Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 16, 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 11-23-2008, 10:04 PM   #26
Dipp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 127907
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
99RS 9.54 @ 146
2.65L & FOBIA fab & S374

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
while it is impressive to show a non-bb 72 lb/min turbo spooling the same as a 62 lb/min turbo its still a weird comparision to post on a subie forum.....since it in no way reflects what the comparos gonna look like on an EJ motor....
well you should just search Fobia's thread, in which a stock EJ257 spooled a gt4088R and then a BW S374 almost identicaly.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Dipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 08:48 PM   #27
Full-Race Geoff
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 133386
Join Date: Nov 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: AZ/NJ
Vehicle:
13 F150
ecoboost

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dipp View Post
well you should just search Fobia's thread, in which a stock EJ257 spooled a gt4088R and then a BW S374 almost identicaly.
can you link to that thread? very interesting to hear the results, that seems almost too good to be true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmurphy View Post
I want to move up to a bigger twinscroll turbo setup and have been eyeing these borgwarners for about 6 months now. Are there any other good suppliers other than bullseye?
These are brand new turbocharger releases by BorgWarner Airwerks for 2009. the bullseye turbos are NOT the same as borgwarner airwerks turbos. bullseye is a small turbo company in michigan that makes their own hybrid concoctions out of borgwarner parts... BorgWarner is a massive turbocharger mfg plant in asheville, NC that mfgs their own units, start to finish, in-house. based on past experience, I strongly recommend using straight up off-the-shelf turbochargers rather than a "morphed" hybrid as bwts calls them

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
99% of my above 3 posts are pure fact.
i appreciate your enthusiasm, but your posts are not factual... the majority of your posts indicate you do not fully understand turbocharging fundamentals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
and what exactly is overlaying a 62 lb/min turbo's comp map over a 72 lb/min comp map supposed to tell us? why not just overlay this over the gt35 if you wanna make it look bad/small/whatever you're trying to show any turbo bw makes i pretty much gaurantee garrett makes a turbo with almost exactly the same comp map. BW cant make magic air pumps....
The compressor maps between garrett and borgwarner are DRASTICALLY different. Garretts are 6 blade compressors with a square tip exducer, while Borgwarners are 7 blade compressors with an "extended" (angled) tip exducer. this results in massive compressor map differences and efficiency island shape. the reason i overlayed the comp maps is to show how high you can boost a BW, while the garrett is out of breath. do you understand how to read compressor maps?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
a gt35 and one of these bw turbos operate at peak efficiencies at very different PR's.
actually the efficiency islands are not all that different... hence the reason the powerbands were remarkably similar at the same boost level. are you looking at the same compmaps as me???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
mutha fkca didnt change the cup holder....he's almost entirely stock
customers of ours generally refer to the engine when we are talking about "stock"... in my mind stock crank, stock rods, stock pistons, stock valves, stock head, stock block, stock intake manifold, stock bearings, stock oil pump, stock oil pan, stock crank pulley, stock cam gears, stock throttlebody, etc means its almost entirely stock with a turbokit, cams and a fuel system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
from what i've seen the borgs are more expensive...what kinda marketing ploy is this? did you guys just get in a couple truckloads of BW turbos?

nasioc, club rsx, evom
i dont know what you've seen, but the borgwarners are considerably less espensive than an equivalent Garrett turbocharger. I do not think you have seen this turbocharger before as we are one of the first to test these, let alone sell them. I posted this to help show forum members something new. We will happily sell a Garrett Ball bearing GT turbo just as happily as we will sell a borgwarner airwerks turbo

the reason its on 3 forums is that test was performed on an evo so i posted it on evoM. i put it on CRSX because i am one of the people that made clubRSX's turbo forum what it is today... (i used to be the moderator on there and now i post up any cool tests i do every time i do them whether its on an RB26 a supra or a honda). why you are pulling up my posts and trying to use them to discredit me is something i will not try to understand

