HX35 HX40 on a FP31 & Garrett Turbine Housing

It has been very much discussed that the HX35 and HX40 can utilize the FP31 turbine housing or the T3/T4 series from the Garrett.

Below are some pics of the finished machining.

Below are from dsmtuners member : thilaksharma

Below is from user ProjectTSI 

Read More

Just a billet turbo wheel ?

The current hype is billet, everything billet turbochargers. So why did the new billet wheels go cheap ? What is the diffrence ? Quality ?

Have a look again

Read More

Bar & Plate vs Tube & Fin weight comparison

I found this japanese picture which explains the diffrence in weight of an exact size intercooler.

Read More

Misc Turbo Sizes and Flows

Turbo flows and sizes information, random copy paste from the web. If you do have anything to be taken down, please do let me know.

Source : http://evox.forumup.co.za/about47-evox.html

Evo 8 TD05 Turbo - (360HP) Stock Evo 8 TD05-16G with 9.8 exhaust housing
Evo 8 TD05 Turbo - (380HP) TD05-16G with 10.5 exhaust housing
Evo 8 20G Turbo - (415HP) Upgraded TD05 with 20g compressor wheel and 10.5 exhaust housing
Evo 9 TD05 Turbo - (390HP) Stock Evo 9 TD05H-16G with 10.5 exhaust housing
Evo 9 20G Turbo - (425HP) Stock Evo 9 turbo with the 20G compressor wheel

Forced Performance have awsome Evo 9 based Turbos Available:

FP White (425HP) capable
Evo 9 based Turbo with:
Larger HTA 68mm Compressor Wheel

FP Green (475HP) capable
Larger FP 47lbs Compressor Wheel
Larger FP designed Turbine Wheel

FP RED (550HP) capable
Larger FP Red HTA Compressor Wheel
Larger FP designed Turbine Wheel

Also the 600HP+ FP Black and the new FP GREEN 73HTA Turbo (seems to be hot pick for a 500HP street turbo).

Also look at the BBK turbos, they seem quite popular.

nb. the stock turbo's need high boost and race fuel with suporting mods to make these kind of power figures... (But it is possible.)


GT3071R - (450HP) Boost is seen 700 - 1000 rpm earlier than the
GT3037S and only 200-300 later than stock. needs less boost than the FP Green to make the same power levels.

GT3076S - (525HP) This "benchmark" turbo, used my many a kitmaker, makes excellent power but spool-up does suffer about 1000rpm later than stock.

GT35R - (650HP) Most talked about Turbo - excellent race Turbo used by those that want big power an low ETs


T3/T4 Turbo kit choices:

Garrett 50 Trim T3T4E
Horsepower: 450hp
Compressor Wheel: 76mm Exducer; 54mm Inducer 50trim
Turbine Wheel: 65mm Inducer; 57mm Exducer 76trim

VS.

Precision PTE 5557 - T3/T4 Turbocharger
Horsepower: 495HP
Compressor Wheel: 76mm Exducer; 55mm Inducer 54trim (billet wheel)
Turbine Wheel: 65mm Inducer; 57mm Exducer 76trim

VS.

Garrett GT3076R
Horsepower: 525hp
Compressor Wheel: 57mm Ind; 76.2mm Exd 56trim
Turbine Wheel: 60mm Inducer; 56mm Exducer 84trim

VS.

Precision PTE 5857 - T3/T4 Turbocharger
Horsepower: 600HP (claimed by some shops but should be closer to 580HP)
Compressor Wheel: 76mm Exducer; 58mm Inducer (billet wheel)
Turbine Wheel: 65mm Inducer; 57mm Exducer 76trim

VS.

Garrett T3 60-1 - T3/T4 Turbocharger
Horsepower: 610HP (max flow potential for this T04S wheel)
Compressor Wheel: 76mm Exducer; 59mm Inducer 60trim
Turbine Wheel: 65mm Inducer; 57mm Exducer 76trim

VS.

