New FP White turbo
Jul 2, 2008, 07:17 PM
#271
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: McKinney TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That wasn't our car, we had no control or data. I don't even know what the boost curve looked like. Subsequently others duplicated it, but it took time, it made everyone else push harder to catch up with Tym. He caught a lot of crap for that, but once again everyone else worked harder till they caught up. Look at what people are doing with stock 1580's now. And its not because they are getting them to magically flow 10 more lb/min of air, they are making better use of the air.
I'm not sure if you're directly trying to compare an EVO8 to an EVO9 or what, there are enough differences between the stock turbos and the MIVEC and other minor changes that this is somewhat iffy. I'd have to look it up but I recall the 2.0L EVO8 car I did have WR data on as being a little less HP than this (I recall 360-365 peak) at slightly higher boost, and it had cams, all IC pipes, an IC.
A gasoline engine of this type is going to make between 9-11 HP at the crank per lb/min airflow. A very well put together one will be higher. This is an average setup, maybe even below average. A very well thought out chassis will be even higher, reduction of acceleration losses counts. This is a basically stock chassis. What Joe Average will make for a peak HP number is sometimes hard to predict.
The 1580 is a rockin' little turbo. There are measurable differences between the 1580 and the WR and this one. The 1580 was designed for the factory boost curve, but still does a good job at higher PR's. These were designed to work better at higher PR's, and they do. If you run at lower PR's it probably makes more difference what the temp is than what turbo is in it, until you significantly reduce the exhaust pressure or some other factor that attributes to engine power.
I'm not sure if you're directly trying to compare an EVO8 to an EVO9 or what, there are enough differences between the stock turbos and the MIVEC and other minor changes that this is somewhat iffy. I'd have to look it up but I recall the 2.0L EVO8 car I did have WR data on as being a little less HP than this (I recall 360-365 peak) at slightly higher boost, and it had cams, all IC pipes, an IC.
A gasoline engine of this type is going to make between 9-11 HP at the crank per lb/min airflow. A very well put together one will be higher. This is an average setup, maybe even below average. A very well thought out chassis will be even higher, reduction of acceleration losses counts. This is a basically stock chassis. What Joe Average will make for a peak HP number is sometimes hard to predict.
The 1580 is a rockin' little turbo. There are measurable differences between the 1580 and the WR and this one. The 1580 was designed for the factory boost curve, but still does a good job at higher PR's. These were designed to work better at higher PR's, and they do. If you run at lower PR's it probably makes more difference what the temp is than what turbo is in it, until you significantly reduce the exhaust pressure or some other factor that attributes to engine power.
Jul 2, 2008, 07:33 PM
#272
Just going off the charts available. No idea how the setups compare.
For all I know, the Green could be on a nasty 10:1 motor on alcohol and open exhaust to spool sooner. I was just looking at the Green chart on your website and the green is sitting at 350 ft/lb around the same time this white is hitting 300 ft/lb.
I guess that's why I am hoping for an stock IX, the white, and the green all on the same car and dyno with the same tuner pushing all three to the limits. Max power/torque on all three and see how the curves compare.
I say this with the idea that I have an IX turbo on the way and am trying to decide between a white and a green upgrade within the next few months.
For all I know, the Green could be on a nasty 10:1 motor on alcohol and open exhaust to spool sooner. I was just looking at the Green chart on your website and the green is sitting at 350 ft/lb around the same time this white is hitting 300 ft/lb.
I guess that's why I am hoping for an stock IX, the white, and the green all on the same car and dyno with the same tuner pushing all three to the limits. Max power/torque on all three and see how the curves compare.
I say this with the idea that I have an IX turbo on the way and am trying to decide between a white and a green upgrade within the next few months.
Jul 2, 2008, 07:41 PM
#273
That wasn't our car, we had no control or data. I don't even know what the boost curve looked like. Subsequently others duplicated it, but it took time, it made everyone else push harder to catch up with Tym. He caught a lot of crap for that, but once again everyone else worked harder till they caught up. Look at what people are doing with stock 1580's now. And its not because they are getting them to magically flow 10 more lb/min of air, they are making better use of the air.