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ctracer911 View Post
i have delt with BW turbos and i personaly like them but at the same time i like garrett turbos just as much. For somebody new to turbos I wouldnt recomend the BW turbos because they have such a range of back housing witch make it a pain in the butt if you dont know anything about turbos and back pressure. Most the people i see throw on a BW turbo and get crazy lag because they dont pay any attention to back pressure.
i disagree.. i think the BW turbos are easier because they dont require watercooling and exotic fittings (a gt inlet is 7/16" inverted flare with an .035 restrictor and coolant fittings are M14, good luck finding that at your local hardware store) also with the BW turbos there are only (2) a/r T4 housings to choose from (garrett often has 3 or 4). Of course there is still nothing wrong with the garrett units, they are excellent, consistent units that deliver fantastic performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
the gt4094 has a comp map that is way more comparable to the BW
actually that is completely false. the GT4094 is a cut down 42R compressor wheel stuffed into a too-small 4088R comp hsg. it is a terribly inefficient turbo that does not work all that well... It has literally nothing in common with the BW 83mm exducer compwheel in this thread, except for the fact they are both made out of aluminum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
a huge freaking comp map that goes up to PR's of 5.0 is pretty......how many people in the world are gonna run 50psi on an EJ motor?
theres nothing wrong with high boost levels if the engine is built to take it, and many of our customers do in fact run over 35psi, or they plan to in the future once they build their engine. The fact that the BW can efficiently run high boost levels is the point of this overlay. good luck taking a 35R past 33-35psi

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
settle down guys....jeez. dont get your panties in a bunch....
heed your own advice

Quote:
Originally Posted by cubuff View Post
If you look, fullrace sells garrett as well. They also seem to really like these turbo's. I have talked to Jeff personally and he has nothing but good things to say about the 4088r. If I recall correctly it is one of his favorite turbo options?
that is correct, i have a lot of experience with the 4088R and LOVE it. If you search you will probably find i am one of the strongest supporters of this turbocharger!!!

Last edited by Full-Race Geoff; 11-24-2008 at 08:56 PM.
Full-Race Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 09:04 PM   #28
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Full-Race Geoff View Post
i appreciate your enthusiasm, but your posts are not factual... the majority of your posts indicate you do not fully understand turbocharging fundamentals
so those afr's arent all over the place?
your manifold isnt comparatively expensive?
these turbos wont be at different pr's on a subie motor?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Full-Race Geoff View Post
The compressor maps between garrett and borgwarner are DRASTICALLY different. Garretts are 6 blade compressors with a square tip exducer, while Borgwarners are 7 blade compressors with an "extended" (angled) tip exducer. this results in massive compressor map differences and efficiency island shape. do you understand how to read compressor maps?? the reason i overlayed the comp maps is to show how high you can boost a BW, while the garrett is out of breath.
thats what i said....they are drastically different....so what not compare it to a map thats more like it, like the 4094.

the comp map of the 4094 (high pr's and higher flow rating) is way more comparable to the BW one you posted than a gt35 comp map.


And just because you can show two turbos spooling the same in a single gear on the dyno doesnt show how they will act in lower gears and off boost.

I can plot up my fp green outspooling 20g's for days in 4th gear pulls....but it loses to the 20g quite handily in 1st-3rd pulls.....

Last edited by Phatron; 11-24-2008 at 09:10 PM.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 09:29 AM   #29
wrxhard
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 108091
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fargo, ND
Vehicle:
2002 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
so
thats what i said....they are drastically different....so what not compare it to a map thats more like it, like the 4094.

the comp map of the 4094 (high pr's and higher flow rating) is way more comparable to the BW one you posted than a gt35 comp map.

He compared the compressor maps because they're the maps of the two turbos in the thread. he didn't use a 4094 map because he didn't use the turbo in the comparison. 2 very different turbos that acted very similar on the dyno. that was the point.
wrxhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 11:35 AM   #30
robertrinaustin
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 51964
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Austin
Vehicle:
2008 STi, OB, EVO
Blk Sti and EVO, Navy OB

Default

Phatron,
You need to reread your original posts. You're confused on what "factual" means. I won't pick apart your post line by line, but your opinion is simply that and though you may think enough of yourself to equate your opinion with fact, it doesn't make it so. You obviously have some sort of bias at work here, so maybe you should just move on.

And just for clarity, a bigger turbo that equals the smaller turbo down low that is the "standard" (make no mistake, the 35R is the standard), cost less money to buy and much less money to rebuild is a better option. Only an idiot would argue otherwise, but that seems to be your point.
robertrinaustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 02:32 PM   #31
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

alright i was wrong.

the bw is better than the gt35
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 03:11 PM   #32
wrxhard
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 108091
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fargo, ND
Vehicle:
2002 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
alright i was wrong.

the bw is better than the gt35
FINALLY!!!!
wrxhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 03:31 PM   #33
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

so how many BW advocates in here have a BW? Or have results on a subie?

can you guys atleast agree with me on these two points

1) a turbo comparo and an evo doesnt necessarily reflect how that comparo would go in a subie

2) a 4th gear dyno chart isnt a meaningful assessment of 1st-3rd gear and off boost characteristics

Last edited by Phatron; 11-25-2008 at 03:41 PM.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 04:52 PM   #34
LittleBlueGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 96204
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: Winnipeg
Vehicle:
2013 STI GR
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
And just because you can show two turbos spooling the same in a single gear on the dyno doesnt show how they will act in lower gears and off boost.