Turbonetics T3/T04E Super 60
Horsepower: 580HP (No compressor map available but its a dead ringer for a GT4082 Comp Wheel)
Compressor Wheel: 82mm Exducer; 58mm Inducer 50trim
Turbine Wheel: 65mm Inducer; 57mm Exducer (F1)

and for 600HP+ = GT35R, PTE3562, PTE6262, GT4088R, etc...  



So I've owned a lot of T3-T4 Turbo's of different specs and from experiance I can tell you that depending on the combination of compressor and exhaust wheels on std frame T3/T4 with a T3 .63 Turbine housing and a T04E Compressor side they can hit peak poost anywhere between 3000 and 5000rpm for a non ball-bearing Turbo...

I have been curious to see where the mordern day variants of these T3-T4's spool on a 2.3L EVO with the .63 Exhaust housing:

GT3071R - AMS say 3300-3400rpm on a 2.3L Stroker, with around 3800rpm on the stock block 2L. [450HP capable Turbo]

GT3076R - Evo_M owners claim 3800rpm on a 2.3L Stroker with about 4000-4200rpm on the stock block 2L depending on supporting mods... [500HP capable Turbo]

GT35R - 4100-4300rpm on a 2.3L Stroker and on the stock block 2L depending on supporting mods as high as 4500-4900rpm... [600HP capable Turbo]


On the whole .63 vs .82 Hotside issue: 

from EVO M The 50trim is larger that the 3071 and will flow 49lbs of air, the 71R a bit less than that. The 76 will flow 52 pounds of air and the 35R 62 pounds. The 50trim spools up around 4000 when no-ball bearing but about 200-400rpm sooner when dualbb, Ive seen more say 400rpm sooner, RNR sells both and they claim a 400rpm quicker spool. Also, RNR made 389hp at 21psi on 91 and 423hp on 93 without alcohol injection. So it seems it spools faster than the 3071 and makes more power... it can make almost as much HP as the 3076 but with faster spoolup and for a pump gas turbo I think the 50trim is better, if your going to run race gas all the time or alcohol then maybe the 3076 would work better for you. One more thing, a TurboTrix customer, REZ90, made 480hp with the 50trim although I dont know the supporting mods. Also, a 3037 is capable of about 520hp, the 50trim about 490hp(good tune, race gas) but faster spool and me running pump gas on a daily basis in my mind make the 50trim better. If any of this is wrong, someone correct me, a turbo isnt cheap and I dont want to buy the wrong one.

davidbuschur wrote:

Smogrunner, sorry, I never saw this post. Anyone who wants my attention in a post just send me a PM with a link and I'll be glad to stop by. First, if you use the Tial or Garrett ported shroud compressor covers you will NOT experience any surging with the HTA35r. Next, the .63 housing works very good with the 35r's. Depending on the build we are doing we will sometimes use the .82 housing. I have now tested a few different header designs and tested 4-5 different turbine housings with the HTA35r. Overall I'd say the .63 housing works the best and a 2.5" outlet with a 2.5" 02 housing doesn't seem to hurt the power at all compared to the 3" stuff. The 3" does however make fabricating the housing, nicely, in one piece much easier. It was said that most of the charts posted from us are on the .82 housing. That could seem true simpy because my car has a ton of charts posted BUT there are some kick ass charts posted with the .63 housing too. We've made 520 whp here on the .63 housing on 93 octane. Best ever was on Peter's car at 547 whp on the .82 but the car is also set up just like mine with nothing left out. .

scorke wrote:

The .82 should make another 30-50 whp on a full tilt car than the .63. The difference in spool as dave said should be about 2-300 rpm sooner at lower boost levels, although I would venture a guess that the difference between spool times to make 30 psi would be more considerable in the 4-500 rpm range. Scorke .

