[s-cars] RS2 turbochargers

[QSHIPQ at aol.com]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
My thoughts are this.  IF you can run 2.8PR thru a RS2 hot side without
reducing the CE, it's not just "size" that matters.  Remember too, that maybe
your comparos are off, the RS2 is larger than the k24, but the k24 peaks at
280hp or 300hp (mit sport config).  What becomes very interesting is
comparing the RS2 to the 5k/200 k26.  The 26 on the hot side is LARGER
(exducer) than the RS2, but it can only support about 300hp.  Why?  What's
different?   Looking further, the hot side housing (before KKK tweeks it) is
from the early 2664 turbo that maxes CE at 1.4-1.8PR....  hmmm.  Back to the
RS2:  What "appears" to limit the RS2 HP is flow. Flow is usually address
pretty well with larger cold sides, of which a couple larger than the RS2 are
available.

Mike, pick a turbo that maxes CE at the lowest boost level that meets the
airflow requirements of your motor.  This gives the 'best' compromise of
lowend grunt and high end flow.  The RS2 turbo "may" well be out of the
picture, but might be worth playing with, whatever kkk did on the hot side,
you can put some big cold sides on it and have some good flow and performance
come from a small exducer bore.

In the world of turbo tweeking, it's still more art than science.  Some of
the premises you guys are using right now, aren't necessarily the rigeur.
WRT the RS2, it's a very interesting and pleasing bird IMO/E.  7years with a
variety of them, hasn't changed that opinion.

BTW, dodge used an interesting turbo in the late 80's, a variable nozzle
turbo was found in many of the bread and butter 2.2 and 2.5 liter turbos.
Hey!

My .02

SJ


In a message dated 6/18/02 11:18:51 AM Central Daylight Time, mlped at qwest.net
writes:


> Lag?  Well, that's still a great unknown, but I welcome your speculation;
> HP?  That's another big unknown.  Again, I'd welcome your thoughts.
>
> mlp
>