Replacement APS ST turbo options...?
09-25-2006, 03:14 PM
#41
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by MIAPLAYA
Well again thats assuming his running a pressure ratio that fits into that "more efficient" portion of the map. If you plot it strictly based on his BHP peak then the compressor have identical efficiency. In all honesty if he is only running 9-9.5 PSI of boost and making 515BHP he is not even on the efficiency island of the GT35 at peak BHP and pressure. He is at least still on the 65% band of the 62-1 at that point though. Making the 62-1 a more logical choice if again he is only running 9-9.5 PSI of peak boost pressure. To be more efficient as you stated on the GT35 he would have to run much more boost.
09-25-2006, 03:25 PM
#42
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BriGuyMax
You're fighting a losing battle here. He proved you wrong and you won't agree that you were wrong.
09-25-2006, 04:11 PM
#44
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on that info. With a peak pressure ratio of ~1.84 rounded out of course. His peak horsepower comes at roughly 4800 RPMs and remains constant through the graph. I'm attaching compressor charts to compare efficiency at that engine speed (4800 RPMs) and peak pressure ratio 1.84 (12.4 PSI). You tell me the difference.
09-25-2006, 04:15 PM
#45
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And some others as food for thought. Although this is a rough estimate as to transitioning power look at where each turbo enters its efficiency map first.
Last edited by MIAPLAYA; 09-25-2006 at 04:22 PM.
09-25-2006, 04:50 PM
#46
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bethesda, MD
Posts: 971
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JoeDirtPharmD
Don't have the boost graph for ya', but that run peaked 12.4 psi at 4500rpms, and tapered to 7.8 psi at 6500rpm
09-25-2006, 05:51 PM
#47
Originally Posted by Nealoc187
You can calculate the estimated BHP at the various points using brake specific fuel consumption and air fuel ratio. That's one way of doing it and the way that the books I've read on the subject said to do it. Of course all of this, my previous posts included, makes a bunch of assumptions and estimations using "accepted" or "average" values. As you know all of these equations and values are really just an "educated guess" sort of thing and that you can't really calcuate he actual output of an engine with just a few simple equations - but you can get a good idea of what it will produce and a good idea of where in the efficiency islands your setup is going to fall.
The basic point I was trying to convey in a nutshell was that a) the GT3582R is a more efficient compressor in almost every spot possible on the compressor map for the boost levels being talked about here, and that b) the maximum mass flow rate of a compressor at some super high pressure ratio doesn't tell you anything about how "good" a compressor is for an application using a drastically different pressure ratio.
If you're wondering about how I did the calculations for all the plot points and what not: I didn't. I did them once for a couple maps when I was sizing a turbo for another application and I don't want to do them again. I've got a computer program which does them for me now. I just input values such as pressure drop, ambient temp, displacement, boost pressure, RPM, and that sort of thing.
The basic point I was trying to convey in a nutshell was that a) the GT3582R is a more efficient compressor in almost every spot possible on the compressor map for the boost levels being talked about here, and that b) the maximum mass flow rate of a compressor at some super high pressure ratio doesn't tell you anything about how "good" a compressor is for an application using a drastically different pressure ratio.
If you're wondering about how I did the calculations for all the plot points and what not: I didn't. I did them once for a couple maps when I was sizing a turbo for another application and I don't want to do them again. I've got a computer program which does them for me now. I just input values such as pressure drop, ambient temp, displacement, boost pressure, RPM, and that sort of thing.
What program do you use? Ive been wanting to DL one but havent looked into them just to make things faster then doing it by hand.
09-25-2006, 06:36 PM
#48
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nealoc187
it is lighter and as such has better spool characteristics,
09-25-2006, 07:07 PM
#49
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not trying to make this an APS vs All thread. I'm just trying to give him "options" as he requested in the thread title. A brand new 62-1 setup however you want is $1660.48. Thats MSRP. Any dealer can get you a MUCH better price than that. That includes not having to modify a compressor housing, assemble the housings or anything else. That price would include the compressor housing with the elbow cast into it, Ball bearing, water cooled, balanced, and with a 12k mile 12 month warranty. That warranty would even include coverage in case the turbo was damaged in another accident or any other reason. No faut, no hassle. So his choice is a CHRA for $1000 with a limited warranty, getting an elbow welded on, assembling the housings etc. Or ~$1400 (what any dealer should be able to sell you the turbo for) for a ready to go turbo out of box with a better warranty. If its me its a simple decision.
09-25-2006, 07:40 PM
#50
assembling the housing costs nothing, getting the elbow welded on shouldnt cost more than $50. thats 1000 total, the CHRA is 950 shipped. thats still 600 cheaper, and you know 100% that it fits and mates up perfectly. dont forget about the internal wastegate setup, which would cost around 4-500 for a custom external setup, so add that to the 62-1 price.
09-25-2006, 07:55 PM
#51
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tig488
assembling the housing costs nothing, getting the elbow welded on shouldnt cost more than $50. thats 1000 total, the CHRA is 950 shipped. thats still 600 cheaper, and you know 100% that it fits and mates up perfectly.