Max Airflow Correted to Garrett Method:

EFR6258 = 42 lbs/min
GTX2860R = 42 lbs/min
GTX2863R = 44 lbs/min
EFR6758 = 45 lbs/min
GTX2867R = 47 lbs/min
EFR7064 = 51 lbs/min
GTX3071R = 57 lbs/min
EFR7670 = 60 lbs/min
GTX3076R = 65 lbs/min
EFR8374 = 75 lbs/min
GTX3582R = 76 lbs/min
EFR9180 = 88 lbs/min
GTX4294R = 97 lbs/min 

Read More

Manley H Beam vs I Beam

Hello guys, I know everyone is looking for comparisons for the manley conrods. I found these pictures on evolutionm.net and would like to share with you guys. Notice the weight and design. The question is, do you really need a I beam ? Source : Realstreetperformance

Manley turbo tuff vs standard evo

Read More

Wiseco vs Wiseco 1400HD

Since everyone over the internet is looking for pictures for the differences  my buddy Mr Matt decided to share me some pictures. The Wiseco HD comes with a .22 pin instead of a .20 pin. Notice the piston is a asymmetrical skirt design and the much deeper valve relief ports.

Credits to

Read More

Wiseco new 4G63 series , but do you notice the diffrences

Wiseco has a new range of pistons, but does everybody notice the diffrences in the Compression Height ? How will it effect our clearance.

Read More

4G63 Valve Spring Rates and Tests

Valve spring comparison #2

Evo VIII, Stock DSM, Manley, Brian Crower

 From left to right

· Used EVO VIII
· Used Stock 4G63
· Used Manley
· Used BC1100
· New BC1100

The EVO springs, set of 16, tested 58-62 lbs @ 1.530

Used stock 4G63 valve spring Appox. 140k miles

56lbs @ 1.530

Used Manley Valve spring, mileage unknown.

78lbs @ 1.530

Used BC1100 valve spring, Appox 5000 miles

85 lbs @ 1.530 

There must have been a change in the production of the springs about 2-3 years ago. Since the used springs test stronger than the new ones.

New BC1100, right out of the box

80 lbs @ 1.530   

Part Number #160-1280

Free length 1.910
O.D. 1.110
I.D. .754
Wire size .145x.178


Closed position
pressure & Length (intalled specs)
66@1.575 Valve closed

Open position
Pressure & length Valve Open
160@1.240

solid height
1.100

The factory installed springs should be close to this also.

EDIT: I just checked 7 sets of used 4G63 valve springs, and only came up with 1 and a half sets of decent used springs.
Most springs checked between 45-55 Lbs @ 1.575
I would say a good spring should test at 60lbs@1.575, Most spring manufactures, will allow 10% loss in spring tention for spring "break in"
I used a Rimac spring pressure tester.


Ferrea “beehive” Spring info


Specs on the springs
- Spring O.D. - 23.87mm / 28.07mm = .939/1.105
- Spring I.D. - 14.73mm / 18.85mm = .579/.742
- Seat Pressure - 90 lbs. @38mm = 1.496
- Open Pressure - 225 lbs. @28mm =1.102
- Rate Inch - 342 lbs.
- Coil Bind - 23mm =.905
- Max Net Lift – 13.5mm = .531
- Spring Material - PAC Alloy

http://www.extremepsi.com/store/cust...at=1417&page=1

BC 1100 Valve spring info
Spring Pressure:
BC1100 Seat:
Colsed 1.500" @ 95 lbs /
Open: 1.000" @ 235 lbs /
Coil Bind: 0.935"
(no machine work required)

http://www.briancrower.com/makes/mitsubishi/4g63.shtml


GSC Power-Division 4G63T Beehive Single Spring Set
Spring Pressures :
Seat @ 1.56"=68 lbs / .300"=160lbs / .400"=190lbs / .450"=210lbs / .625"= Coil bind.

http://www.vr-speed.com/store/gsc-po...63-p-2046.html


Kiggley springs
97lb Seat Pressure at 1.440"

325lb/in Rate

http://www.shop.kigglyracing.com/pro...2&categoryId=1

Source : http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/cylinder-head-short-block/440147-valve-spring-comparison-2-evo-viii-stock-dsm-manley-brian-crower.html
by BogusSVO

Read More

Tial Turbine Housing Raped

There two ways to mount a wastegate, one is on a turbine housing next is on the manifold itself. So below is how a Tial turbine housing is raped for this purpose.