I can plot up my fp green outspooling 20g's for days in 4th gear pulls....but it loses to the 20g quite handily in 1st-3rd pulls.....
I can't believe I gave you e-ammunition!

Relax Ron, you come across as someone who wants to slam everything FR says, like they slighted you or something. (I know that is not how you feel, but it seems that way)

I think you would love for the FR stuff to perform, just as much as I want it to.

Just ask meaningful questions, OK? I know you can do it.

FWIW so far FR has been one of the best at answering my questions and displaying that they do in fact have a fair bit of turbo knowledge. I don't think are the be-all-and-end-all of suby info, but they are getting there.

They still haven't really proven HUGE power and spool gains from there headers, apparently that takes a bit of time. (too much IMO) So far good evidence is on the table, and many of us want to see more.

I actually think Ron is the way he he is because he really wants a FR manifold, but just cannot swallow the $$s, but then he is stuck because nobody else makes one that is its equal. So he complains in hopes that FR will lower their price. If he didn't care about the ultimate in boost-threshold/power he wouldn't be posting here.

Remember, being the first requires lots of R&D, that costs money (at least in the USA). I am not ready to shell out $3000 for their manifold. But if it proves (still waiting on more evidence) to be the best combo of spool/power, then I will spend the money, as will a few others here.

FWIW Eric at FR as all over getting per gear logs, it is almost like I am the first person to ever do it. I think he thinks it will help prove their product. I hope he is right.
LittleBlueGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 05:01 PM   #35
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

^^ at least someone can read between the lines....

how could the rest of you not get that from my meaningful, well though out and structured posts....i was definately in no way under the influence of anything during enscribation of said posts.

yes, littleblue is right. Of course i want one....or both the BW and the FR manifold.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 05:24 PM   #36
PPhilthy
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 102948
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2006 STI

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
^^ at least someone can read between the lines....

how could the rest of you not get that from my meaningful, well though out and structured posts....i was definately in no way under the influence of anything during enscribation of said posts.

yes, littleblue is right. Of course i want one....or both the BW and the FR manifold.
AH, I understand you now... You were the kid that used to hit the girl he liked in school...
PPhilthy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 07:02 PM   #37
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

there are a lot of interesting questions with both the FR mani and the BW turbos....

how are the gains of the FR mani on a single scroll turbo compared to a twin scroll setup

what exactly is the extended tip technology in the BW turbos....and why does robert from FP call it a "gimmick" and claim their turbos dont need it to perform well?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcedPerformace
This is a urban legend. Our HTA wheel aero is our own and not even similar to existing wheel aeros. It certainly isnt a Borg Warner wheel.

It does not have "extended tip technology" and it doesnt need a gimmick like that to work properly.
reading through the honda and evo forums doesnt really shed any light on these things.....

lastly....i have yet to find any turbo comparo on nasioc in which the tester setup a true technical test and collected the proper data to explain why a certain turbo was/wasnt performing well.

whens the last you saw turbine back pressure, compressor boost pressure and intake plenum pressure data along with a detailed technical explanation of what was causing the power/power loss?

i am certainly not the smartest person in the world when it comes to turbo chargers and the workings, but i know enough to know that running 2 turbos at the same boost in one gear doesnt tell you how they will perform in other gears, nor does it tell you how the comp and turbine were working during the test and what PR the comp was really at during the test.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 10:56 PM   #38
robertrinaustin
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 51964
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Austin
Vehicle:
2008 STi, OB, EVO
Blk Sti and EVO, Navy OB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
there are a lot of interesting questions with both the FR mani and the BW turbos....

how are the gains of the FR mani on a single scroll turbo compared to a twin scroll setup

what exactly is the extended tip technology in the BW turbos....and why does robert from FP call it a "gimmick" and claim their turbos dont need it to perform well?



reading through the honda and evo forums doesnt really shed any light on these things.....

lastly....i have yet to find any turbo comparo on nasioc in which the tester setup a true technical test and collected the proper data to explain why a certain turbo was/wasnt performing well.