09-26-2006, 06:36 AM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winfield, IL
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by meatbag
What program do you use? Ive been wanting to DL one but havent looked into them just to make things faster then doing it by hand.
I use Turbocalculater, version 2.0 I believe is the version. They used to have a website but last time I checked it a few months ago it seemed to be gone. Not sure if it is back up.
09-26-2006, 06:39 AM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winfield, IL
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MIAPLAYA
Based on that info. With a peak pressure ratio of ~1.84 rounded out of course. His peak horsepower comes at roughly 4800 RPMs and remains constant through the graph. I'm attaching compressor charts to compare efficiency at that engine speed (4800 RPMs) and peak pressure ratio 1.84 (12.4 PSI). You tell me the difference.
The difference is that a) at redline the GT35R plot is still at a higher efficiency (70% vs 68% for the 62-1) and that b) the GT35R is still more efficient in other areas of the powerband.
09-26-2006, 06:50 AM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winfield, IL
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MIAPLAYA
And some others as food for thought. Although this is a rough estimate as to transitioning power look at where each turbo enters its efficiency map first.
Those plots are assuming his boost is a linear progression which it clearly is not. Boost does not ramp up to it's peak value linearly, and it doesn't stay there either as evidenced by the fact that he said he drops off to 7.8psi by redline. I'm at work right now without access to my turbocalc program at home and without the time to do the calculations manually for the different RPM points and boost levels. I suspect it is going to be more of the same though - with the GT35R still being more efficient in the majority of the areas and maybe some areas where they are equal.
JoeDirt, do you have a datalog of boost vs RPM by chance? That would enable us to pretty accurately model the GT3582R wheel. That wouldn't work well for the 62-1 compressor though as it won't necessarily spool the same (it'd definately spool slower in my opinion, but MIAPLAYA will certainly say this is just an assumption, which it is, but it is a reasonable one since in general GT series turbos spool faster than T series turbos do).
As for the wheel weights MIA, it's general knowledge that the GT wheels are lighter, more aerodynamic, and faster spooling than the T wheels are. I don't have a literary source to cite, just the word of various individuals in the industry such as my boss, and an acquaintence/buddy who works at Tial.
For the record, I have a T series turbo (T-61 to be exact). I don't even have a 350Z so I'm not interested in making this a ____ vs ____ kit argument. This is a discussion simply about turbo efficiency and which turbo is better for this application.
As far as cost goes. He doesn't need a new compressor housing he said. So getting a GT35R is cheaper in that regard. Also the MSRP of a ball bearing 62-1 is $2296 where I'm looking right now. Cheapest (and only) retail price I found as I said earlier was in excess of $1700. As far as cost goes in this discussion there is no question, replacing his GT35R with another GT35R would be cheaper than a 62-1.
Warranty - well we're getting REALLY far away from the original debate which was that "the 62-1 flows more than the GT35R but who cares about that, right?" I don't know anything about the warranties on the two so I can't make any reasonable argument about that.
Last edited by Nealoc187; 09-26-2006 at 06:57 AM.
09-26-2006, 07:37 AM
#56
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That depends on who is making the compressor wheel. Keep in mind that a wheel trim design and the material the wheel is made of are two differnt things. You can make a 62-1 compressor wheel trim from the same material as you make a GT35R wheel and I assure you the weight is negligible. I know those plots are assuming linear regression which why I said it was a "rough" estimate. An accurate estimate is not possible unless he can provide a boost graph that logs boost at each load point. As for 62-1 turbo price here is an excerpt from the August 2006 Turbonetics Price sheet
Tig,
Yes you can get the 62-1 with any turbine you want (T3) with a 5 bolt discharge flange and internal wastegate.
Originally Posted by Turbonetics Price List
11004-BB Turbo, Ball Brg., 62-1 Series, Stg 5, Tang .68 $ 1,660.48
Yes you can get the 62-1 with any turbine you want (T3) with a 5 bolt discharge flange and internal wastegate.
09-26-2006, 07:41 AM
#57
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nealoc187
The difference is that a) at redline the GT35R plot is still at a higher efficiency (70% vs 68% for the 62-1) and that b) the GT35R is still more efficient in other areas of the powerband.
09-26-2006, 11:34 AM
#58
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the meantime, I ended up getting a replacement CHRA for $975 shipped, but had a come-to-Jesus talk about the plans for the car. An upgrade is certainly within the near future, will keep everyone aprised of that outcome.
When I get home, I'll look to see if I have a boost graph available for review so you can map out the efficiency as requested.
When I get home, I'll look to see if I have a boost graph available for review so you can map out the efficiency as requested.
09-26-2006, 11:48 AM
#60
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Blake350z
Would a Garret GT40R fit in the place of the current turbo setup?
Not sure...but even if it does I'm sure there's a Turbonetics unit that is cheaper and better all around than the cr@p that garrett makes.
