it for you with my XTI, before and after comparisons!
manitou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 10:06 AM   #221
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

I think it looks good and would probably increase flow, however I can smell a debate on the necessity coming. My gut tells me this will help the dedicated circuit racers that see sustained loads for more than a few bursts.

If nothing more it gets rid of the stock ugliness which for some builds is dang near mandatory.

**edit**
It just dawned on me this may be necessary for part of this kit due to radiator / other size/space restraints . So if that is the case then it will obviously be useful

Last edited by Layvon; 04-08-2013 at 10:30 AM.
Layvon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 02:08 PM   #222
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 manitou View Post
Very cool Chris! Is this something that you will produce or are thinking of producing? I would be happy to test it for you with my XTI, before and after comparisons!
Thanks! We'll just have to see if anyone else likes the theory behind it as much as I do. Worthless bling or functional, I don't know, but I feel better with it on there

I only got enough stuff to make the one, but if there's demand we'll make some more and see what happens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Layvon View Post
I think it looks good and would probably increase flow, however I can smell a debate on the necessity coming. My gut tells me this will help the dedicated circuit racers that see sustained loads for more than a few bursts.

If nothing more it gets rid of the stock ugliness which for some builds is dang near mandatory.

**edit**
It just dawned on me this may be necessary for part of this kit due to radiator / other size/space restraints . So if that is the case then it will obviously be useful
There's definitely a higher flow capacity with this part. The factory piece has a super sharp corner (poor flow and bubble creation debatable) and I'm willing to bet a beer that most of the coolant flows through one half of the thermostat a lot more than the other. Even the ID of the smallest section is quite a bit bigger than OEM because it's thinner walled stainless.

The Low Mount Kit did have some off the shelf bends and couplers. It wasn't pretty, but it worked just fine, so this part isn't needed. Although it does look pretty cool and I did angle the inlet to match the Low Mount specific radiator I designed
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 05:46 PM   #223
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

ever thought of running the turbo transverse and reversing/stacking coolers? sorta like v mount but with a short and wide (11x31) rad mounted in the intercooler position and the intercooler mounted to the upper rad support (22x12)?

you would be one less bend into the turbine and one less bend into the compressor.

depending on intercooler height it could make it so you dont need the oil scavenge pump and so intercooler piping was less than 2 feet.

you would have to fabricate new rad hoses but its not like you havent done that to a point already. and it would allow you to use more off the shelf parts.

the only disadvantage i can see is that exposed surface area for the intercooler could be reduced for the intercooler on 02-05 models.

Last edited by azn2nr; 04-08-2013 at 05:52 PM.
azn2nr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2013, 06:53 AM   #224
KillerBMotorsport
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 198281
Join Date: Dec 2008
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Virginia
Vehicle:
2005 WRX/STi
WRB of course

Default

^ I'm pretty sure I've thought about it every way to Sunday

The bend into the turbine would be nice to get rid of, but physically the turbocharger just won't fit between engine and front cross member. Remember, this is supposed to be a 'bolt-in' kit. In the beginning I spent a lot of time thinking about going straight out the front like you're talking about. I even went so far as some sketches with a split radiator, but ditched the idea because it got considerably more expensive.

I didn't like how it would add feet to the exhaust (adding exhaust length adds backpressure).

The bend going into the turbine doesn't bother me. It's a 3" bend for ample flow and has some straight before the compressor inlet so turbulence shouldn't be too bad.
KillerBMotorsport is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2013, 07:12 AM   #225
A-man07
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 271525
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: BagEnd
Vehicle:
07 STi
424whp/382wtq GT3076

Default

I see ambient temps of 100+F for 3-4 months of the year down here so I'd be in for one of the lower coolant hose deals.
A-man07 is online now   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 09:40 PM.


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.