Read More

Tial MVS MVR Design Diagram

This is the NEW Tial MVS 38mm with a 38mm Vband Flange Inlet and a Vband Flange Outlet. The kit comes with both the inlet flange and outlet flange AND both clamps. It also includes all air fittings, block off fittings, banjo bolts and everything else required to install.

Read More

HKS vs GT naming conventions

The HKS and GT turbos are similar , the HKS turbos are actually manufactured by Garrett. They utilize similar parts except for the compressor cover and turbine housings. Below are your cross reference compiled by Tong Turbo.

Read More

GT30 & GT35 T4 Divided 1.06 A/R .ar housing

There are lot of turbocharging freaks looking out for a T4 Divided housing for the GT30 and GT35. There is an anwsers, previously ATP brought out a housing sized 1.06 .ar , but reviews were bad and the design of the divided flange was not the conventional T4 flange. Cracks was also one of the issues of this housing. ATP has redesigned the turbine housing and have launched out their new product.

Previous lower quality housing below

Read More

GT Ballbearing vs EFR Ballbearing catridge

A review comparing EFR and GT ballbearing surfaced up the internet sometime ago showing the picture below claiming the EFR to have a bigger ballbearing cage. The truth is both the GT and the EFR has bigger cages but they start at a diffrent turbocharger frame. The border catridge is actually a GTX3582 which oftenly is compared to a EFR8374 and also the GTX3076 with the EFR7670.

The GT/GTX series is divided to 3 frames while the EFR series is divided to only 2 frames.
GT25/28 Frame1, GT30/35 Frame2 , GT37,40,42 Frame3.
While in the EFR series , all EFR up to EFR6758 shares one frame while anything above it shares a bigger catridge. In comparison the EFR7670 sits in a bigger frame while GTX3076 sits in its seconds frame thus EFR having a bigger cage but also a beefier shaft which also means heavier. No doubt the GT series are proven till at high boost capabilities till today despite it counterparts differences. GT30/35 based turbos are one of the most used turbocharger in the Motorsport industry where some with billet wheels surpass the 800hp range.

EFR big cage vs GT small cage

GT small cage vs GT big cage

Read More

Garrett GTX vs GT 3076

Below are some results of GT3076 vs GTX3076, how technology of the new blade by Garrett make difference in power and response. The new GTX is a all new billet wheel which was carved to perfection on a C&C machine.

Source : http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/turbo-system-tech/387381-garrett-gtx3076-turbo-pics.html

Source : http://www.nissansilvia.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=497486

Hi all... i have conducted a TRUE comparison between the two turbos thanks to Sonic Performance and Garage 7. By true comparison i mean the only thing changed was the turbo. nothing else was touched. The result was suprising and disappointing both at the same time. We found that the GTX version DID spool quicker and hence started making torque and power earlier in the midrange. i now have FULL boost around the 3500 rpm mark which for a turbo like that is impressive. Its highly streetable! 

The downside is that for the same boost level peak power is changed by .1 of a kw! its pretty much lineball! the two turbos match each other on the graph pretty much spot on.
runs were done with air temp probe and same correction mode and dyno that STatus uses for real world comparison. 

Solid pink line is GTX, thin red line is GT. 

See how much faster the GTX builds boost

Read More

VR4 AMG Intake Manifold 4G63

Comparison of the super Rare VR4 AMG tuned engine intake manifold vs the cyclone intake and the 1G / 4g67 intake manifold. The AMG is superior in size and flow. The AMG engine was built natural aspirated but it whopped nearly 200hp on a 2Liter 4G63.

Source : http://www.galantvr4.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Board=UBB3&Number=802855&page=5&fpart=1

Cyclone vs AMG

Read More

Evo vs Vr4 head , DSM 1g vs 2g head

There are much confusion between the 1G vs 2G DSM head. The 1G head is similar to the VR4 Head while the 2G head is similar to the Evo 1,2,3. There is another head stamped 1.8L which is similar to the VR4 but instead of 47cc , it is a 43cc combustion chamber.