I'm not sure if you're directly trying to compare an EVO8 to an EVO9 or what, there are enough differences between the stock turbos and the MIVEC and other minor changes that this is somewhat iffy. I'd have to look it up but I recall the 2.0L EVO8 car I did have WR data on as being a little less HP than this (I recall 360-365 peak) at slightly higher boost, and it had cams, all IC pipes, an IC.
A gasoline engine of this type is going to make between 9-11 HP at the crank per lb/min airflow. A very well put together one will be higher. This is an average setup, maybe even below average. A very well thought out chassis will be even higher, reduction of acceleration losses counts. This is a basically stock chassis. What Joe Average will make for a peak HP number is sometimes hard to predict.
The 1580 is a rockin' little turbo. There are measurable differences between the 1580 and the WR and this one. The 1580 was designed for the factory boost curve, but still does a good job at higher PR's. These were designed to work better at higher PR's, and they do. If you run at lower PR's it probably makes more difference what the temp is than what turbo is in it, until you significantly reduce the exhaust pressure or some other factor that attributes to engine power.
I'm not sure if you're directly trying to compare an EVO8 to an EVO9 or what, there are enough differences between the stock turbos and the MIVEC and other minor changes that this is somewhat iffy. I'd have to look it up but I recall the 2.0L EVO8 car I did have WR data on as being a little less HP than this (I recall 360-365 peak) at slightly higher boost, and it had cams, all IC pipes, an IC.
A gasoline engine of this type is going to make between 9-11 HP at the crank per lb/min airflow. A very well put together one will be higher. This is an average setup, maybe even below average. A very well thought out chassis will be even higher, reduction of acceleration losses counts. This is a basically stock chassis. What Joe Average will make for a peak HP number is sometimes hard to predict.
The 1580 is a rockin' little turbo. There are measurable differences between the 1580 and the WR and this one. The 1580 was designed for the factory boost curve, but still does a good job at higher PR's. These were designed to work better at higher PR's, and they do. If you run at lower PR's it probably makes more difference what the temp is than what turbo is in it, until you significantly reduce the exhaust pressure or some other factor that attributes to engine power.
And thank you for the technical post prior.
I wish there was this kind of reveal of a given turbo system on a specific build car. It would be helpful, for instance, if FP posted something like this on their site for their (past and) present turbos.
Thanks again.
Jul 2, 2008, 08:23 PM
#274
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: kent wa
Posts: 4,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just going off the charts available. No idea how the setups compare.
For all I know, the Green could be on a nasty 10:1 motor on alcohol and open exhaust to spool sooner. I was just looking at the Green chart on your website and the green is sitting at 350 ft/lb around the same time this white is hitting 300 ft/lb.
I guess that's why I am hoping for an stock IX, the white, and the green all on the same car and dyno with the same tuner pushing all three to the limits. Max power/torque on all three and see how the curves compare.
I say this with the idea that I have an IX turbo on the way and am trying to decide between a white and a green upgrade within the next few months.
For all I know, the Green could be on a nasty 10:1 motor on alcohol and open exhaust to spool sooner. I was just looking at the Green chart on your website and the green is sitting at 350 ft/lb around the same time this white is hitting 300 ft/lb.
I guess that's why I am hoping for an stock IX, the white, and the green all on the same car and dyno with the same tuner pushing all three to the limits. Max power/torque on all three and see how the curves compare.
I say this with the idea that I have an IX turbo on the way and am trying to decide between a white and a green upgrade within the next few months.
+1
Jul 2, 2008, 08:32 PM
#275
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: McKinney TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a 10.5 hsg and in fact when we swapped back and forth between the two (1580 and this unit) used the same factory cut 10.5 exh hsg. I couldn't see any significant difference in spool threshold or response between the white and the 1580 under controlled conditions, its hard to compare dyno graphs and come to any conclusion due to variances in load, start speed, etc. The WR and Green are a little behind on spool.
