New FP White turbo
Jul 2, 2008, 06:13 AM
#241
Its like alot of threads they get posted up with out all of the information. I reckon i can vouch for 90% of people on this thread are interested in stock turbo upgrading and quite rightly myself included will not make a decision until the correct dyno results are posted!
FP White vs Stock IX vs Fp Green (all overlayed on one dyno sheet)
This is one of the main reasons why threads have so many replies! As above we are 17 pages deep and still haven't had the simple question answered!
If you paid 1 mechanic a day or two you could carry out the above test and you'd probably have mine and 4 other members orders by now! the main reason why people like me haven't bought there upgrade turbo yet is because we can be sure which version to go for and is there a red coming out? you probably have 100's of PM's asking the same questions why not save yourself the bother & carry out the test.
cheers
FP White vs Stock IX vs Fp Green (all overlayed on one dyno sheet)
This is one of the main reasons why threads have so many replies! As above we are 17 pages deep and still haven't had the simple question answered!
If you paid 1 mechanic a day or two you could carry out the above test and you'd probably have mine and 4 other members orders by now! the main reason why people like me haven't bought there upgrade turbo yet is because we can be sure which version to go for and is there a red coming out? you probably have 100's of PM's asking the same questions why not save yourself the bother & carry out the test.
cheers
Jul 2, 2008, 06:50 AM
#242
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: McKinney TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'choke' limitations are based on exducer tip speed, once a certain empirically discovered (many many decades ago) speed is reached and exceeded, flow goes flat, and turbine pressure (power needed to drive it) takes a jump. This critical speed is well above transonic but below Mach 2 (temperature corrected), regardless if the compressor is a 45 trim or 65 trim (inlet area). The larger the wheel the lower the RPM on the last RPM line on the comp map. There's a reason.
I don't know what the rules are for axial flow compressors.
Keep in mind the simplest and most accurate way to measure flow is a sharp-edged orifice device, which is a volume device and requires correction to a std. Different companies use different standards for whatever reason, but if you convert it to mass flow they're directly comparable.
Another thing- y'all shouldn't get too concerned of the 'efficiency' numbers in the center of the comp map, because the majority of you boost junkies spend about zero time on the map, you're either above it or on the right off the page somewhere on the smaller units. And people like Tom and them bad-*** boys in Puerto Rico are never on the page from 2 step to finish line.
I don't know what the rules are for axial flow compressors.
Keep in mind the simplest and most accurate way to measure flow is a sharp-edged orifice device, which is a volume device and requires correction to a std. Different companies use different standards for whatever reason, but if you convert it to mass flow they're directly comparable.
Another thing- y'all shouldn't get too concerned of the 'efficiency' numbers in the center of the comp map, because the majority of you boost junkies spend about zero time on the map, you're either above it or on the right off the page somewhere on the smaller units. And people like Tom and them bad-*** boys in Puerto Rico are never on the page from 2 step to finish line.
I disagree
There is a reason why compressor flow maps are printed in reference to "corrected airflow." These airflow corrections are based on various standardized atmospheric conditions. Garret, if I recall correctly, uses a standardized atmosphere of 13.95 PSIA and 85 degrees for all of there compressor flow maps. Mistubishi on the other hand uses something like 14.3 PSI and 75 degrees.
I believe turbines are VOLUME based and not mass based pumps. This can also be reinforced by some of the basic equations that govern isotropic turbines.
When you are pushing the maximum airflow of a turbo, you are choking the inlet due to airspeed and not mass flow. Hence the reason why inlet conditions become very relevant in this type of testing.
This is the way I understand it. I'm very interested in another perspective on this though.
There is a reason why compressor flow maps are printed in reference to "corrected airflow." These airflow corrections are based on various standardized atmospheric conditions. Garret, if I recall correctly, uses a standardized atmosphere of 13.95 PSIA and 85 degrees for all of there compressor flow maps. Mistubishi on the other hand uses something like 14.3 PSI and 75 degrees.
I believe turbines are VOLUME based and not mass based pumps. This can also be reinforced by some of the basic equations that govern isotropic turbines.
When you are pushing the maximum airflow of a turbo, you are choking the inlet due to airspeed and not mass flow. Hence the reason why inlet conditions become very relevant in this type of testing.
This is the way I understand it. I'm very interested in another perspective on this though.
Last edited by GrocMax; Jul 2, 2008 at 06:53 AM.
Jul 2, 2008, 06:59 AM
#243
...
