Totally immersing a red hot turbocharger can in rare cases cause issues not only to the turbocharger but more likely the red hot exhaust manifolds. We hear of stories on the internet but let’s have a look at the real world.

Firstly, we have been producing high performance turbocharger systems for gasoline and diesel powered SUVs since well before the term SUV was coined (about 30 years). We used to call them 4x4’s…. Now if you want to see a harsh environment, you’ll get no worse than this market. Racing flat out for hours on end, caked in mud and plunging through rivers, places particular design requirements on the turbocharger system. To give you an example, this is the sort of stuff our SUV customers get up to:

http://www.safari4x4.com.au/docs/video.htm

Now we don’t for a minute expect our 350Z customers to attempt this sort of thing, but that same engineering practice used in our 4x4 products goes into each turbo system regardless of the vehicle type. Situations such as driving through deep puddles becomes a non-issue because of the position of the turbocharger which is protected again by the side rails and front cross member - as well as the lower shield underneath the turbocharger.

In the case of road and/or track going vehicles such as the 350Z, even when the car is under severe load and the turbocharger very hot, there is very little likelihood of turbo damage due to water. In the case of driving through flooded areas, it is very unlikely that you will enter the water with the turbo red hot – which again is unlikely to cause a problem with the high nickel content material APS uses for the turbine housing. In the 4x4 market, in order to be safe, we recommend that if the engine has been working hard, wait a minute for the differential, gearbox and engine to cool before immersing the vehicle in deep water. It’s a sensible recommendation mainly for the protection of the drive train components.

Also for what it’s worth, we have been utilizing and taking advantage of the cooling benefits of turbochargers in this position since the twin turbo on the Lingenfelter C5 Corvette, on many V8 turbocharged applications and of course in some 4x4s.

I hate to say this but this issue is much the same as the turbocharger position we have been discussing on this thread. The issues are valid, but we had already addressed them early on in the design process.

Hope this helps.

George

 

I would not want my 5k$ under my car while i drove around and went through water and scraped on inclined hills,speed bumps, cause my car is dropped, shoot i wouldnt even want my cai down there- this is why i got a pop charger in the first place- "I would want my investment tucket somewhere safe under my hood that would stay dry and safe from any concerns" sure pipes can get damage even and do get wet but screw those compared to it being "the turbo" bolted under my car..there are so many things that would happen 1.ROCKS fly everywhere under any car at high speeds 2.WATER oh yes it will get wet and from what i read it will get hot so "wet-hot-wet-hot" 3.DIRTY yes it will get dirty and maybe im wrong but i know when i go to the car wash to blow my car off after a nasty rain storm that has left film on the streets and all under my car i don't pop the hood cause its safe under there and uaslly still clean

Maybe the turbo can take all this abuse and still be safe for many years but why would I chance that for a colder location placement.

This is just my thoughts

 

Hi Mia,

I’d love to help you out but I am a bit confused because there are a heap of pictures of the APS Intercooled Single Turbo scattered throughout this thread and they show the position of the actual turbo from a variety of angles. Like I said, to see the turbocharger I need to photograph it from a snail’s eye view – which is already here. Besides, because the turbo is tucked into its cavity, it is difficult to get any other angles.

I have a suspicion that regardless of how many photographs I submit, it will be a case of you seeing it in the flesh in order to have a clear understanding of the exact position and orientation – from a frame of view that is meaningful to you. I mean that sincerely because it’s the sort of thing that is difficult to visualize regardless of the camera position.

I think that we may have done this to death now. How about you? Are you happy to wait and see it in the flesh?

George

 

It's been talked to death.....as far as I'm concerned it's no longer an issue, for me, anyway. The only issue I've got now is waiting a couple more months.

 

I understand your thoughts completely Leggo350 and as I said previously in this thread, each of us have our own needs and desires and we need to satisfy them.

Just briefly though, to answer your points:

1. rocks and stones are not a problem though they will no doubt scuff the lower shield – which is a low cost item if you take your car to car shows etc. Polishes up a treat too.
2. Water, yes the turbocharger will heat cycle. This is normal operation of the turbocharger, and the rate of temperature gradient when quenching is accounted for in the material selection of the turbine housing.
3. Yep, if you want to keep it clean, you’ll have to clean it. I sometimes get under my 4x4 and spray truck wash under it and then set up a garden sprinkler under the vehicle to gently rinse all the muck away. It works a treat and sure makes life easier for any mechanic working under there.

