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

Mon Dec 29 14:57:25 EST 2003

I am in the process of talking myself into the installation of said GT30R.
But I am also talking myself out of it as well.

What can I say I am all messed up :-)

I do want to do it, but not sure if it will fit with out major mods to
entire right side of engine compartment.
I know they made the turbine housing with a T3 inlet flange, so there are
various adapters around for that part of it.
An adapter should be fashioned for the exit of the turbo as well.
Oil and coolant line *should* be easy.

Let me know what you think, maybe we can collaborate on it together online ?

Mark S
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "mlp qwest" <mlped at qwest.net>
To: "Ned Ritchie" <Q at IntendedAcceleration.com>; "'Mihnea Cotet'"
<mik at info.fundp.ac.be>; <QSHIPQ at aol.com>; <gary.m.lewis2 at boeing.com>;
<s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: [s-cars] Bypass Valves and Pressure Losses (Uh, Pizzo??)

> Does anyone know of any installation or use of a complete, unadulterated
> Garrett GT30R (i.e. go, for example, to
> http://www.limitengineering.com/catalog.pdf and look to/at catalog page 21
> of 48 for the specs/compressor map) on a UrS4/6?
>
> If someone has, or knows of a GT30R installation, do you have any
> information on the ease or difficulty of adapting the Garrett fittings to
> the Audi mounting points, including (1) the exhaust manifold to turbo
> flange; (2) turbo to downpipe; (3) air intake to MAF/Airbox feed; and
> finally (4) the oil and water lines?
>
> For one thing, it looks like one would have to adapt the hotside scroll
from
> a roughly 1.75"x ?? 2.75 to 3" rectangular Garrett exhaust maniflod mount
to
> the Audi/KKK's style round turbo mount outlet; or find a "round" port
> hotside scroll that could be machined to fit the Garret GT30 turbine and
> accept the ball bearing center housing.  An adapter for the 4" air intake
> should be fairly simple to manage by comparison.
>
> Last, does anyone have any real feel for the "truth" of Garrett's
> advertising claims for their compressor wheels to be "... the most
advanced,
> state of the art etc. available ..."  How much, if anything, has really
> changed in compressor inlet efficiency/design vs. the decades old either
> Garret TO4E or the KKK K26 compressor wheels? or the turbine wheels for
that
> matter?
>
> Mike Pederson
>
>
> ~-----Original Message-----
> ~From: s-car On Behalf Of Ned Ritchie
> ~Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 2:29 PM
>
> ~Mihnea,
> ~
> ~I don't know.  I don't have an air cooled K26 with a small exducer bore
> ~to compare with the 6.11; however, it maybe the same thing.
> ~
> ~I know that Roland and I buy from the same guys at 3K so it could be the
> ~same turbo.
> ~
> ~Ned
> ~
> ~-----Original Message-----
> ~From: s-car on Behalf Of Mihnea Cotet
>
> ~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
> ~
> ~
> ~_______________________________________________
> ~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