Hypergear Turbochargers and High flow Services Development thread

[Lithium]

It definitely is interesting enough to make me wonder how it'd compare with the likes of the BW EFR8374, Precision 6262 and the HTA3582/HTA3586 (I suspect it fits somewhere in between) - oh to have the funds and means to do a shoot out between some of these units!

[Joshbigt62r]

Yeaj how awesome would a shootout betwwen them all? Stao did say when he works out some production line type thing or something he was meaning I think it should bring the price down were his words. The ceramic bearings he uses alone are $400ish+ and are a fair level higger grade then the other top model turbochargers out there.

Josh

[MoJizzy]

Post it up so I can compare all 3 results

I get full boost by easily 4000 rpm if not earlier

Might take a video and get you an exact rpm

I think there is a fair bit of difference in the mid range. Seems to be about 20kw until my boost drops off.

Hey Manuel,

Sorry for the dalay but i've got the time to post up my graphs for a comparo. I have just realised that your ss1 is in a R33 but it doesn't hurt to get some feedback

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/20130911_142728.jpg.html

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/20130911_142708.jpg.html

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/998049_10151473799196403_1262221954_n.jpg.html - As she sits now, just got my BC BR coilovers delivered today & have a jap spec front bar & series 2 sideskirts which I'm in the process of painting as well.

Edited September 11, 2013 by MoJizzy

[Manuel Kasko]

Looks good mate!

Thanks for that

[89CAL]

Some progress shots of my turbo getting ready. This was done today:

Just have to finish the dump and it can go in finally

Ill get some better photos for you Stao as it goes on

[Ben C34]

Looks good! Love how aussie the first photo is with a random thong!

and pm sent regarding your rear vent.

Edited September 11, 2013 by superben

[GTScotT]

Hey Manuel,

Sorry for the dalay but i've got the time to post up my graphs for a comparo. I have just realised that your ss1 is in a R33 but it doesn't hurt to get some feedback

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/20130911_142728.jpg.html

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/20130911_142708.jpg.html

http://s1145.photobucket.com/user/morganjanusevski/media/998049_10151473799196403_1262221954_n.jpg.html - As she sits now, just got my BC BR coilovers delivered today & have a jap spec front bar & series 2 sideskirts which I'm in the process of painting as well.

Hey Morgan.

Looking at your graph I have a strong feeling that your VCT is not working properly. Your car is nealry 1000rpm laggier than mine and for all intents and purposes it should be more responsive.

Get this checked out!

[hypergear]

They are pretty decent power for stock cams, and notice the power curve is still on the rise all the way to red. I think PZP should be pretty happy with this out come. Check if VCT is working, fully agree. You can't skip teeth on the timing chain with the SRs can you? my skyline picked up heaps of response after timing belt correction.

[MoJizzy]

Thanks for the feedback guys, I'll get this looked at as soon as I get a chance.

[Kinkstaah]

Getting 465kw out of 850cc's makes me really wonder wtf is wrong with my setup getting 345kw maxxing out 800cc's at E60, on the same dyno with the same tuner ;p

[GTScotT]

Getting 465kw out of 850cc's makes me really wonder wtf is wrong with my setup getting 345kw maxxing out 800cc's at E60, on the same dyno with the same tuner ;p

Your package is less efficient.

Any details?

[Lithium]

Your package is less efficient.

Any details?

465kw is actually a hell of a lot from 850cc injectors on E85, I had thought the same thing when I saw the result. By more efficient - I can assure you one thing, it's nothing to do with the turbo as all that does is moves air. Air fuel ratio literally means air/fuel, the power comes from a combo of the engine's ability to make a certain amount of power with a certain amount of fuel (and obviously air relates to that), and how much air is passing through it. The ability of a turbocharged spark ignited engine to make more/less power with a certain amount of air/fuel only varies by a few percent - so by "efficient" the following things are the most likely things I can think of:

1) The tune is leaner (less fuel for the amount of air)

2) The dyno is being more generous

3) The injectors are "very efficient" 850cc injectors?!

I can't think of anything else?!

[SimonR32]

My 1200cc injectors are just hitting 100% at 450rwkw on the same brand of dyno

[GTSBoy]

I can't think of anything else?!

Sheer turbo efficiency could/would still play a part. One turbo running in the meat of the efficiency island is going to be able to have the engine run a lot more timing than another turbo that's operating somewhere off to the side of the island with another 60°C or more air temp. Assuming something like the same PR and total flow for both turbos of course.

