Best Turbo Set Up for Pump Gas and Alky?
Aug 8, 2005, 05:24 PM
#16
Originally Posted by wingless
if you got the loot to do a 2.3L gt35r, I would consider a built 2.0 with a Evo400 turbo as well (TME+BB center section).
Depends if you want to rule street/autoX/smaller tracks.... Or... big track and drags?
Depends if you want to rule street/autoX/smaller tracks.... Or... big track and drags?
Aug 8, 2005, 09:14 PM
#17
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.3 or 2.4 with a properly built GT35R kit. This is what we are back running again in our shop. We are in the process of building the ultimate daily driver. 550WHP on pump gas and 700whp on race gas. This is with our 2.4 GT35R set up we love so much.
Aug 8, 2005, 10:18 PM
#18
Originally Posted by RnR Racing
2.3 or 2.4 with a properly built GT35R kit. This is what we are back running again in our shop. We are in the process of building the ultimate daily driver. 550WHP on pump gas and 700whp on race gas. This is with our 2.4 GT35R set up we love so much.
1) how would this set up perform at 7000ft above sea level?
2) what would spool up be like?
3) is 550whp on pump gas and alky? or just pump gas? i believe you guys get 91oct also, so results would be very similar.
the only concern i have right now is spool and drivability up here. is the car you are talking about running an aem? i am not going to run an aem due to the fact that there are no experienced tuners around where i live, so i am leaning towards the utec as the best alternative, can you recommend any?
Aug 8, 2005, 10:21 PM
#19
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure it would be laggier at 7000ft, but can't give you an hard facts on it because we haven't tested it at elevation.
Down here it spools very quick and makes so much torque that the last thing you are worried about is where it is getting full boost. We are getting it around 3800-4000rpm.
Down here it spools very quick and makes so much torque that the last thing you are worried about is where it is getting full boost. We are getting it around 3800-4000rpm.
Aug 8, 2005, 10:22 PM
#20
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: char, NC
Posts: 1,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TwStDeVo
i am looking for ultimate street performance, there are no tracks around where i live and no gas stations with race fuel. i mostly race from 40mph rolls and standstill drag races. these are the reasons i am looking for the best set up for pump gas and alky.
Bigger turbo's are meant to shine on race gas and high boost. It is easier to achieve this with high octane race gas than (91)pump and alky. Don't go too big on the turbo unless you're going to use it.
Unless you plan on building the head, engine, and all the supporting mods to take advantage of higher boost levels of the bigger turbo I would stick with the TME or 20G. A build like that could cost in the area of $10,000+ for the build.
What are your horsepower goals?
Aug 8, 2005, 10:24 PM
#22
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: char, NC
Posts: 1,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RnR Racing
550whp on 91 octane and alky. We are using an AEM EMS.
Last edited by EVOONYOASS; Aug 8, 2005 at 10:26 PM.
Aug 8, 2005, 10:30 PM
#23
my goal is 500-550whp, i know the 20g would not get that high but i want power that can be used. by this i mean, with 550whp, if i cannot get any performance due to things like traction and need for drag radials, then its not worth it. i want the best street set up for racing on street tires like the stock advans or falken 615s. the most imporant part for racing is being able to launch off the line and performance from 40mph rolls. i would like to be able to beat cars like supercharged mustangs, cameros, stock z06's etc. the main thing that is making this decision so hard is the elevation factor.
Aug 8, 2005, 10:35 PM
#24
Originally Posted by RnR Racing
550whp on 91 octane and alky. We are using an AEM EMS.
also, i should expect a 15-20% delay in spool, is this set up still worth it?
Aug 9, 2005, 05:19 AM
#25
Originally Posted by TwStDeVo
...1) how would this set up perform at 7000ft above sea level?
http://www.geospectra.net/kite/weather/h_altit.htm
What this means is that at an altitude of 6000' ASL (Santa Fe is 7000', ABQ is 5300'), there is only 83.6% of the air density available at sea level. In rough terms, this means that a 2000cc engine at that altitude is only moving as much air mass as a 1672cc at sea level. Try putting a GT35R on a 1672cc engine at sea level, and you may be fairly disappointed in the spool characteristics. Also, trying to get 550whp at 7000' is MUCH more difficult because again, you're trying to get that type of power from what will effectively be the equivalent of an engine even slightly smaller than 1672cc if you're at 7000'ASL.
At 6000', a 2300cc engine is more like a 1922cc, and a 2400cc engine behaves more like a 2000cc.
This should provide a bit of perspective on what to expect, and given that, I'd advise staying at the smaller end of the spectrum if you want good spool characteristics.
Last edited by Ted B; Aug 9, 2005 at 05:23 AM.
Aug 9, 2005, 08:40 AM
#26
Originally Posted by Ted B
Consider the air density table here:
http://www.geospectra.net/kite/weather/h_altit.htm
What this means is that at an altitude of 6000' ASL (Santa Fe is 7000', ABQ is 5300'), there is only 83.6% of the air density available at sea level. In rough terms, this means that a 2000cc engine at that altitude is only moving as much air mass as a 1672cc at sea level. Try putting a GT35R on a 1672cc engine at sea level, and you may be fairly disappointed in the spool characteristics. Also, trying to get 550whp at 7000' is MUCH more difficult because again, you're trying to get that type of power from what will effectively be the equivalent of an engine even slightly smaller than 1672cc if you're at 7000'ASL.