I am with you when it comes to having a good clean car and the pleasure I get when admiring it is kind of cool. However, the way I figure it is that I spend a lot more time (and derive a lot more pleasure) driving. Enjoying greatly improved low to mid RPM torque, greater heat extraction from the exhaust ports and lower under hood temperatures to me are all high on the list of desirable features and I enjoy it each and every time I’m behind the wheel. Again, each of us has our own needs and desires so what flips my switch may be different to the next person – which is great. It’s what drives people to design and manufacture products to suit the variety of needs.

George

 

Which is why the APS system fits well with how I use my car and my priorities....that doesn't mean it's the right choice for everybody.

 

well said, agreed.

 

So, APS, would you admit that there is a much higher chance of water damage given the location of your turbo? And because of this would you be willing to warranty any water damage?

You also have to be willing to admit that there are many different scenarios that are possible when it comes to rock damage, potholes, bumps, etc. Just simply stating that a bump in the road would have to go through the corssmember first may be insufficient.
You can go over a bump at many different speeds, and the slower you go, the easier it is for the bump to damage to more than one area. Lets exaggerate the situation for example. Say we set the 350z on top of a somewhat sharp bump right at the location of the turbo. If the bump DOES come into contact with the turbo as the car is set on top of the bump, then there ARE situations where a bump can damage the turbo, regardless of your pervious explanation.

Thus far APS seems to have a really polished record, and alot of experience. I don't want you to recieve negative publicity. I don't want to see ANY company receive negative publicity, unless they truly deserve it. I think different solutions are great, but I think you should more thoroughly address the issue of your tubo placement, rather than assuring us that it's fine becuase you've been in business for so long. Everyone makes mistakes. The proof rests on real world possibilities, not on your reputation.

I am a customer seriously considering your single turbo application. Please be more thorough, than doctoring up somoenes half-assed MS paint drawing

 

Did you look at the most recent pic? The turbo is not all that low.

They lifted the car up, took some pics showing the location flat as we asked, and then posted them. How much more thorough do you want them to be?

After looking the pics, I believe them when they say you would have to be into something serious to hit the turbo.

 

As an FYI almost all motorcycle turbocharger applications mount the unit directly behind the front wheel fully exposed to the air stream. This is a picture of mine with the plastic lower fairings removed.
http://tinyurl.com/45ffw
I have driven over 27000 miles with this type of installation some of it unfortunately in driving rain. I'm not sure how many turbo bikes are out there but my guess would be in the thousands and there has never been a reported problem caused by contact with water. I only wish everything else was as durable as the turbine housing.

 

I guess we have beat this to death. I don't personally like the turbo placement you chose but like ZZ said theres a kit for everybody. I prefer to see my $5k investment when I open the hood rather then sticking it up against the tranny underneath the car where something could happen. I know you have assured us nothing will but like I said I don't see it. Sure the down the front, side, etc pics are good but are you really telling me there is NO WAY to lift the car go directly under the turbo and take a picture? Thats what I'm looking for. Either way if not thats fine. My decision was made long ago and I'm very happy with it. My car performs great, looks great, and it is exactly what I wanted.

 

To answer your question: As far as being more thorough, I would like to see a pic directly under the car (Like Mia mentioned above). The MS paint diagram was pretty lackluster in terms of explaining how a bump would have to hit the cross brace first. I was trying to explain that not every accident happens how we think it does. What if I were to drive in reverse over a bump? What if I was going around a corner (which would mean that it could come through the side of the car at an arc missing the crossbrace)? The diagram that Wicked drew and APS added on to only address forward motion. I just want to exhaust the possibilites before I make a choice. And I don't want to get screwed out of money if something happens due to poor design.

 

It would be a boring planet if we all liked the exact same cars, girls, homes, etc, etc, I totally agree mia, that's why there is always plenty of products for consumers to choose from.

Fair enough and I suspect others would prefer a more stealth approach in CA for when the police/inspectors open the hood and see a product with no CARB approval.

I guess this real important issue to me and others at APS is we don't want our customers to be power limited in the future by an undersized down pipe from the turbocharger, if your happy with a smallish down pipe then that's that cool with me mia.

This is a significant technical issue that will have serious implications for power increases down the path, high under hood temperatures (created by an undersized down pipe and high exhaust back pressure) and very high total exhaust back presure should be avoided at all cost if engine durability is important, again if this does not concern you, that's fine with me.


That's fine and I'm sure you are happy with your choice, this is what life is all about, people make different choices depending on what best suits their needs.

