10 vT EM?

Sat Apr 27 02:12:57 EDT 2002

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Thanks Javad

I think we agree: Allmost anything is better than oe turbo EM :)
Those guys want to make some kind of tube header with modified
K-26. I´ll let You know how was it and what happened.

One more thing: Your A/R seems to be "light" as mine too, but
Your compressor is quite big, if we think OE K-26 has 42 mm
and Your T-3 has 57 mm wheel. How about turbine side, the 3rd
stage hot side tells me nothing, because I´m not familiar with
Garretts? I mean what is turbine dia? If we think the ratio, it must
be something like 65 mm and that means You are looking for
450-500 Hp?

regards
Jukka

ps.
I would love to have a ride in Your car and would like to give You
a ride in my V8/200TQ, when it is completed :)) ( Gotta finish my
Bimmer 745iA turbo first. )

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: JShadzi at aol.com
  To: jiipm at sci.fi
  Cc: quattro at audifans.com ; urq at audifans.com
  Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 7:47 AM
  Subject: Re: 10 vT EM?

  <<No response??>>

  Easy, I don't work well under pressure  =)

      <<I know Your solution, didn´t we discuss Your too small K-26
      turbo last year, when You were thinking to get bigger IC?>>

  Yes, I guess we did

      <<We have done lots of 10v headers and mods, I posted pics
      of some last Year too, remember? Here is one that dynoed
      +450 Hp, of course all those were with EFI:
      :
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/audifinns/files/boosts/01-10.jpg
      >>

  Yes, I remember, nice piece, but I've only seen about 2 or 3 designs, that's not a whole bunch in my book

      <<And my one ( ok it´s now a 20v project ) . With a Holset H1
      with 59mm turbine and 50 compressor A/R  0,65. I am looking
      for some 350-380. But that is different story. Anyway -the pic:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/audifinns/files/TEMP/H1ps.JPG>>

      Nice

      <<Both headers are made by same header specialist here.
      Main difference to Your header seems to be; our runners are
      longer and a flange ID sized collector. Your collector seems to
      be done by putting all runners together. May I ask, what are
      Your T-4 turbine and compressor diameters? A/R ? Just trying
      to figure Your final target :) Ok that is another story, too...>>

  Yes, I wasn't too concerned about having totally equal length runners, all of them fall within about 25% of each other, which is 100% better than the stock manifold.  All the runners come in and merge into each other, I wanted to keep the volume of the collector low, I didn't want to dump each runner into a larger chamber than necessary.  I'm running a T03 .63 AR hot side Stage 3 with a T04E cold side with 57 trim wheel.

      <<About 10v: CIS limit You mentioned is known. Is it just 250 for
      a 200Hp 10v 1B engine, or 180 Hp KG  (only in Europe), I do
      not know, maybe a little more.

      Propably I did not make in the last post myself clear:
      We are not looking to those KG-cars more than +250 Hp.
      But as we all know, it needs 1.1 Bar at 5500 and it is not
      very smooth with oe EM and K-24, or 26. There will be lots
      of backpressure.>>

  Well, that seems clear, but I don't know if its really worth all the trouble for a little smoothness (if that is a problem as you say), I don't really have any doubt that the stock manifold if more than suited to 250hp, I think 300 is where the stock manifold starts causing real performance losses.

      <<In my former 10vT I had that 1,1-1,2 Bar, it spooled fast to
      max, but started to decrease when closing the top. Reason
      is sure that EM and restrictive K-24 turbine ( only 46 mm ).
      Now we plan to get that 250 with less boost and smoother,
      just by making exhaust flow.>>

  Well, no doubt there, the K24 is definitely going to hurt top end power, but the CIS is going to limit top end power also just by restricting air flow, for good top end performance at the 250hp level, the stock CIS must be removed, the cam upgraded, and a bigger exh. side housing used, even bigger than the K26 IMO/E.

      <<Idea is to use a modified K-26. It´s 55 mm turbine is ok, but
      that small 42 mm compressor will be chanced to a 48 one.
      IMO any EM  will be better than OE. Also WG will be placed
      in the collector, not like OE has. That´s all. >>

  Ya, I just don't agree that the stock manifold is the real problem at those power levels

      <<I have seen some tuning EM:s for 10vT CIS. Homemade, but
      didn´t Dialynx have a cast one? >>

  The Dialynx manifold is hardly a solution...

  <<Here is a pic I found in the net,

      look at the location of the fuel system, ok -that will not be our way:

      http://hem.passagen.se/anordman/trimm100turbo/peter/engine.jpg>>

  Wow, very interesting, for that amount of work, CIS could have been replaced with EFI twice  =)

  Javad
  80tq.com
--