An increase in inlet area would reduce losses, BUT there are a bunch of compromises involved- in general lower trim #'s make more PR, and with smaller AR housings even more PR for a conventionally mapped unit (not overspeeded or run out the back door). If you look thru some of Garrett's published data you'll find comp wheels with the same aero and exducer but a smaller trim and smaller AR housing, look at the comp map- the small trim/small AR map looks 'pinched' at the top and goes to a MUCH higher PR, but has a slightly lower peak airflow. The newer 'extended tip' (or whatever the buzzword of the week is) aero's close the gap on the high PR or high flow compromise.
The 1580 is very very well thought out and hard to improve on. This project sort of started out on a lark as a "well, it shouldn't work but go get some data" deal. As it turned out this comp wheel required such as significant amount less shaft power to operate in the target areas and enough extra flow capacity that a very clear improvement was seen without sacrificing any spool or recovery. I could readily make the 1580 hit true surge with minimal warning (it feels/acts like fuel cut) where as this unit would presurge a bit but drive thru it.
1580 surge:
This is what true surge looks like. Notice there is very little presurge activity in the comp inlet pressure (CIP). The compressor inlet temp (CIT) and compressor outlet temp (COT) are in deg K, notice the jumps- these temp jumps coincide with the fuel cut-like bucking as the compressor stalls and backflows then restarts. The ticks on the time axis are .025 seconds, so the first buck lasted about .05 seconds. Notice the first buck was severe enough to make the TPS reading change. Note the turbo RPM crazyness as it tries to pump air that is no longer present. Note the airflow crazyness. Right before the surge begins it is riding juuuust to the right of the surge line on the 1580 comp map, and as surge occurs it jumps to the left side of the surge line.
Presurge is the condition where the inlet pressure will oscillate, and you may even be able to hear it, but none of the other symptoms show up.
We had to make our own temp sensor setup to get fast temp data, as you can see it is about as close to real time as we can get and still have some sensor reliability.
Oh, the comp inlet temp sensor is located next to the airflow element about 18" upstream of the comp inlet, you see the CIT is stable until the surge backflow occurs, then a bunch of hot air that came from the exducer side gets push all the way into the air filter then sucked back in when forward flow restarts and the temp then settles back down to normal again until the surge reoccurs. True surge is pretty violent and obvious when it happens.
An increase in inlet area would reduce losses, BUT there are a bunch of compromises involved- in general lower trim #'s make more PR, and with smaller AR housings even more PR for a conventionally mapped unit (not overspeeded or run out the back door). If you look thru some of Garrett's published data you'll find comp wheels with the same aero and exducer but a smaller trim and smaller AR housing, look at the comp map- the small trim/small AR map looks 'pinched' at the top and goes to a MUCH higher PR, but has a slightly lower peak airflow. The newer 'extended tip' (or whatever the buzzword of the week is) aero's close the gap on the high PR or high flow compromise.
The 1580 is very very well thought out and hard to improve on. This project sort of started out on a lark as a "well, it shouldn't work but go get some data" deal. As it turned out this comp wheel required such as significant amount less shaft power to operate in the target areas and enough extra flow capacity that a very clear improvement was seen without sacrificing any spool or recovery. I could readily make the 1580 hit true surge with minimal warning (it feels/acts like fuel cut) where as this unit would presurge a bit but drive thru it.
1580 surge:
This is what true surge looks like. Notice there is very little presurge activity in the comp inlet pressure (CIP). The compressor inlet temp (CIT) and compressor outlet temp (COT) are in deg K, notice the jumps- these temp jumps coincide with the fuel cut-like bucking as the compressor stalls and backflows then restarts. The ticks on the time axis are .025 seconds, so the first buck lasted about .05 seconds. Notice the first buck was severe enough to make the TPS reading change. Note the turbo RPM crazyness as it tries to pump air that is no longer present. Note the airflow crazyness. Right before the surge begins it is riding juuuust to the right of the surge line on the 1580 comp map, and as surge occurs it jumps to the left side of the surge line.
Presurge is the condition where the inlet pressure will oscillate, and you may even be able to hear it, but none of the other symptoms show up.
We had to make our own temp sensor setup to get fast temp data, as you can see it is about as close to real time as we can get and still have some sensor reliability.
