Brett

Hey guys if I'm going to swtch to a tial38mm and blitz boost controller do I want to delete the Banjo bolt??

Ahmet

No, why would you? You will still need a boost line?
Ahmet

Brett

ok I thought I might because I'm about to order hard pipes and needed to know if I should keep the banjo

Ahmet

Incase there's confusion, yes keep the banjo. You will need a signal and a control line to your dual port wastegate.

I presume this will mean you will run one line straight from the banjo bolt to a port on your wastegate (usually to the side port), the other from the banjo bolt, through your boost controller and to the other port on the wastegate (usually the top one).
Ahmet

Brett

Ok thanks Ahmet

eclou

Instead of using the banjo fitting, use the top port from the old wastegate. It is a perfect fit and sized for vacuum tubing.

cpt_koolbeenz

You can tap it off the manifold...
I like that idea better since there is no innercooler to drop the pressure. We'll see if there is any change...

Ahmet

Using the fitting which normally signals the FPR and the diverter valve (as well as the fuel damper) has downsides. This will increase system volume, and with the supply line (banjo bolt at manifold) staying @it's current size, response will be slower on both the driverter valve (which is already lagging a bit behind) but also FPR. I would not do it. The volume added is significant.

The other thing is, running your signal from the manifold can lead to a spike as pressure does take a while to get to the manifold. This may or may not be a significant factor depending on a lot of things, but why do it if you can just run it from the intercooler piping?
Ahmet

NZ951

You SHOULD delete it. I am getting the BG951 pipes without the banjo, I have a bolt in there currently. I tapped the manifold for the boost lines. Very easy and pure MAP I guess. I will post a pic if anyone want to see... why take a reading a few psi less?

Ahmet

I don't see what you're saying there, or your reasonning to suggest the deletion of the banjo bolt fitting. The pressure will be higher @the intercooler pipes than inside the manifold. It will also be available sooner. Furthermore it won't delay the signal going to the diverter/blow off valve, the fuel pressure regulator, nor the fuel pressure damper.

If you want to tap the manifold seperately, that's another option, but why do that when you can have a line coming from the intercooler pipes?
Ahmet

NZ951

Why wouldnt you take the most accurate measure for pressure your engine will experience? I have tapped the manifold, using the port previously for the ISV (IIRC)

NZ951

A good reason for not using the banjo with the tial, you need to have two signals, you would have to split the hose and it is usually best practice to have two separate signals to the tial. Its the same level of accuracy that my link computer is getting, seems to make sense that they should be the same

EDIT: PS I could be wrong, its just what I am doing.

Ahmet

The car is tuned using manifold pressure, boost can be regulated using a line from the intercooler pipe, nothing wrong with that. There will be a boost controller in line. I think the sooner you have pressure available to the boost controller the better. As I've noted before, there will be more pressure to work with from the intercooler pipes as well. Both of these points are plusses, in my opinion.
Are you suggesting there be one line from the intercooler pipe, and another from the manifold?

Either way, I don't think this is necessary. If the banjo bolt diameter is large enough (the factory one is), making a split in it is not a problem as the signal volume (diaphram+lines) as well as constant pressure line (+ the diaphram) volume can be supported by one initial line. If memory serves me correctly, Tial lists the optimal diameter (3/8ths I believe), and recommends a split.
Ahmet

Duke

I just posted this on another thread regarding if it's more accurate to have the banjo-bolt after the intercooler:

---
It actually doesn't matter since the boost gauge doesn't take it's reading from there, but from the KLR line that is mounted directly on the intake manifold. The only scenario it would make a difference if you would have psi/bar-settings on the boost controller. But with a mechanical boost controller you set it by "turns" and how many turns that is necessary for a certain psi-value differs from car to car anyway.

The reason why it's placed there is because it's closer to the turbo and that makes the reaction of the wastegate faster.
On many turbos the pressure line to the wastegate is actually placed directly on the compressor housing.

NZ951

In my case, the Link controls boost through the system integrated EBC. So it doesnt have anything to do with a manual device needing to be close to anywhere. I set a desired MAP (Boost) in the software and the EBC adjusts depending on the MAP the link reads from the manifold... make sense? Any thoughts on the way I am configuring my control as being sub-standard?