whens the last you saw turbine back pressure, compressor boost pressure and intake plenum pressure data along with a detailed technical explanation of what was causing the power/power loss?

i am certainly not the smartest person in the world when it comes to turbo chargers and the workings, but i know enough to know that running 2 turbos at the same boost in one gear doesnt tell you how they will perform in other gears, nor does it tell you how the comp and turbine were working during the test and what PR the comp was really at during the test.
I think Robert is interested in selling turbos and not finding the best turbo considering he makes turbos. Full Race on the other hand, can sell any turbo. What incentive is there for Robert to credit any product that is not his. There are more than a few different manufacturers out there that are using BW wheels in their turbos and I doubt they'd agree with Robert.

The only company I've seen doing actual testing as you described is Full Race. They could tell you the pressure any where in their "system" and have posted pics with all the pressure and temp probes pocking out of everything. Of course, they're testing their manifold designs and not turbo options.

It's odd that you're expecting something from Full Race that by your own admission, no one on here or any other forum has provided. Frankly, I doubt any of the shops that post on here have the time, budget or experience to do the testing your wanting. In fact, I'd argue that outside of a lab where all conditions can be controlled, the testing your requesting can't be done. I'm sure BW and Garrett both have done extensive testing, but I don't expect either to share their data.

I can guaranty you that there are multiple turbos out there that will out perform the almost 2 decades old, designed for a diesel, Garrett GT35R. I'm not sure why you find this so hard to believe. Frankly, BW or Garrett could both have easily done this already, but the business case wasn't there.

Finally, just let it go. You've made a valiant attempt at recovering, but we're not getting any where.
robertrinaustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2008, 02:30 PM   #39
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

well my point about the data collection is that without the data no one can come to a "real" conclusion about why the dyno plot is the way it is.

did you notice on the comparo plot that the BW's run was started about 500rpm sooner than the gt35? you think that effects the spool? i can post up 6 million plots of my car with pulls started 500rpm apart and show you what it does to the spool, boost, tq, etc....but im sure you already know.

do you know what the IAT's were on the pulls? again, i can show you data of a 50* pull started at 2500rpm vs a 80* pull started at 3000rpm.

do you know the boost over the whole pull?

do you know what the timing was? afr? do you know how much power varying the AFR 2-3 full points correlates to on an evo?

do you know if the car was retuned with the BW or run on the same map as the gt35?

maybe the 1.06 turbine on the gt35 was killing its spool....maybe the spool woulda kicked ass with the 0.82 and maybe it woulda made the same peak hp with the 0.82 on pump gas.....

everyone keeps bagging on me, but again please tell me what conclusive information you can draw from the above dyno plots.....and then explain how you can take that conclusion and relate it to a ej2x motor.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2008, 03:26 PM   #40
taossti
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 145445
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Houston
Vehicle:
05 Time Attack STi

Default

hey, what were the logs on oil temp too or maybe the tranny temp?

I think Geoff put a good comparo together. he has no reason to put the BW above a Garrett unless he has become a BW dealer now and suddenly plans on throwing away all his work on Garrett turbo kits.

I ask if the dyno was started 500 rpm one way or another, would it really matter past a certain rpm like 4200rpm????

I know several folks who are racers, mostly drag, and they are switching to the BW. One even broke his class record with the new BW turbo.

ok, my head hurts now.
taossti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2008, 06:55 PM   #41
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taossti View Post
I ask if the dyno was started 500 rpm one way or another, would it really matter past a certain rpm like 4200rpm????
yes....starting the pull later can/will shift the whole powerband to the right.

to completely exaggerate the effect of starting at a later rpm picture these two scenarios

1) cruising on the freeway in 4th gear at 4500rpm, then going WOT

2) starting a WOT pull at 2000rpm in 4th gear

In which case do you think you'll be at higher power levels at 4500rpm almost to redline?

it takes time for the exhaust gases to spin the turbine up....
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2008, 01:49 AM   #42
Dipp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 127907
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
99RS 9.54 @ 146
2.65L & FOBIA fab & S374

Default

\can you link to that thread? very interesting to hear the results, that seems almost too good to be true.

this is the link
http://mnsubaru.com/forums/showthrea...992#post557992

sorry 500 rpms differince in spool when I asked him. my bad
Dipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2008, 02:47 AM   #43
deathinacan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 76826
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: washington
Vehicle:
2013 delorean
P.I.T.A. to clean silver