Thanks

Peter

 

Trust me when I tell you this it doesn't matter where the turbos are if they know they know. They see that intercooler or BOV or polished piping even without a CARB sticker and it doesn;t matter what you have done you're screwed. The only difference between having just a polished pipe and BOV and having the beautifully polished turbo under the hood is that people who are into cars can admire the turbo and you can show of your investment. When it comes to cops all they have to see is something that isn't stock and no sticker and you're toast.

 

Well, with respect Mia, there are many differences in terms of engine performance and engine durability and it is my personal opinion is that ultimately having the ability to leave all and sundry in your wake is just too much fun to compromise.

When it comes to the obligatory chat back in the pits (or when the pair of you pull over at the next set of traffic lights) and you flip the hood, it's entirely up to you to keep your mouth shut and totally demoralize them or if you're feeling sympathetic towards the poor guy, get him to look down past the LH exhaust manifold to see the Mother of a turbo (or mother of a pair of turbos under each manifold).

Having had my share of kills, there is a certain perverse pleasure I get from having the ability to really screw with your opponent's mind.

Besides, experiencing all that power and torque is a lot of fun.

Horses for courses really and it comes down to whether you want to show off your investment or to put your investment to the best use possible.

On that note and if I may draw a parallel, I like to get the maximum return from my investments in the share market and don't really care if I get a lovely share certificate to frame for the dresser.

Each scenario is valid depending on your requirements.

George

 

With respect to you and all you can't honestly tell me there is no "return" on my investment. 386 RWHP at 8 PSI and 11:1 AFR on 91 gas is a very NICE return on my investment. You may spool 500 RPMs sooner but you cannot argue with numbers that are clearly superior. Turbonetics is making 409 RWHP at 8.5 PSI 11:1 AFR and 91. So at the same pressure ratio on worse gas and with a richer tune my investment is making 23 more horsepower roughly a 1/4 second later then your kit. I think thats a VERY NICE return on my investment. Plus I get to watch their jaw drop not only after the kill but when I pop the hood and see that nice polished compressor housing and black chrome intake piping. And I don't even have to get a mirror to show them!!

 

Crikey (Aussie term) no Mia, it would be silly of me to say that and I would be lying if I did so. Please don’t think for one minute that I believe that you are not pleased with your purchase because by the sound of it I think that it is a good match for your requirements – and I am not here to preach or pass judgement on the validity of one’s wants or needs.

There seems to be some confusion here Mia and I hope to clarify this. There is a whole thread (titled APS Intercooled Single Turbo vs Turbonetics Single Turbo) on this forum devoted to the differences between the two systems and it goes into quite some detail regarding the performance advantages and level of “completeness” of each system.

The differences between the spool-up characteristics can be summarized below (from the above thread):

APS\Garrett GT series turbo

2500 rpm- 4.2 PSI

3000 rpm - 6.4 PSI

3500 rpm - 8.3 PSI

Turbonectics turbocharger

2500 rpm - 1.5 PSI

3000 rpm - 3 PSI

3500 rpm - 5.25 PSI

Therefore, to say that the APS turbocharger spools 500 RPM sooner is somewhat misleading and kind of stretching the truth - Because the difference is significantly greater. So what you may ask? It means the difference between squeezing the throttle when cruising and accelerating with authority or having to change down a gear or two.

What the table does not show however is that at steady state when you squeeze the throttle at say 2,500 RPM in a tall gear, the APS system will achieve full boost very quickly so that you have the maximum amount of torque available under your right foot without having to change down and rev the engine hard. This fact has further implications on engine durability where delivering high torque at low engine RPM avoids the undue stress on the engines mechanical components experienced at high RPM. Over the life of the Z, this can have a significant accumulative affect upon the durability of the engine – and it is an important criterion that APS considers seriously when designing any performance system.

Yes it’s fun "giving it" to your opponent and watching their jaw drop, though I think that this point was well covered in an earlier post.

George

 

I guess what I should have sais was you achieve full boost 500 rpms sooner.

 

Thanks for the clarification Mia, but on going by the turbocharger pressure graphs posted on the APS Intercooled Single Turbo vs Turbonetics Single Turbo thread the difference is more like 1200 RPM. I'm not being provocative or confrontational - but I am only using the technical data that is available to each of us here.

When steady state boost pressure is considered (as opposed to transient in the turbocharger pressure graphs) the difference in RPM where full boost is achieved should be even greater (though I haven't seen anyone post steady state data on this forum).

George

 

Since I'm going with the APS system, I do like those comparative numbers. I think I'd prefer those to being able to show off the underhood turbo, something I'm really not into anyway. If I want to really impress someone, I'll just pull my **** out.

It's just a joke guys!!! I'm only kidding!!!