Another thing- y'all shouldn't get too concerned of the 'efficiency' numbers in the center of the comp map, because the majority of you boost junkies spend about zero time on the map, you're either above it or on the right off the page somewhere on the smaller units. And people like Tom and them bad-*** boys in Puerto Rico are never on the page from 2 step to finish line.
Another thing- y'all shouldn't get too concerned of the 'efficiency' numbers in the center of the comp map, because the majority of you boost junkies spend about zero time on the map, you're either above it or on the right off the page somewhere on the smaller units. And people like Tom and them bad-*** boys in Puerto Rico are never on the page from 2 step to finish line.
And will probably continue to do the same,...thank you very much. The car is coming together nicely. Soon, very soon.
Jul 2, 2008, 07:03 AM
#244
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: McKinney TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Completely stock engine with exception of some early prototype FP4R cams, head studs. BR IC and lower IC pipe, STOCK upper IC pipes. STOCK turbo inlet hose w/85mm MAF. M800. Works O2 hsg and 3" exhaust. Stock drivetrain and street tires, no lightened components. Oh, and an Exedy twin disc, because Robert has a retarded left foot 
***** boost and ***** timing (no knock control), its a Joe Everybody car, not a ringer.
***** boost and ***** timing (no knock control), its a Joe Everybody car, not a ringer.
Last edited by GrocMax; Jul 2, 2008 at 07:08 AM.
Jul 2, 2008, 07:23 AM
#245
Completely stock engine with exception of some early prototype FP4R cams, head studs. BR IC and lower IC pipe, STOCK upper IC pipes. STOCK turbo inlet hose w/85mm MAF. M800. Works O2 hsg and 3" exhaust. Stock drivetrain and street tires, no lightened components. Oh, and an Exedy twin disc, because Robert has a retarded left foot
***** boost and ***** timing (no knock control), its a Joe Everybody car, not a ringer.
***** boost and ***** timing (no knock control), its a Joe Everybody car, not a ringer.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...5&#post2064945
Jul 2, 2008, 07:36 AM
#246
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WALES
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude I hear you but you have to realize, The latest and greatest only stays that way 'til something better comes along. If you have the mindset that whatever turbo you choose will be the best on the market forever than you are just kidding yourself. To go around blasting the guys for not providing a test that's suitable for you is petty. FP did'nt start this thread, it was not the product release thread it has turned out to be. When it's in the cards for them to release their test data I believe they will do so. But in the meantime be patient.
Jul 2, 2008, 08:30 AM
#249
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Thornton CO
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And don't forget guys, FP does do more then just make the evo green and white lol it might not seem like asking much to have 1 car test 3 turbos in a row, but they're probably 80+ orders back on greens, producing whites, all the htas, cams, not to mention all the turbos for several other cars. I think people tend to forget FP doesn't cater solely to the evolution and evom. They're busy, be happyRobert even came to a non official thread, conformed the white, gave some specs AND gave us a dyno sheet on the first page.
Jul 2, 2008, 08:35 AM
#251
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: McKinney TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(Vonnegut mode:ON)
LISTEN UP-
(Vonnegut mode:OFF)
This turbo is intended for people who need response and a low boost threshold, such as those who autocross, club rally, tight course road race or hillclimb or other similar applications. It works better than the factory 1580 at higher PR's, but is NOT intended to supersede the green or other larger flow rate turbine units that are more suitable for high RPM applications like open road course or drag racing. In reality there is a limited proper intended application for this turbo. If your needs don't fit, don't buy it.
We DID NOT TRY to get the max HP out of it on the dyno trip. It was a very 'Joe Average' setup. Boost started at 22PSI and fell off to a little over 20PSI up top. Timing was conservative- THERE IS NO KNOCK CONTROL ON THE CAR, and it has been this way for ~8000 miles. The car was driven an hour plus thru traffic and thrown on the rollers with no cooldown. When we publish dyno runs of our cars they are replicatable results that can be achieved by anyone, not ringer max HP runs. You should be able to do better than us.
We prefer that any max HP numbers be published by independent sources, therein lies the proof that results can be replicated. We've tested stuff to death long before it gets a mass release and know what it is capable of, but its up to the consumers to prove it beyond a doubt.
LISTEN UP-
(Vonnegut mode:OFF)
This turbo is intended for people who need response and a low boost threshold, such as those who autocross, club rally, tight course road race or hillclimb or other similar applications. It works better than the factory 1580 at higher PR's, but is NOT intended to supersede the green or other larger flow rate turbine units that are more suitable for high RPM applications like open road course or drag racing. In reality there is a limited proper intended application for this turbo. If your needs don't fit, don't buy it.
