Turbo choices
#48
hally,
PM Rage, he use to run one & I remembered that he
made very good power from it. BTW, this is really
a very safe buy. Among the 4E's the 50 trim has the
best overall flow much better then the 46 or 57 trim.
A friend of mine is using one but with Super 50 trim.
Very very good.
PM Rage, he use to run one & I remembered that he
made very good power from it. BTW, this is really
a very safe buy. Among the 4E's the 50 trim has the
best overall flow much better then the 46 or 57 trim.
A friend of mine is using one but with Super 50 trim.
Very very good.
#49
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pauerman
I mentioned the TPS switch cause I thought Rage was using a TO4S on his 2.8L setup and I think he mentioned that he had to use a different TPS switch.
#50
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J Chen
hally,
PM Rage, he use to run one & I remembered that he
made very good power from it. BTW, this is really
a very safe buy. Among the 4E's the 50 trim has the
best overall flow much better then the 46 or 57 trim.
A friend of mine is using one but with Super 50 trim.
Very very good.
PM Rage, he use to run one & I remembered that he
made very good power from it. BTW, this is really
a very safe buy. Among the 4E's the 50 trim has the
best overall flow much better then the 46 or 57 trim.
A friend of mine is using one but with Super 50 trim.
Very very good.
I do have a 50 trim turbocharger in my garage, but it's going into my Civic racecar.
#51
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by rage2
Pauerman is correct. It was a clearance issue. Using a E36 M3 TPS now.
The super 50 moves you away from the surge limit but also shifts the high RPM points to lower islands of efficiency.
I've been looking at the 46 trim and 60 trim and found that the lower RPM points were on or passed over the surge limit. I used these values to calculate flow: 3000RPM, 85%Ve, 2.5L
Pr 2.0 = 15.84 lbs/min
Pr 2.2 = 17.42 lbs/min
Does anyone else see this? Are my numbers off? With all the guys that run the 46 and 60 trim, never hear much about compressor surge.
I thought the 2V head flowed more efficiently at lower RPM's which is why they produce more torque down low compared to 16V heads. Chen doesn't seem to thinks so.
#53
Here's how I've mapped the load points of the 951. These points are calculated with a Ve 85% and RPM 6500 and 2.5L displacement of course.
85% VE may be correct at 5500 rpm but hardly at 6500 rpm. Does anyone have data on this?
#54
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tomas L
Why do you use 6500 rpm? The airflow will be highest close to the max power rpm and that should be somewhere around 5500-6000 rpm for an unmodified 951 engine. Above that rpm VE decreses faster than rpm increases thus air flow will decrease.
85% VE may be correct at 5500 rpm but hardly at 6500 rpm. Does anyone have data on this?
85% VE may be correct at 5500 rpm but hardly at 6500 rpm. Does anyone have data on this?
#56
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Jimbo, T-61 right?
I'll keep the high RPM points at 6500 (thanks for your input Rage) and Ve @ 85%. Low RPM points will be 3000 and same Ve. All lbs/min values have previously listed.
Here you go.
I'll keep the high RPM points at 6500 (thanks for your input Rage) and Ve @ 85%. Low RPM points will be 3000 and same Ve. All lbs/min values have previously listed.
Here you go.
#57
Originally Posted by Pauerman
Jimbo, T-61 right?
I'll keep the high RPM points at 6500 (thanks for your input Rage) and Ve @ 85%. Low RPM points will be 3000 and same Ve. All lbs/min values have previously listed.
Here you go.
I'll keep the high RPM points at 6500 (thanks for your input Rage) and Ve @ 85%. Low RPM points will be 3000 and same Ve. All lbs/min values have previously listed.
Here you go.