[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by BrianMN

Cool, thanks for the pictures.

It appears RB has bored out the turbine outlet and puts in an upgraded turbine. Something that seems like it'd be worth it due to how small they are in the first place.

Info from RB suggests that each turbo flows 27.5lb/min, 55lb/min total. Do you have any data from the AWD set?

I'm not trying to drill you on questions for comparisons sake, just trying to grasp what specifically you're doing to the turbos...something that hasn't really been elaborated on yet.

our Turbos are rated at 31lbs per min each.. Your not drilling me dont worry.. Its been elaborated on and actually all of this info is on this forum its just buried amongst the 300+ replies..

Mike

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by AWD Motorsports

our Turbos are rated at 31lbs per min.. Your not drilling me dont worry.. Its been elaborated on and actually all of this info is on this forum its just buried amongst the 300+ replies..

Mike

Wow, that's theoretically 620hp!

If you would, please help me build knowledge on the subject, I'd like to know what are the most important "traits" that contribute to the flow rate? I assume the RB compressor wheel/housing and your 39.6 billet wheel/housing are similar in diameter, yours being billet. Is the weight of the wheels a large factor? Is the design of the fins a very large factor? How important is the diameter of the turbine outlet?


Thanks Mike!

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by BrianMN

Wow, that's theoretically 620hp!

If you would, please help me build knowledge on the subject, I'd like to know what are the most important "traits" that contribute to the flow rate? I assume the RB compressor wheel/housing and your 39.6 billet wheel/housing are similar in diameter, yours being billet. Is the weight of the wheels a large factor? Is the design of the fins a very large factor? How important is the diameter of the turbine outlet?


Thanks Mike!

The weight isnt as much of a factor as AEROS.. AERO is what plays the largest role in the flow of the turbo and at what pressure ratio it can still make power.. Since my experience with BMW is limited ill give you an example with an evo..

a 67mm Cast wheel turbo on an evo makes 740-750hp MAXED out.. At 42psi power just starts to fall like a rock.. a 67mm Billet wheel Turbo makes 920whp at 45psi and power holds steady.. It can run 50psi actually if we needed because the newer billet aero can flow that amount of boost..

So if we could get the N54 to turn up to 23-25psi i bet it would still show some gains in that pressure range..

The turbine plays a role ONLY when it cant keep up with the flow of the compressor.. Our testing showed all we needed was a clipped turbine..

another Evo Example.. a popular turbo is a billet 6262 which is 62mm compressor and 62mm turbine.. a turbo we ran 8s with and make 782whp..

We also had made a 6265 which is 65mm turbine.. we tested that turbo and with the 65mm turbine it showed ABSOLUTELY NO HP gains.. the only thing it did was lag more..

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by AWD Motorsports

The weight isnt as much of a factor as AEROS.. AERO is what plays the largest role in the flow of the turbo and at what pressure ratio it can still make power.. Since my experience with BMW is limited ill give you an example with an evo..

a 67mm Cast wheel turbo on an evo makes 740-750hp MAXED out.. At 42psi power just starts to fall like a rock.. a 67mm Billet wheel Turbo makes 920whp at 45psi and power holds steady.. It can run 50psi actually if we needed because the newer billet aero can flow that amount of boost..

So if we could get the N54 to turn up to 23-25psi i bet it would still show some gains in that pressure range..

The turbine plays a role ONLY when it cant keep up with the flow of the compressor.. Our testing showed all we needed was a clipped turbine..

another Evo Example.. a popular turbo is a billet 6262 which is 62mm compressor and 62mm turbine.. a turbo we ran 8s with and make 782whp..

We also had made a 6265 which is 65mm turbine.. we tested that turbo and with the 65mm turbine it showed ABSOLUTELY NO HP gains.. the only thing it did was lag more..

Cool, you guys are no stranger to high HP engines

Aero- I'm assuming that consists of the angles and shapes of the fins? Anything more to that?

Sorry again for all the questions.

So in theory, (without drawing petty conclusions that people will extrapolate and create drama from) the design of the fins on the billet wheel and clipping of the turbine, or AERO, is "better" than that of a 27.5lb/min turbo?

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by BrianMN

Cool, you guys are no stranger to high HP engines

Aero- I'm assuming that consists of the angles and shapes of the fins? Anything more to that?