Below is 2G vs Evo III Intake manifold

Read More

Volumetric Efficiency 101

Volumetric Efficiency 101
by Brian Barnhill
Source : http://tunertools.com/articles/volumetric-efficiency.asp

This can actually be a quite tricky subject, mostly due to confusion and differing opinions among many people. Volumetric efficiency (VE) is typically defined as "the actual amount of air being pumped by the engine as compared to its theoretical maximum."
Basically, VE is a measure of how "full" the cylinders are.

As most of us will know from basic science, gas will expand to fill its container. Seemingly, that would suggest that the cylinder is always full. And, in the pure volumetric sense, that is correct. A 0.5 Liter cylinder will always have 0.5 liters of air in it. The measure we are looking for here is air density. A cylinder with 500 mols/liter of air in it is said to me "more full" than one with 400 mols/liter.
Now, where is this air density measured?

This is one of the points of disagreement. The point at which air density is measured is crucial. Many will claim that you must take the measurement at a standard, such atmospheric density. This, however, can cause many issues with VE measurements. Forced induction cars will have skewed VE values due to the simple fact that they are forcing more air into the manifold. With more air available to the engine, it will receive a larger/more dense amount. This is not a pure measurement of the efficiency of the engine,

To correct for these factors, air density available at the intake manifold should be used. This will correctly measure the VE based on the amount of air available to the engine. As a simple example: Take a 4 cylinder, 2.0 Liter engine (assume even flow to each cylinder) each cylinder will be 0.5 liters. If the intake manifold has a density of 100 mols/liter (this gives 25 mols/cyl), at 100% VE, the cylinder will have 25 mols/Liter. This comes from the equation:
VE = Densitycylinder/Densitymanifold * 100%

Lets look at this another way. Say the cylinder in a single cylinder engine has 186 mols/Liter. Now, the density of at the manifold is measured at 213 mols/Liter. The calculation of VE gives: VE = 286/213 * 100% or 87.32%
It is upon this principle that variable valve timing and similar technologies rely.

They will change the flow aspects of the engine to best match the particular RPM range. An engine is typically only maximized for a particular rpm range. By allowing the change in parameters, this can be overcome. This can easily be seen when looking at DYNO charts for any Vtec equipped engine (the S2000 is a good example). In these charts there will be a "double peak." The horsepower will begin to fall off at one point, and then climb again. This rpm point will correspond to the "Vtec" point.

Volumetric Efficiency plays a large role in how your engine operates. By understanding this parameter one can begin to grasp the details required to properly tune any engine.