Oh, the comp inlet temp sensor is located next to the airflow element about 18" upstream of the comp inlet, you see the CIT is stable until the surge backflow occurs, then a bunch of hot air that came from the exducer side gets push all the way into the air filter then sucked back in when forward flow restarts and the temp then settles back down to normal again until the surge reoccurs. True surge is pretty violent and obvious when it happens.
One of the best turbo related posts I've seen. Thanks Grocmax
This was with the 10.5 turbine housing, correct?
If you don't mind, could you respond to my post about the trim and how it affects total airflow.
I think 9sec9 is going to make some sick torque with this turbo. Kind of surprised on the peak power though as the white rabbit seemed to make quite a bit more peak power then this turbo? Also, if compared to the green dynocharts on FP's website, this turbo spools about 300 RPM later then the green. Green vs. white vs. stock, same dyno, same car would really sort things out.
This was with the 10.5 turbine housing, correct?
If you don't mind, could you respond to my post about the trim and how it affects total airflow.
I think 9sec9 is going to make some sick torque with this turbo. Kind of surprised on the peak power though as the white rabbit seemed to make quite a bit more peak power then this turbo? Also, if compared to the green dynocharts on FP's website, this turbo spools about 300 RPM later then the green. Green vs. white vs. stock, same dyno, same car would really sort things out.
Last edited by GrocMax; Jul 2, 2008 at 10:05 PM.
Jul 2, 2008, 09:11 PM
#276
Great info and the data is awesome to see the relationship between all of it.
A friend's car with the IX turbo surges like crazy below 3500 RPM. It's pretty surprising that the factory turbo surges so badly. Looking at the shaft speed, it puts things into perspective as to why surge is so destructive. That is some serious angular acceleration/deceleration, not to mention the pressure fluctuations.
You guys weren't kidding when you said low mass thermocouples. That's some fast sensor response.
I've noticed that relationship in compressor flow maps and trim in the past. I've never seen anybody talk about it so I wasn't sure if it was just a casual coincidence or if there was something to it though. The T04E family of wheels has been a research favorite for me simply because there are several wheels all based on the same BCI, housing and exducer size with the only change being the profile cut into the wheel.
Thanks for the info. Every turbo I've bought has come from FP and this is why.
A friend's car with the IX turbo surges like crazy below 3500 RPM. It's pretty surprising that the factory turbo surges so badly. Looking at the shaft speed, it puts things into perspective as to why surge is so destructive. That is some serious angular acceleration/deceleration, not to mention the pressure fluctuations.
You guys weren't kidding when you said low mass thermocouples. That's some fast sensor response.
I've noticed that relationship in compressor flow maps and trim in the past. I've never seen anybody talk about it so I wasn't sure if it was just a casual coincidence or if there was something to it though. The T04E family of wheels has been a research favorite for me simply because there are several wheels all based on the same BCI, housing and exducer size with the only change being the profile cut into the wheel.
Thanks for the info. Every turbo I've bought has come from FP and this is why.
Jul 2, 2008, 09:18 PM
#278
03whitegsr, I'm still trying to learn as much as I can and GrocMax has been very good in trying to help me get there. FP not only builds great turbos, but they build them a certain way based on a ton of analysis. Beats throwing darts at the solution. Wow, GrocMax, I don't know if I'm going to make it past kindergarten, First grade is looking tough. Thanks for all of the information.
Jul 2, 2008, 09:47 PM
#279
im not tryn to be an @ss but i dont understand why people want to see this turbo "pushed to the max". nothing about this turbo says that. FP, the designers of this turbo, are not advertising it as such either. This turbo is for the person who may go as far as full bolt-on BUT will either stay or mostly use pump gas. I think, the best "test" would be the following:
1. same car
2. same day
3. same dyno
4. same octane (93)
5. same psi (20-23 psi)
6. stock ecu
Then test the evo9 vs the white vs the green and nothing else. you shouldnt even be looking at this turbo if you want to run high psi or high octane.
*I do feel for some strange reason that the WHITE will make more power than the GREEN and EVO9 at the same psi on pump. Countless GREEN owners say how well it performs on meth/race gas and high psi. Those same ppl also will say how "normal" or "average" it feels on pump and low psi. just look at the fp green owners thread. or maybe its the thread that talks about GREEN owners track times.