Sorry again for all the questions.

So in theory, (without drawing petty conclusions that people will extrapolate and create drama from) the design of the fins on the billet wheel and clipping of the turbine, or AERO, is "better" than that of a 27.5lb/min turbo?

Yes we are no stranger to high HP engines.. We made 1001whp 3 years ago with an evo and set many records..

The aero is exactly that.. the angles, shapes and length of each fin..

Without starting drama the only FACT i know from testing dozens of turbos over the last 4 years is that if you take a cast wheel turbo of equal size and compare against a " Properly " designed billet wheel of the same size you will find the billet wheel makes more power lb for lb every time.. There are always exceptions.. a wheel made in China on a Cnc by someone who has 0 experience in turbo design will not make more power than a turbo wheel made out of notebook paper probably..

Our billet wheel program has proven to work on every single application we have done so far.. its also proven for example that a 62mm Billet wheel can make even more power than a 67mm cast wheel just due to aeros.. When you can continue to make power at 49psi where we ran our 6262 8 second car it becomes more efficient than a 67mm cast wheel turbo that cant make power past 40-42psi.. so bigger is not better as well..

Mike

[Rob@RBTurbo]

AWD,

So one could deduce you've developed N54 Turbos with upgraded larger turbines, but only to realize by actual testing that all you needed was a clipped turbine to get the same results?

Additionally, just another correction (something I mispoke a while ago so no fault to BrianMN), the RB compressors actually flow 29lb/min. But this is an MHI measurement, something that isnt the same as someone elses flow calcs/equipment. It could be similar as saying a Mustang Dyno reads 300rwhp, and a Dynojet reads 350rwhp. Without knowing any different, youd think the car on the dynojet is making better power when in actuality they are the same.

Originally Posted by AWD Motorsports

The turbine plays a role ONLY when it cant keep up with the flow of the compressor.. Our testing showed all we needed was a clipped turbine..

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by RobBeck

AWD,

So one could deduce you've developed N54 Turbos with upgraded larger turbines, but only to realize by actual testing that all you needed was a clipped turbine to get the same results?

Additionally, just another correction (something I mispoke a while ago so no fault to BrianMN), the RB compressors actually flow 29lb/min. But this is an MHI measurement, something that isnt the same as someone elses flow calcs/equipment. It could be similar as saying a Mustang Dyno reads 300rwhp, and a Dynojet reads 350rwhp. Without knowing any different, youd think the car on the dynojet is making better power when in actuality they are the same.

The manufacturer of the turbos logged the back pressure and the datalogs did not show any need for larger turbine wheels given the 39.6mm compressor..

In the past I have tested turbos in the real world just to see for myself that larger turbine wheels did not increase any more power in the case of the 6265 billet.. That was actually a stubborn customer who wanted the larger rear wheel and all it did was eat up 500+rpm of powerband with 0 gains on top..

I agree the lbs per Min to me doesnt mean much of anything.. In theory and rule of thumb as you know 10hp per lb of min if the engine can flow it.. I dont think we would see 620whp with these turbos even on Ethanol..

However in the case of the Evo EVERY SINGLE turbo we tested in billet we exceeded the lbs per min rule in HP.. Might take 45-50psi to do it and in some cases 57psi but pushed to the limit it exceeded the lbs per min rule on a built high compression and efficient 4g63 engine..

Mike

[Penn999]

Compare your graph to the one here: I know you hold power all the way to redline but peak hp and tq is not a lot diff. I was running 100 octane, NO METH and ONLY 16psi!

your is here:http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=328

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by RobBeck

AWD,

So one could deduce you've developed N54 Turbos with upgraded larger turbines, but only to realize by actual testing that all you needed was a clipped turbine to get the same results?

Additionally, just another correction (something I mispoke a while ago so no fault to BrianMN), the RB compressors actually flow 29lb/min. But this is an MHI measurement, something that isnt the same as someone elses flow calcs/equipment. It could be similar as saying a Mustang Dyno reads 300rwhp, and a Dynojet reads 350rwhp. Without knowing any different, youd think the car on the dynojet is making better power when in actuality they are the same.