Read More

4G63 Camshaft Specifications

	CAM	ADV Duration	Duration @ 1mm	Peak Lift (mm)	Centerline
Intake	OEM EVO	248	200	9.8
Exhaust	OEM EVO	248	200	9.32
lIntake	Brian Crower	272	206	10.54
Exhaust	Brian Crower	272	206	9.86
Intake	Brian Crower	276	216	11.07
Exhaust	Brian Crower	276	216	11.07
Intake	Brian Crower	280	213	10.3
Exhaust	Brian Crower	280	216	10.36
Intake	Brian Crower	288	222	11.83
Exhaust	Brian Crower	288	220	12.14
Intake	Buddy Club Spec 1	264		10.8	108
lExhaust	Buddy Club Spec 1	272		10.2	107
Intake	Buddy Club Spec 2	272		10.8	108
Exhaust	Buddy Club Spec 2	264		10.2	107
Intake	Eitidd‘. Club Spec 3	280		10.3	116
Exhaust	Buddy Club Spec 3	230		10.2	116
Intake	Buddy Club Spec 4	290		11.5	110
Exhaust	Buddy Club Spec 4	290		11.5	110
Intake	Comp 264	248		10.3	104
Exhaust	Comp 264	248		10.2	112
Intake	Comp 272	256		10.8	104
Exhaust	Comp 272	257		10.2	112
Intake	Comp 280	264		11	104
Exhaust	Comp 280	265		10.4	112
Intake	Cosworth M2	272		11
Exhaust	Cosworth M2	272		11
Intake	Costworth M3	280		11.6
Exhaust	Costworth M3	272		11
Intake	FP 4R	267	221	11.1	108
Exhaust	FP 4R	275	228	10.9	113
Intake	FP 5R	279	233	12.1	110
Exhaust	FP 5R	285	238	11.8	114
Intake	GSC S1	268	216	11	107
Exhaust	GSC S1	268	220	10.5	113
Intake	GSC S2	274	230	11.2	107
Exhaust	GSC S2	274	230	11	113
Intake	GSC S3	280	238	11.7	109
Exhaust	GSC S3	280	235	11.7	115
Intake	Greddy	260		10.8	110
Exhaust	Greddy	260		10.3	112
Intake	HKS Step 1	264		10.8	110
Exhaust	HKS Step 1	264		10.2	110
Intake	HKS Step 1	272		10.8	110
Exhaust	HKS Step 1	272		10.2	110
Intake	HKS Step 1	280		10.8	110
Exhaust	HKS Step 1	280		10.2	110
Intake	HKS Step 2	274		11
Exhaust	HKS Step 2	278		11
Intake	JUN 264	264		10.5	110
Exhaust	JUN 264	264		10.5	115
Intake	JUN 272	272	235	10.8	110
Exhaust	JUN 272	272	235	10.8	115
Intake	Kelford TX258	258	208	10.5	107
Exhaust	Kelford TX258	264	220	10.5	111
Intake	Kelford TX264	264	216	11	107
Exhaust	KeIford TX264	260	216	10.35	113
Intake	kelford TX272	272	226	11	107
Exhaust	Kelford TX272	272	226	11	113
Intake	Kelford TX280	280	233	113	107
Exhaust	Kelford TX280	276	230	11	115
Intake	Kelford TX288	288	242	12	105
Exhaust	Kelford TX288	280	238	11.5	117
Intake	Kelford TX276HL	276	234	123	106
Exhaust	Kelford TX276HL	272	230	12	115
Intake	Kelford TX284HL	284	242	12.5	106
Exhaust	Kelford TX284HL	280	238	12	116
Intake	kelford TX294HL	294	250	12.5	106
Exhaust	Kelford TX294HL	292	244	12	117
Intake	Piper Drag Race	290		11.99	106
Exhaust	Piper Drag Race	290		11.99	106
Intake	Piper Race	274		11.99	106
Exhaust	Piper Race	274		11.99	106
Intake	Piper Race	274		11.51	106
Exhaust	Piper Race	274		11.51	106
Intake	Piper Race	270		11.51	106
Exhaust	Piper Race	270		11.51	106
Intake	Piper Fast Road	272		10.8	108
Exhaust	Piper Fast Road	256		10.16	107
Intake	Piper Fast Road	264		11	108
Exhaust	Piper Fast Road	260		10.1	107
Intake	Piper Ultimate Road	265		11.51	108
Exhaust	Piper Ultimate Road	265		10.8	107
Intake	Piper Rally	265		11.51	108
Exhaust	Piper Rally	265		11.51	107
Intake	Piper Group A	265		11.51	106
Exhaust	Piper Group A	267		9.61	108
Intake	Revolver	262	222	11.4	109
Exhaust	Revolver	264	223	11.5	111
Intake	Skunk2 Tuner Series	264		10.8
Exhaust	Skunk2 Tuner Series	272		10.2
Intake	Tomei PON	260		10.7
Exhaust	Tomei PON	260		10.2
Intake	Tomei PON Type R	270		10.7
Exhaust	Tomei PON Type R.	270		10.2
Intake	Tomei PRO	270		11.5	110
Exhaust	Tomei PRO	270		11.5	115
Intake	Tomei PRO Solid	230		11.5
Exhaust	Tomei PRO Solid	230		11.5
Intake	Tomei Pro Solid	290		11.5
Exhaust	Tomei Pro Solid	290		11.5

Read More