Default

Just FYI -

I look forward to the results you guys have - I went with the GT35/40r twin scroll through ATP turbo with a Zerosports twin scroll header to a custom up-pipe w/ a Turbosmart 38mm wastegate -

Very quick spoolup - and clean linear powercurve throughout -

Supporting mods in a nutshell:

CP stock bore pistons -
Cosworth Rods -
Axis Billet Crank
Ported non-avcs Spec C Heads w/ Jun Valvetrain & Kelford 272 cams
Ultimate Racing 1000cc injectors/fuel rail w/ 400gph fuel pump
Element Hydra EMS Tuned by Phil Gabrow

- best of luck to you guys! Twin scroll on a Suby is one hell of a treat...
deathinacan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 09:55 AM   #44
TurboDXsti
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 106671
Join Date: Feb 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2006 Sti
grey

Default

let me add my $0.02 here is my S258 /.70 AR TXS plot , 23/24 psi on 93 octane .
My setup is stock heads,only mod to the block was replacement pistons,stock modified 816cc injectors , 3" turbo bk,utec. The turbo is pretty decent , seems like it doesn't wake up till 28-30+ psi though based on the flowchart I see on their site. Midrange power is decent


TurboDXsti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 12:54 PM   #45
Donkaart
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 91832
Join Date: Jul 2005
Default

@Geoff "but we will be performing the identical test on an STI in the next 2-3 weeks."

Looking forward to the results!
Donkaart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 07:41 PM   #46
Ctracer911
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 73405
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default

[quote=Full-Race Geoff;24592345]



i disagree.. i think the BW turbos are easier because they dont require watercooling and exotic fittings (a gt inlet is 7/16" inverted flare with an .035 restrictor and coolant fittings are M14, good luck finding that at your local hardware store) also with the BW turbos there are only (2) a/r T4 housings to choose from (garrett often has 3 or 4). Of course there is still nothing wrong with the garrett units, they are excellent, consistent units that deliver fantastic performance.


[quote=Full-Race Geoff;24592345]

sry about that i think i got them confused with the Bullseye units witch i always thought were the same as BW. sry about that.
Ctracer911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 03:29 PM   #47
juanmedina
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 133146
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SC
Vehicle:
07 FPgreen 7.37@95
WRX VF39+E85 12.0, 121mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Full-Race Geoff View Post
This test is a little OT becuase it was done on an evo, but we will be performing the identical test on an STI in the next 2-3 weeks.
Posted 11-21-2008 10:41 AM

Can you provide some data?
juanmedina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2009, 03:20 PM   #48
Full-Race Geoff
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 133386
Join Date: Nov 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: AZ/NJ
Vehicle:
13 F150
ecoboost

Default

sorry for the delay. Rather than test with our Gen1 kit, we decided to do push back the testing and do it with our Gen2 kit on yimisport's 08 STI.

the results will be ALLL over this site and iwsti, you guys are going to love what we have in store for the next few months

< hint - working on a repeat of this: http://www.full-race.com/modified08/ >
Full-Race Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2009, 11:35 PM   #49
socalLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 89752
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: On the dyno at Yimi Sport
Vehicle:
08 STI
SWP

Default

Indeed we are Of course, we are looking at going with something a wee bit bigger than a GT35R
socalLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2009, 07:04 AM   #50
c'dalerider
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 92388
Join Date: Jul 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Pennsylvania
Vehicle:
04 WRX, 06 STI
wrb x 2,900awhp combo

Default

I just dont think the results would/WILL be the same in the Subaru "configuration". The Evo configuration makes for 'easier' spool..etc. Its sweetness. Suby results may be close, but i doubt the same. However, having gone through many turbos myself and friends cars, I have always thought that the turbos having journal bearings VS BB (gt35r..etc) were minimaly defined in those ways, IMO. No test's, just IMO.
c'dalerider 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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HTA GT35R vs normal GT35r. Questions? D Money Built Motor Discussion 99 03-03-2010 05:07 PM
twin scroll vs sigle gt35r both .82 housing acssa Built Motor Discussion 8 01-28-2010 03:14 PM
fullrace GT3076 1.5 Scroll vs Blouch DOM III vs FullRace Twinscroll GT35R azn_ryder02 Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain 58 04-06-2009 10:29 PM
Singlescroll Gt30 vs. Twinscroll Gt35 Results Inside Brandon@TXS Proven Power Bragging 20 03-28-2009 02:01 AM
kingpin vs godsped gt35r. Please no flames!! NORCAL STI Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain 45 10-27-2005 04:23 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:06 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.