We DID NOT TRY to get the max HP out of it on the dyno trip. It was a very 'Joe Average' setup. Boost started at 22PSI and fell off to a little over 20PSI up top. Timing was conservative- THERE IS NO KNOCK CONTROL ON THE CAR, and it has been this way for ~8000 miles. The car was driven an hour plus thru traffic and thrown on the rollers with no cooldown. When we publish dyno runs of our cars they are replicatable results that can be achieved by anyone, not ringer max HP runs. You should be able to do better than us.
We prefer that any max HP numbers be published by independent sources, therein lies the proof that results can be replicated. We've tested stuff to death long before it gets a mass release and know what it is capable of, but its up to the consumers to prove it beyond a doubt.
Last edited by GrocMax; Jul 2, 2008 at 08:53 AM.
Jul 2, 2008, 08:46 AM
#252
The 'choke' limitations are based on exducer tip speed...There's a reason.
I don't know what the rules are for axial flow compressors.
Keep in mind the simplest and most accurate way to measure flow is a sharp-edged orifice device, which is a volume device and requires correction to a std. Different companies use different standards for whatever reason, but if you convert it to mass flow they're directly comparable.
Another thing... from 2 step to finish line.
I don't know what the rules are for axial flow compressors.
Keep in mind the simplest and most accurate way to measure flow is a sharp-edged orifice device, which is a volume device and requires correction to a std. Different companies use different standards for whatever reason, but if you convert it to mass flow they're directly comparable.
Another thing... from 2 step to finish line.
I definitely see what you are saying. However, why is it that two compressor wheels with the same exducer diameter can have considerably different maximum flow limits? Is there a balance where a smaller trim compressor reaches a point where inlet velocity becomes so high that the inlet becomes the restriction and not the compressor tip speed?
Take for example the T04E series wheels. I choose the T04E wheels simply because they all have the same exducer diameter of 3.0”. Below are the various flow limits and shaft speeds for the varying trims of compressor wheels.
40-trim = ~38 lb/min 120,000 RPM
46-trim = ~42 lb/min 120,000 RPM
50-trim = ~48 lb/min 120,000 RPM
60-trim = ~54 lb/min 120,000 RPM
I would include the 54-trim and the 57-trim, however, I'm having trouble finding compressor flow maps with shaft speeds of these two wheels. I also realize I'm not looking at engineering compressor flow maps but sales literature so it may not be entirely accurate. I would imagine its close enough though?
If you plot out the corrected airflow with respect to inlet area, it is a fairly linear relationship. On these particular wheels, it equates to roughly 13.1 lb/min of airflow per square inch on inlet area. A linear curve isn't a perfect fit, but it does provide an R^2 value of 0.96 which is reasonably decent. The real outlier is the 50 trim, which happens to flow roughly 13.4 lb/min per square inch of inlet area. This is interesting considering the proven strength of the 50-trim over the other T04E compressor wheels.
This is contrary to what you are saying. If tip speed was the limiting factor, I would expect to see the above 4 compressor wheels choke at the same airflow. This obviously is not the case. Running the numbers though, I can also see that the inlet velocity is ~0.37 mach. If the inlet velocity was the limiting factor, I would expect this number to be closer to the speed of sound, as that’s typically when the air starts having more issues, just as a general rule of thumb. Then again, 0.3 mach is where airflow can no longer be treated as incompressible flow from a fluid dynamics standpoint and does represent a significant number.
I can see a second dimension here though that has been left unmentioned. The tip height at the exducer is likely not a constant between all four wheels. This would essentially mean that the tip velocity could be the limiting factor and simply the added airflow can be accounted for in the increase in exducer flow area due to the higher tip height? This however is information that is not readily available to me, so I am just guessing that the tip height varies between these 4 wheels. I’m well aware of your knowledge, Scott, and I’m sure I and others can learn an almost endless amount from you. Maybe you can shine some light on this for me? Does the exducer flow area vary with these wheels and does it vary is a fairly linear fashion? If the inlet velocity is not the limiting factor, why do all 4 wheels seem to be designed to have a maximum inlet velocity of ~0.4mach?