**If two identical evos lined up against another, one with the WHITE and the other a GREEN, both on pump, 23 psi, etc. i bet the WHITE powered one will wear the GREEN out. Turn up the wick and different/higher octane and the GREEN would wear the WHITE out. IF im correct with that assumption then people would understand its "place" in the turbo line up.
LOL, i bet if FP came out with the cure for cancer people would want them to compare it with the cure for polio.
1. same car
2. same day
3. same dyno
4. same octane (93)
5. same psi (20-23 psi)
6. stock ecu
Then test the evo9 vs the white vs the green and nothing else. you shouldnt even be looking at this turbo if you want to run high psi or high octane.
*I do feel for some strange reason that the WHITE will make more power than the GREEN and EVO9 at the same psi on pump. Countless GREEN owners say how well it performs on meth/race gas and high psi. Those same ppl also will say how "normal" or "average" it feels on pump and low psi. just look at the fp green owners thread. or maybe its the thread that talks about GREEN owners track times.
**If two identical evos lined up against another, one with the WHITE and the other a GREEN, both on pump, 23 psi, etc. i bet the WHITE powered one will wear the GREEN out. Turn up the wick and different/higher octane and the GREEN would wear the WHITE out. IF im correct with that assumption then people would understand its "place" in the turbo line up.
LOL, i bet if FP came out with the cure for cancer people would want them to compare it with the cure for polio.
Last edited by PsychDr. HN$; Jul 2, 2008 at 09:53 PM.
Jul 2, 2008, 10:18 PM
#282
true and i def understand where you are coming from on that statement BUT this turbo isnt really designed for that. FP stated that this is good for low boost and its quick spooling. perfect for the person who is going to run mostly pump. NOW that doesnt mean that RACE GAS/METH numbers arent important because they are. HOWEVER, if you plan on running meth/higher octane then this prolly isnt the turbo to consider. Im almost 100% positive that when FP made the statement about 20-23psi and pump they did that after their testing yeilded the WHITE's efficieny range. Like someone said, its going to happen eitherway. But i do feel that it may be somewhat misleading to dyno test it differently (higher psi/octane) because it isnt designed for that. Personally i hate seeing ANY turbo dyno at a maximum level to describe its power. It kinda reminds me of when i used to work in car audio sales and installations and SONY would put 1200watts on the cover of the amps nowing that 1200watts is PEAK POWER, was done in a lab, and prolly will never be duplicated in the real world while the RMS/constant/realistic power is 100 watts per channel.
Jul 3, 2008, 06:30 AM
#284
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I get it on the dyno on the 14th, it'll be for an E85 tune with the normal bolt-ons (intake, TBE 3" exhaust, AMS FMIC, Nisei IC upper & lower piping & head studs). My results probably won't be directly comparable since I live at 5,000 feet, but I'm hoping that this turbo will exend the useable powerband over the stock IX turbo a little bit to make the shift into 5th gear not quite so much of a power killer.
Dave
Dave
Jul 3, 2008, 07:07 AM
#285
*I do feel for some strange reason that the WHITE will make more power than the GREEN and EVO9 at the same psi on pump. Countless GREEN owners say how well it performs on meth/race gas and high psi. Those same ppl also will say how "normal" or "average" it feels on pump and low psi. just look at the fp green owners thread. or maybe its the thread that talks about GREEN owners track times.
**If two identical evos lined up against another, one with the WHITE and the other a GREEN, both on pump, 23 psi, etc. i bet the WHITE powered one will wear the GREEN out. Turn up the wick and different/higher octane and the GREEN would wear the WHITE out. IF im correct with that assumption then people would understand its "place" in the turbo line up.
LOL, i bet if FP came out with the cure for cancer people would want them to compare it with the cure for polio.
**If two identical evos lined up against another, one with the WHITE and the other a GREEN, both on pump, 23 psi, etc. i bet the WHITE powered one will wear the GREEN out. Turn up the wick and different/higher octane and the GREEN would wear the WHITE out. IF im correct with that assumption then people would understand its "place" in the turbo line up.
LOL, i bet if FP came out with the cure for cancer people would want them to compare it with the cure for polio.