Yeah I had seen that 27.5 on the first page of this thread: http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5029

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by Penn999

Compare your graph to the one here: I know you hold power all the way to redline but peak hp and tq is not a lot diff. I was running 100 octane, NO METH and ONLY 16psi!

your is here:http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=328

What's there to compare? The upgraded turbos simply produced better power and torque throughout the entire powerband while retaining spool characteristics and smoothness...

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by Penn999

Compare your graph to the one here: I know you hold power all the way to redline but peak hp and tq is not a lot diff. I was running 100 octane, NO METH and ONLY 16psi!

your is here:http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=328

Ok well i can compare atleast the initial powerband without an overlay.. Our turbos are making 400whp by 4500rpm.. Your graph shows about 500rpm later @ 5k.. So its making the power sooner and holding it longer.. Thats about all i can compare other than the fact we know our turbos hold more power on top..

Mike

[BrianMN]

Besides no difference in Power, how much of a difference can a larger turbine make in exhaust pressure and EGTs? One would presume if there were a significant reduction in exhaust backpressure (I read in upwards of 35psi somewhere), then that would be seen in an increase in power..but if you're experiencing no increase in power that would suggest there is no significant increase in exhaust flow/reduction in exhaust pressure. ?

[Rob@RBTurbo]

The manufacturer must have a test car to log this back pressure I assume? What Intake pressures was he running on said car when making this judgement call? Or did he test this on the customer car? Curious as to where the measurement was taken, obviously we are looking for pre-turbine here and tapping of the manifold or turbine housing would be required to my knowledge. Did they make these Intake pressures vs. Pre-turbine pressures vs. RPM available by chance? I do not have the data for mine, so I have no other use for other than just out of pure interest. Even with the turbine clip, I'd imagine the pre-turbine pressures to be very much on the high side with this itsy bitsy TD03L wheel especially forcing 20psi through it until redline.

As for your stubborn customer example and the lack of gain from the increased turbine size, assuming all else is the same (ie. Intake Pressures), perhaps the engine flow potential was just tapped out? Pretty much the theory behind what I have bolded in your quote. There are a ton of factors to consider in this example really, and I dont think its a really fair comparison to what we have going on here with the N54 and these TD03L-10T Turbos.

Originally Posted by AWD Motorsports

The manufacturer of the turbos logged the back pressure and the datalogs did not show any need for larger turbine wheels given the 39.6mm compressor..

In the past I have tested turbos in the real world just to see for myself that larger turbine wheels did not increase any more power in the case of the 6265 billet.. That was actually a stubborn customer who wanted the larger rear wheel and all it did was eat up 500+rpm of powerband with 0 gains on top..

I agree the lbs per Min to me doesnt mean much of anything.. In theory and rule of thumb as you know 10hp per lb of min if the engine can flow it.. I dont think we would see 620whp with these turbos even on Ethanol..

Mike

[Penn999]

Originally Posted by AWD Motorsports

Ok well i can compare atleast the initial powerband without an overlay.. Our turbos are making 400whp by 4500rpm.. Your graph shows about 500rpm later @ 5k.. So its making the power sooner and holding it longer.. Thats about all i can compare other than the fact we know our turbos hold more power on top..

Mike

I bet I could come very close to those numbers with meth and 18-19psi. You have 5 more psi on me and meth?!? Not to mention that wasnt even what the car could have done, I left the default settings alone! 16psi vs 21-22psi THATS A TON! How much are these turbos? close to 4k installed? Im just talking about power for the money. Im not trying to bash at all, just trying to fathom spending that kinda money for only a couple more hp and tq. I hope the numbers that are soon to come are better than those.

[AWD Motorsports]

I guess i was wrong.. The RB Cast wheel turbos are in factory housings they may not be larger than ours after all.. Anyone know the wheel inducer size?? Here is a direct pic comparison if that helps..

RB


AWD

[Penn999]

Originally Posted by BrianMN

What's there to compare? The upgraded turbos simply produced better power and torque throughout the entire powerband while retaining spool characteristics and smoothness...

FOR ROUGHLY $4K!! Sorry man, thats not worth it for me.