Sorry for making it so long. As for the last part of your post, I agree 100%. I live at 4500’ with typical density altitude of 10,000' in the summer. I’m very interested in what compressor wheels can do at maximum shaft speed and pressure ratio. Honestly, regardless of how the white performs at sea level, I can almost quarantee it is going to be a great turbo at altitude. You really don't need the large turbine at high altitude because the compressor almost always becomes the limiting factor first.
Last edited by 03whitegsr; Jul 2, 2008 at 08:51 AM.
Jul 2, 2008, 09:04 AM
#253
"If any of you think that you can do an AEM tune up as good as Tym Switzer, you should have taken the blue pill from Morphious and woke up back in your bed instead of following the rabbit down the hole. We went to Tym because he has always been the guy that leaves NOTHING on the table when it comes to make power."
That infuriated me when I first read it because it was so inconsistent with prior statements promoting the turbo and the results on "stock cams", etc., and I haven't forgotten it. Now you are saying that your White numbers are not ringer max HP runs and we should expect to do better. I'll believe it when I see it.
Jul 2, 2008, 09:38 AM
#254
Well a bunch of people have already ordered it up. If they aren't to embarrassed with the results we should be seeing some real world dynos soon.
Then again flipping dyno numbers don't mean jack. I'd like to see WHITE people (lol) running high 11s on pump gas at 23 psi. That would be better proof to me.
I'm still leaning towards a Green or the next generation of it. I see no reason to go through the trouble of an upgrade for gains less than 50whp.
Then again flipping dyno numbers don't mean jack. I'd like to see WHITE people (lol) running high 11s on pump gas at 23 psi. That would be better proof to me.
I'm still leaning towards a Green or the next generation of it. I see no reason to go through the trouble of an upgrade for gains less than 50whp.
Jul 2, 2008, 10:06 AM
#255
*grabs coke to wash down mcdonald's fries*
i def understand the rank of turbos out now which would be something like
1. evo8 stocker
2. 2005 stocker
3. evo9 stocker
4. NEW FP WHITE RABBIT
5. fp green/50 trim
6. 30R
7. 3065
8. 35R
9. etc
BUT it seems like the "crowd" wont be happy until someone compares it to a green or evo9 at the SAME boost level with a car with the SAME mods. In a perfect world that would be great, but in reality that may not happen anytime soon. Remember this isnt evens FP's thread.
Secondly with that being said, i think that this is a good upgrade for anyone on a stock evo8 turbo period. OR for those who want to go full bolt-on but will never run meth or race gas to properly push the green. HOWEVER Im not sure if this will be a "GREAT" investment for those who currently have an evo9 turbo?!?
HOPEFULLY, when FP makes their announcement in their OWN post, they will have two full bolt-on evos, same dyno, same day, same psi (21-23), same octane. One equipped with a WHITE and the other a GREEN. Really there is no need to test anyother turbo in that mix. Also there is no other need to test at a higher psi. We all not what an maxed out evo9 turbo can do as well as a properly set up Green.
Just my .02 but eitherway I understand that this should be sold as the, "everyday person's turbo that is designed for pump, 20-23psi, and just so happens to work well if your are an autocrosser". Anything else i think would be misleading.
-L8R
i def understand the rank of turbos out now which would be something like
1. evo8 stocker
2. 2005 stocker
3. evo9 stocker
4. NEW FP WHITE RABBIT
5. fp green/50 trim
6. 30R
7. 3065
8. 35R
9. etc
BUT it seems like the "crowd" wont be happy until someone compares it to a green or evo9 at the SAME boost level with a car with the SAME mods. In a perfect world that would be great, but in reality that may not happen anytime soon. Remember this isnt evens FP's thread.
Secondly with that being said, i think that this is a good upgrade for anyone on a stock evo8 turbo period. OR for those who want to go full bolt-on but will never run meth or race gas to properly push the green. HOWEVER Im not sure if this will be a "GREAT" investment for those who currently have an evo9 turbo?!?
HOPEFULLY, when FP makes their announcement in their OWN post, they will have two full bolt-on evos, same dyno, same day, same psi (21-23), same octane. One equipped with a WHITE and the other a GREEN. Really there is no need to test anyother turbo in that mix. Also there is no other need to test at a higher psi. We all not what an maxed out evo9 turbo can do as well as a properly set up Green.
Just my .02 but eitherway I understand that this should be sold as the, "everyday person's turbo that is designed for pump, 20-23psi, and just so happens to work well if your are an autocrosser". Anything else i think would be misleading.
-L8R
Last edited by PsychDr. HN$; Jul 2, 2008 at 10:15 AM.