TURBOS GT42R Vs T51R KAI PLUS FUEL
Dec 26, 2006, 05:25 PM
#76
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not going to argue this, it's a fact. Please contact any reputable engine builder or turbo company and they will tell you the same thing.
Dec 26, 2006, 05:25 PM
#77
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shep is in the 1400whp range now (with a filled block and Eagle crank), and was known to go most of a season in the 1200whp range before freshening up his motor (he also ran a stock block and stock crank). That being said, look at what he had going when he still ran a H-gate trans. He went many race weekends on the same trans, replacing the clutch every 10-15 passes. Most shops were running a second slower and replacing their transmissions every other pass. He has his car down to a science, he wouldn't be the quickest AWD car in the world otherwise.
Dec 26, 2006, 05:29 PM
#78
No it wont. If a small motor can max out a turbo, that same turbo on a larger motor is not going to make any more horsepower. The torque will be differant, but that's it.
I'm not going to argue this, it's a fact. Please contact any reputable engine builder or turbo company and they will tell you the same thing.
I'm not going to argue this, it's a fact. Please contact any reputable engine builder or turbo company and they will tell you the same thing.
Your still wrong. Peak horsepower will be different.
Dec 26, 2006, 05:47 PM
#80
Unless you can show me or explain to me why i wont need to. Since you know more.
Its not that complicated.
* so you have a 3037 or some middle sized turbo that evo's use and lets say (maybe wrong just using simple numbers) maxes out at 450. 2.0 engine with 3037 = 450 (and its rated for 450 so its maxed out) Now take a 5.0 American engine, pick any one that potentially makes about 450 stock or will little or no work. Then add the same turbo , this is where your telling me nothing happens.
Your basically telling me turbos can read horsepower. *
Displacement is always going to make more power.
Last edited by Jean; Dec 26, 2006 at 05:55 PM.
Dec 26, 2006, 06:04 PM
#81
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spose I should have said efficiently, a larger motor will make more power, but not 50% more like the original post said that I responded to. A larger motor is capable of spooling the turbo faster than a smaller motor, however its going to get to a point where it's blowing hot air and not worth it. So to a point you were right, but not nearly as much as was originally said by another member.
Now with the example you used, the motor without the turbo is already flowing enough air to make 450hp, by putting a turbo that flows enough air to also make 450hp, is going to add some power, but it's not going to be efficient, so nothing crazy. It's not like your adding the turbo's power to the motors power. That was what I was saying originally. The turbo can only spin so fast, so when you get to that point, a huge motor cant make it efficiently spin any faster to make it worth it.
So, yes you are right to a point, and I'm right to a point. Is that fair?
Now with the example you used, the motor without the turbo is already flowing enough air to make 450hp, by putting a turbo that flows enough air to also make 450hp, is going to add some power, but it's not going to be efficient, so nothing crazy. It's not like your adding the turbo's power to the motors power. That was what I was saying originally. The turbo can only spin so fast, so when you get to that point, a huge motor cant make it efficiently spin any faster to make it worth it.
So, yes you are right to a point, and I'm right to a point. Is that fair?
Last edited by Frenchy4g63; Dec 26, 2006 at 06:33 PM.
Dec 26, 2006, 07:26 PM
#82
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about you spend some money and find out yourself i told you in my reply its all in the displacement and car.
Ive seen many evos with 35Rs laying down 400-600 whp on V8 and up motors ive seen a single 35R turbo lay down 400-800whp it all depends on suporting mods and car.
Dec 26, 2006, 07:29 PM
#83
I spose I should have said efficiently, a larger motor will make more power, but not 50% more like the original post said that I responded to. A larger motor is capable of spooling the turbo faster than a smaller motor, however its going to get to a point where it's blowing hot air and not worth it. So to a point you were right, but not nearly as much as was originally said by another member.
Now with the example you used, the motor without the turbo is already flowing enough air to make 450hp, by putting a turbo that flows enough air to also make 450hp, is going to add some power, but it's not going to be efficient, so nothing crazy. It's not like your adding the turbo's power to the motors power. That was what I was saying originally. The turbo can only spin so fast, so when you get to that point, a huge motor cant make it efficiently spin any faster to make it worth it.
So, yes you are right to a point, and I'm right to a point. Is that fair?
Now with the example you used, the motor without the turbo is already flowing enough air to make 450hp, by putting a turbo that flows enough air to also make 450hp, is going to add some power, but it's not going to be efficient, so nothing crazy. It's not like your adding the turbo's power to the motors power. That was what I was saying originally. The turbo can only spin so fast, so when you get to that point, a huge motor cant make it efficiently spin any faster to make it worth it.
So, yes you are right to a point, and I'm right to a point. Is that fair?
Well a turbo is a free willing spirit in a way. It can over spin its self if necessary at ease unlike a supercharger (supercharger totally off topic but w/e). So if it needs to over spin to fill up the chamber it can.
Going back to my example its almost like our cars in its stock form. (once agian im not using exact #'s or anything just for arguments sake) we get a small turbo which out engines can get to spool up pretty quick, i think that example will be similar if ever tested but will not make 450 +450 = 900, I in no way ment that. But will make a lot of extra torque prob more than horsepower. Due to the displacement and etc...
However i do get your point
.
Dec 26, 2006, 07:34 PM
#84
I think it sucks when we max out turbo's after spending x amount of dollars and raise the boost on the dyno and make no more power.
I guess it comes with the territory. But the look on one of those muscle car owners faces after getting DESTROYED by a 4 cyl. 2.0L (2.3L in my case) = PRICELESS.
Dec 26, 2006, 08:13 PM
#85
Evolved Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about you spend some money and find out yourself i told you in my reply its all in the displacement and car.
Ive seen many evos with 35Rs laying down 400-600 whp on V8 and up motors ive seen a single 35R turbo lay down 400-800whp it all depends on suporting mods and car.
Ive seen many evos with 35Rs laying down 400-600 whp on V8 and up motors ive seen a single 35R turbo lay down 400-800whp it all depends on suporting mods and car.
Last edited by Frenchy4g63; Dec 26, 2006 at 09:55 PM.
Dec 26, 2006, 10:42 PM
#86
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CYPRUS
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen on dyno two evos one 2.0L(half mm oversized) and second 2.2L with the same turbo GT40 and almost same mods and the 2.2L runed max up to 850hp on 2,3psi boost 9.200rpm and 2.0L runed max up to 900hp on 2,2psi boost 9.500rpm.The third thow with a GT42R 2.0L engine run max up to 800whp on 3,4psi and 9.500rpm with same mods as above only without crankshaft and now by changing into a billet crank goal is 1000whp.