At 6000', a 2300cc engine is more like a 1922cc, and a 2400cc engine behaves more like a 2000cc.
This should provide a bit of perspective on what to expect, and given that, I'd advise staying at the smaller end of the spectrum if you want good spool characteristics.
http://www.geospectra.net/kite/weather/h_altit.htm
What this means is that at an altitude of 6000' ASL (Santa Fe is 7000', ABQ is 5300'), there is only 83.6% of the air density available at sea level. In rough terms, this means that a 2000cc engine at that altitude is only moving as much air mass as a 1672cc at sea level. Try putting a GT35R on a 1672cc engine at sea level, and you may be fairly disappointed in the spool characteristics. Also, trying to get 550whp at 7000' is MUCH more difficult because again, you're trying to get that type of power from what will effectively be the equivalent of an engine even slightly smaller than 1672cc if you're at 7000'ASL.
At 6000', a 2300cc engine is more like a 1922cc, and a 2400cc engine behaves more like a 2000cc.
This should provide a bit of perspective on what to expect, and given that, I'd advise staying at the smaller end of the spectrum if you want good spool characteristics.
so the 35r would basically be useless on both the 2.0 and 2.3? turbo spool makes this decision difficult because im not expecting to be able to have boost all of the time like the stocker, i just want it when i need it, which is standstill racing and 40mph rolls, the rolls are no problem because i would be above 5000rpm in all gears, its just the stand still racing. sometimes it seems like it would be nice not having boost at such a low rpm like the stocker because driving in the city can waste alot of gas and provide horrible gas milege when it was unecessary to have all that boost.
from the most part, it seems like everyone is saying stay with the smaller 20g. i just want the most performance i can get up here, so if the 20g is the limit then i guess i might just have to go the route. if anyone thinks different, please post.
Aug 9, 2005, 08:47 AM
#27
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wilmington NC/ Carolina Beach
Posts: 1,536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TwStDeVo
wow, that is a considerable amount of difference in spool. i want to stay away from the gt30 turbos since they only spool a little faster than the 35r but do not make as much power. i was looking at the 3076 but decided against it due to the fact that it would take 30psi or so to get around 475whp.
i figure the next best choice over the 35r, like many tuners are saying, is the stock turbo or something similar, which is why i am interested in seing how that buschur 20g turns out. your set up seems very nice, what do you think it would have made (power wise) if you tuned it on 91oct and methanol? is a 2.3 better than a built 2.0 at this altitude? btw, cant wait to see how the new set up turns out!
i figure the next best choice over the 35r, like many tuners are saying, is the stock turbo or something similar, which is why i am interested in seing how that buschur 20g turns out. your set up seems very nice, what do you think it would have made (power wise) if you tuned it on 91oct and methanol? is a 2.3 better than a built 2.0 at this altitude? btw, cant wait to see how the new set up turns out!
Aug 9, 2005, 08:52 AM
#28
Originally Posted by Kwman
Very good post my friend. The crossroad you are at right now is along the same lines as mine as far as progress goes. If the money is not a problem go with a 2.3 and the 35r, that will be overkill. If the money is an issue the white rabbit, stock with 10.5, or the TME, will be fine for your needs and it will be a BLAST to drive. The car will have a completely different character if you stick with the 2.0 and get a 35r your car will be playing catch up untill the later rpms where it will spool and the gates of hell will open. Keep it simple and get a 10.5 on your stocker untill the money becomes available for the larger set-up and motor. At least...thats my take on the situation. Either way, your car is going be a blast.
i agree with you totally. the only factor that is messing everything up is this elevation. the 2.3 35r would be awesome, but at this elevation i would still see a delay in spool, maybe 4500rpm or so. plus, im not sure if running the 2.3 35r on just pump and alky is worth spending the extra money. i figure the best thing is to hope for numerous people on this site to provide their opinions from knowledge and experience.
on a side not, i just wanted to thank everyone for their responses!! keep them comming!!!
Aug 9, 2005, 08:56 AM
#29
Originally Posted by TwStDeVo
so the 35r would basically be useless on both the 2.0 and 2.3? turbo spool makes this decision difficult because im not expecting to be able to have boost all of the time like the stocker...
Personally, I think you'll have more fun with the car with a smaller turbo, quicker spool, and a larger usable powerband.
Aug 9, 2005, 09:19 AM
#30
Originally Posted by Ted B
"Useless" is a matter of perspective, but at your altitude, a GT35R will spool slower on a 2.3 than a 2.0 at sea level. This is because at 7000', a 2.3 moves only as much as does a 1.8 at sea level. In other words, the powerband is going to be very short.
Personally, I think you'll have more fun with the car with a smaller turbo, quicker spool, and a larger usable powerband.
Personally, I think you'll have more fun with the car with a smaller turbo, quicker spool, and a larger usable powerband.
this is what seems to be the best alternative. thanks for providing helpful facts and explaination for your answer. i guess at this elevation, there IS no replacement for displacement.
on a side note, maybe it would have been better to get a car that had a larger engine and turbo. Check this car out:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=152851
the widebody would be very nice with high hp. i know the car has a lot of miles, but i just really love the look! more of an explaination in the thread.