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by Penn999

I bet I could come very close to those numbers with meth and 18-19psi. You have 5 more psi on me and meth?!? Not to mention that wasnt even what the car could have done, I left the default settings alone! 16psi vs 21-22psi THATS A TON! How much are these turbos? close to 4k installed? Im just talking about power for the money. Im not trying to bash at all, just trying to fathom spending that kinda money for only a couple more hp and tq. I hope the numbers that are soon to come are better than those.

The meth in this car isnt doing much at all.. its a tiny nozzle and the 1st round it wasnt even in the car and made 440+.. crank yours up 5psi and youll see they are way out of their efficiency range so until you do it you can say you BET but you havent done it.. Stock turbos DO NOT make the power on top and it appears your car doesnt even spool as fast as the upgrades either..Again if they are not worth it to you by all means please do not buy them.. I know what the car feels like before and after the install i dont care what the dyno chart you have shows.. just sit tight and wait for the reviews to come along..

The turbos are 3400.00 installed.. last i checked 3400 was closer to 3k than it was 4k but however you want to make it look to make you feel better go for it.. its easy to spot the guys trying to derail the threads.. trust me this isnt my 1st rodeo.. Im in this game a lot longer than you think..


Mike

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by Penn999

FOR ROUGHLY $4K!! Sorry man, thats not worth it for me.

I understand 100%.. its not worth it for you.. So please find a thread to comment in that seems that it is more worth it for you.. Take care

Mike

[Rob@RBTurbo]

Mike,

The Compressor inducer on the RBs is 42mm.

The RBs Turbine Exducer is 2mm bigger than the OEM Turbines Inducer. Them OEM Turbine wheel will fall completely through the RB Bore.

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by Penn999

I bet I could come very close to those numbers with meth and 18-19psi. You have 5 more psi on me and meth?!? Not to mention that wasnt even what the car could have done, I left the default settings alone! 16psi vs 21-22psi THATS A TON! How much are these turbos? close to 4k installed? Im just talking about power for the money. Im not trying to bash at all, just trying to fathom spending that kinda money for only a couple more hp and tq. I hope the numbers that are soon to come are better than those.

Hahahahaha YOU are talking about justifying power for the money?

You must be crazy to think you could safely come close to 450hp/475tq with 18-19psi and meth. I didn't see-what were your baselines? Those numbers seem quite high for 16psi and no meth without the new V5 maps (post-12-17).

In any case, upgraded turbos are going to be a huge power to money modification after a tune. The best thing about them is how "safely" they can make the power, which is important to nearly everyone. If you really want more power for little money, go with nitrous!!

[AWD Motorsports]

Originally Posted by RobBeck

The manufacturer must have a test car to log this back pressure I assume? What Intake pressures was he running on said car when making this judgement call? Or did he test this on the customer car? Curious as to where the measurement was taken, obviously we are looking for pre-turbine here and tapping of the manifold or turbine housing would be required to my knowledge. Did they make these Intake pressures vs. Pre-turbine pressures vs. RPM available by chance? I do not have the data for mine, so I have no other use for other than just out of pure interest. Even with the turbine clip, I'd imagine the pre-turbine pressures to be very much on the high side with this itsy bitsy TD03L wheel especially forcing 20psi through it until redline.

As for your stubborn customer example and the lack of gain from the increased turbine size, assuming all else is the same (ie. Intake Pressures), perhaps the engine flow potential was just tapped out? Pretty much the theory behind what I have bolded in your quote. There are a ton of factors to consider in this example really, and I dont think its a really fair comparison to what we have going on here with the N54 and these TD03L-10T Turbos.

Ill have to find out where the measurement was taken it wasnt done in house..

That engine wasnt maxed out because we moved it up to a 6765 which was 67mm compressor but used the same 65 and it made 120more hp.. We discussed building a 6762 to see if it would change but never got around to building & testing it..

Regardless of my 1 example which i tested back to back on the same car you must agree its 100% fact that if the turbine is keeping up with the compressors flow there is no reason to make it smaller.. You always have to match the turbine to the compressor because it can be too big or too small..

Mike

[BrianMN]

Originally Posted by Penn999

FOR ROUGHLY $4K!! Sorry man, thats not worth it for me.

What a joke. This is the guy that just bought 3" straight pipe for $2k, and who is going to spend $15k for the HPP single turbo kit making wayyyy more power. And waving as he blows by you.

Different strokes I guess...