[s-cars] Bypass Valves and Pressure Losses (Uh, Pizzo??)

[Mark Strangways]

Ok, so....
I have on my bench, well den floor, a K26 hot side wheel.
It has some markings on the back of it, but they don't really make any
sense.
it has a 94 on it .. so should that mean 1994 ?
it has a 26 on it .. so should that mean K26 ?
it looks like it may have a 9 on it and a 1 about 90 degrees away.

so is this a #9 wheel ? it's about 64.x mm and 54.x mm.

How about housings, how are they identified ?

What is on a RS2 hotside anyways ?
Mihnea, can you make some measurements of the RS2 7200 cold side and hot
side for me ?
Thanks for any help clearing the fog that is the KKK part numbering.

Mark S
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mihnea Cotet" <mik at info.fundp.ac.be>
To: "Ned Ritchie" <Q at IntendedAcceleration.com>; <QSHIPQ at aol.com>;
<gary.m.lewis2 at boeing.com>; <s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 5:58 AM
Subject: RE: [s-cars] Bypass Valves and Pressure Losses (Uh, Pizzo??)


> Ned, what about the small #6 K26 hot side (50mm exducer bore) used on oil
> cooled K26s???? MTM do such a turbo with a water cooled bearing housing,
> small turbine wheel and hot side housing, bolted on a 7200 cold side, and
I
> happen to have one here on the bench...
>
> Mihnea
>
> At 10:11 23/12/2003 -0800, Ned Ritchie wrote:
> >A few of you already know from that for a sacrifice of about 10 hp at
> >the top I've used a custom turbo from the folks at 3K that will give RS2
> >power lower in the rpm range like 2400 rpm
> >For the purpose of comparison here are the specs.  All are RS2
> >compressors with the 10 mm shaft.  The differences are only in the
> >turbine section.
> >
> >K24  2672 GGC  6.13 -- Stock sized S4/S6 turbine
> >K24  2672 GGC  6.11 -- Custom size between stock and RS2
> >K24  2672 GGC  6.12 -- RS2 sized turbine
> >
> >(Yes, I know the numbers appear wrong for the turbine sizes, but that is
> >how 3K does it)
> >
> >On a twisty track or in and around town you can't beat the 6.11 turbine
> >
> >Ned
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
> >[mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com] On Behalf Of QSHIPQ at aol.com
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 5:36 AM
> >To: mik at info.fundp.ac.be; gary.m.lewis2 at boeing.com;
> >s-car-list at audifans.com
> >Subject: Re: [s-cars] Bypass Valves and Pressure Losses (Uh, Pizzo??)
> >
> >I agree Minhea.  Look guys, if you are looking for 26psi on the I5, the
> >RS2
> >will hit it.  If you are looking for Flow at 26psi for xxxhp, the RS2
> >(modified
> >cold side) can hit it (I say up to about 480 or so - Minhea?).  If you
> >are
> >looking for 26psi at low RPM's on a 2.3L motor, I can't think of a
> >better turbo
> >for the task (well I can think of one, but Herr Meyer gets a lot of
> >money for
> >it).  If you take a big turbine and try to get it to do big things with
> >a
> >small motor, you will hit the surge line very quickly.  Surge sucks.
> >
> >Someone really (hey let's get Mikey) should put a couple of these
> >mongosized
> >turbo hybrids on a turbo dyno.  Chassis dynos only give part of the
> >story, as
> >several here are finding out.  I'm intrigued by solving turbo problems
> >with
> >bypass valves.  In fact Gary, using this logic, you are actually going
> >to
> >'increase' pressure losses to get 26psi at 3k.  Part throttle may just
> >require
> >bleeding of boost as several here will find out.  Especially at
> >altitude, these
> >problems are going to get worse, cuz the turbo is spinning faster to
> >attain the
> >same pressure ratio, which means a bigger problem at part throttle.
> >
> >IMO, you are going to see dual sequential turbos (already here) and
> >modified
> >scroll design (already here) as alternatives to one monster turbo trying
> >to be
> >both a lamb and a lion.
> >
> >My .02 arbitraged thru the peso
> >
> >Scott Justusson
> >QSHIPQ Performance Tuning
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >In a message dated 12/22/2003 1:52:22 PM Central Standard Time,
> >mik at info.fundp.ac.be writes:
> >Gary,
> >
> >
> >If you had had a real RS2 turbo (I know the turbo itself is way too
> >expensive, I know!), you could have gotten 26 psi at 2.6k in 4th gear
> >while
> >accelerating WOT from 2k RPM.
> >
> >Just my 0.02 Euros worth of 20vt engines tuning,
> >
> >Mihnea
> >
> >At 11:43 22/12/2003 -0800, Lewis, Gary M wrote:
> > >Hi Hap,
> > >
> > >I oriented it from the bottom (pressure side), as the instructions
> > >indicated, with 6 shims, as Pizzo indicated.  It works far better than
> >the
> > >old 710N unit from a pressure loss standpoint (I gained 200 rpm in 4th
> > >gear).  My current automotive goal in life is to reduce pressure losses
> >in
> > >hope of getting 26 psi at 3,000 rpm.  I'm making progress.
> > >
> > >I think the idea you postulate is really a neat one.  It should provide
> >
> > >far better response than a shimmed-to-the-max BPV.  Uses vaccuum
> > >primarily, not pressure and vaccum to open the valve.  I will try it.
> > >
> > >Sorry I took so long to answer, but I needed to think about this for a
> >few
> > >days.
> > >
> > >That Trevor is something else, ain't he?  The more I talk to him
> > >(virtually of course), the more I want to drive his car.  No to mention
> >
> > >your of course...
> > >
> > >Thanks Again,
> > >Gary Lewis
> >_______________________________________________
> >S-CAR-List mailing list
> >S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> >http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list