i just cant understand why the other half isnt as excited as me......

ive got to explain the coilovers first, as she doesnt know they went on as my xmas present too errrrr myself......

how do you know if your exhaust housing is small or large???mine is jdm04???

and whats the 58mm and 76mm refer too??? please excuse my ignorance....

 

58mm and 76mm refers to the compressor entrance where your air inlet pipe attaches to. ,,,
and how come my other half isn't excited as me too? perhaps she might get excited when i mention the price - lol

 

i think that a smaller housing will give better response on the compressor wheel but a larger housing will keep boosting longer - i think!

 

Apologies if the graphs we have put up so far have confused anyone. I’m going to try and put up information that goes with each turbo soon. Without boring you all I’ll try and explain what we did.

One of the cars used and the one in the two graphs on our site was a MY08 JDM STI 2.0 fitted with our 3” Milltek exhaust, 3-port, front mount and Induction kit. The aim was to have a base car that was spec ‘d so that it would have as little effect as possible as we tried different combinations (we had already used 2 other MY08 cars with early versions of the turbos).

I was not too concerned with torque figures on this dyno as it seemed to vary between runs and how long the dyno held the car for before the run (will put up figures from other dynos as well). However once underway it was very consistent on mid and top end figures
The car was setup to run reasonably conservatively, used V-power and kept the turbo within the recommended efficiency range (115,000-140,000rpm). They can be pushed harder......

We wanted to prove the Garret cores would produce the same or better performance than we already knew they were capable of in single-scroll form. All the data, computer flow models and experience said they would work but it has taken a lot of work to test it.

This on road information for the LM400-S60 and LM450-S60 might be more useful (same 2.0 car as dyno runs):
Turbo type LM400-S60 LM450-S60
Peak HP 410.3bhp 440.6bhp
Boost pressure at peak HP 1.4bar 1.46bar
Turbo speed at peak HP 132,000rpm 129,000rpm
Peak Torque 385lbft 400lbft
Boost pressure at peak torque 1.45bar 1.56bar
Turbo speed at peak torque 119,000rpm 118,000rpm
4th
Boost pressure 0.5bar 2,500rpm 3,100rpm
Boost pressure 1bar 2,800rpm 3,400rpm
Boost pressure 1.5bar 3,100rpm 3,500rpm
5th
Boost pressure 0.5bar 2,100rpm 2,800rpm
Boost pressure 1bar 2,400rpm 3,300rpm
Boost pressure 1.5bar 2,700rpm 3,400rpm

Monitoring Turbo speed has been really useful but we also had egt in the manifold for each cylinder, pressure from both ports of the up-pipes, pre and post turbo and i/c.

We knew how the LM400 would perform as it is basically the same spec as our last Type-20 but the larger core of the LM450 was much more responsive than we thought and certainly much better than when it had been shoehorned into standard TS housings.

I hope that explains the 2.0 testing of these two turbos a bit better but feel free to call us with questions

Iain

 

It's definately not boring Iain! very exciting

 

great that the tests were done on pump fuel but shame on you for using a FMIC. I thought you were dedicated TMIC users.

 

Thanks for the info Iain, just what I was after.

 

The front mount was one of the choices we made so it would not have an effect as we went up in turbo size. My new Type-20 demo is back on the topmount

 

Iain, was the 410 figure acheived with or without a cat?

 

 

The car was fitted with a decat pipe but the large 100cell milltek does not start to cause to much of a restriction until around 450bhp.

 

Iain,

What TMIC would be recommended for the LM400-S60 58mm inlet turbo to stay efficient and keep the best response?

 

the satndard newage STI tmic should be ok

 

Could somebody clarify the HP ratings on these turbo's for me?

Iain shows 2 of them with dyno graphs making 410bhp and 440bhp. These were done on a dyno dynamics chassis dyno correct? Shouldn't these then be marked as making 410whp and 440whp respectively?

I am from America and we typically list BHP and WHP as being different, but I am finding on these forums that everything is generally listed as BHP.

Thanks for help.

 

it would be interesting to see dyno graphs of these various combos

 

Rightly or wrongly, we always talk about flywheel bhp not whp. So Iain's figures are flywheel figures...which mean there is a degree of uncertainty on the exact figure since it depends on how you calculate back from the whp that's actually measured; what losses you assume, for example.

 

DD flywheel figures are/should be within an acceptable factor of any other flywheel output given by a n other RR make (MAHA, Dastek etc), assuming the runs have been done correctly.

Dyno Dynamics RR's are probably the most common in the UK, so I understand why this type of RR has been used for these results.

Tim,
You should really enjoy 480bhp. It was quite a step from my previous 2ltr and 370bhp, when I hit that figure a few years back on the 2.5..... the only thing is you will only want more! I look forward to your results.

 

It doesn't have the twin wastegate like the vf37. It looks more like a twin entry single scroll turbo. I have no idea as to wether that affects the performance at all though and I guess it is cheaper than having it separated around the turbo.

 

I asked Iain about this and he confirmed it is a twin entry rather than twin scroll.

So, it maintains the separation of the cylinder banks right up to the turbo, maximising the benefit of this, but doesn't then suffer what he described as the disadvantage of a true twin scroll which, I think he said, is stress and fatigue on one of the sets of turbine blades when running high power designs.

Something like that, anyway

 

Most of the HP figures you see on NASIOC are laughable, I'd say most of the 'WHP' figures you guys see over there are more or less just flywheel BHP. I mean there was some guy claiming to make 450wheel torque on a 2.5 STi with a VF39, lol.

 

I do recall some douche on NASIOC posting numbers along those lines and having an absolutely terrible trap speed in the 1/4 mile. Now I would say the highest WHP and WTQ that I have seen that is worth trusting, would be from a guy called DownSTI on NASIOC and he made 342whp 418wtq Tuned by ED @ EQ Tuning.

Here is the thread if you anyone wants to see it:
DownSTi's 06 + EQ-Tuned + VF39 + E85 = WOW!!! - NASIOC

 

Again, over here that car wouldn't make 420bhp and 510lbft on our rollers, it's rediculous to think a VF39 could make that power/torque at the fly!

 

I have been following this thread, the Americans do calucluate their HP (SAE) figure differently to us (DIN) as per the Wikipedia link below:

Horsepower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is why American cars make such large HP in comparison to the rest of the world.

 

I am not going to disagree, America does have it's own way of calculating HP and uses our own stupid *** measuring system. Believe me, the majority of us don't understand why we have to use different calculations and measurements...yet we do lol.

Either way I don't know how we got so off topic in this thread and I want to thank Tim Hardisty and Shaun for answering my question.

 

Kayen,
Don't worry about it. Some people get quite **** about RR outputs.... I know, I have been one of them!

 

how would in terms of spool and top figs-

LM450-S60 compare to LM450-L60 with 58mm inlet?

LM450-S60 with 58mm inlet compare to LM450-S60 with 76mm inlet?

 

same question but :

LM400-S60 -(76mm) & LM420-S60 (76mm)

thanks a lot.
xavier

 

I'll have to give it beasting at Brands Febuary

Tony

 

Just looking through the febuary issue of Japanese performance and lateral performance are selling MD321 H/T/V twin scroll turbos but you need to call for information on them .There's a picture of exhaust side of turbo

 

Any prices yet as i want one plz!