That actually has all sorts of compounding effects too. Hotter air is travelling faster and has a higher pressure drop through the pipes, IC and TB. So the less efficient turbo actually has to crank out a bit more boost in order to gain the same pressure in the inlet manifold. Depending on what side of the island you are on, this could increase or decrease the efficiency of the compressor. But even if you increase the efficiency, because it's running at a higher PR than it needs to, there is simply more heating of the gas anyway (I will stipulate that it is quite possible that an efficiency improvement might outweigh the simple adiabatic compression negative effect - I haven't tried to work it out just for this argument).

A "less efficient" turbo on the compressor side might well have more backpressure on the exhaust side too, further making things worse.

Now, if we're talking about the same turbo on both cars, that's a different matter. I didn't bother to check if both these guys are running the same turbo.

[Kinkstaah]

My car is not the poster child of efficiency by any means (too long to get into.. I may make a thread one day about it) but I didnt think it would result into such a huge difference for a very similar sized injector, when both were at 100% duty cycle (in my case). At least not by such a massive amount unless I actually have 100rwkw of restriction.. which may actually be the real reason.

I am going back for more boost with 1000cc's (when my appointment with Trent comes along..) and A FPR and new fuel pump to see if it can be maxxed out or at least to run proper e85 instead of religiously checking the ethanol % every fill up to avoid leaning out. Given the fact my Turbo cold side was designed in 2010, and it's sitting on a Low comp RB28 Neo that's auto, god only knows what it really 'should' be making, but I found the injectors being maxxed at 340 (at e60) when others max at 465 and e85 to be an indicator of something wrong with my setup

[Lithium]

Almost everything you have mentioned there still comes down to air mass - an AFR relates to air mass (which accounts for pressure, density, flow etc) as opposed to psi - doesn't matter what heating or cooling has happened prior to reaching the cylinders, the air mass and fuel mass that get into the engine will be what cause what AFR you measure, and as such what amount of fuel needed to be moved by the injectors.

Sure, timing will affect the BSFC - but not that much, unless things were being pushed WAY too hard. But realistically the 465kw number is the anomaly, not the 340kw one.

[edit: Saw you were at 100% duty cycle] - Sounds like there is something wrong there, one is on the low side and one on the high

[GTSBoy]

Lith,

No I was putting a peg in the sand saying that both hypothetical turbos are running about the same flow and PR.....just achieving it differently from their relative compressor maps. So I took the mass of air out of it.

If you then squirt in the same amount of fuel and get the same AFR in the exhaust, the efficient turbo should give you more power. That is at minimum from the extra timing, but there's also the fact that a less efficient turbo is by definition using more energy from the exhaust gases and therefore is presenting a bigger restriction on exhaust flow, bigger ex manifold pressure, more charge contamination by exhaust, etc etc. All the other reasons why engines may or may not make power become available for consideration when you consider the consequences of poor turbo operating point.

Edited September 12, 2013 by GTSBoy

[Lithium]

That exhaust restriction (or lack thereof) also plays a part in that air mass being moved, even though it is down stream. The raising exhaust manifold pressure is a symptom of the hold up - another symptom of a restrictive turbo hotside, exhaust system or whatever is the drop off in VE you see in the fuel map as rpm/load get up to the area a restriction starts forming.

Again, required fuel flow (especially with a very knock resistant fuel like E85) is the single best indicator of power potential

[GTScotT]

There is also the fact that the hotter charge takes more energy from the fuel as the fuel absorbs some of that heat. It is no secret that fuel coolers are used to get the enth on race cars.

My can of worms comment was pointing fingers at areas such as a more efficient compressor, better pipework and a better hot side. All of these will contribute to the general heat generated by the thing and will therefore govern what you can actually do with a volume of fuel. By no means should two cars with the same injectors, oversized turbos but otherwise entirely different setups both max out at the same amount of power just because the injectors will both be on 100%.

Staos result is possibly a little optimistic but we should also remember that Stao is a turbo developer with a test car, not a walk in customer with his pride and joy. I am sure Trent pushed a lot further on the test rig than he would be comfortable with on the average customers car. Possibly pushed beyond what most tuners would deem a safe limit.

the figure is high, but not astronomical or impossible.

[Kinkstaah]

I think most people would be surprised if word got out that 850cc is all you need for 465rwkw on E85 though. Every calculator that I found seems to insinuate it is above the ability for an 850cc injector.

I only know this as I was looking into finding out what 1000cc injectors would safely seem to support as I ran out of flow. As I said before, its entirely possible my result which is from a turbo smaller than Stao's 465kw one, and older, and generally very shit, so much so I never posted a result in this thread.....

is an indicator of other problems/restrictions (of which there are many if forum searches and general SAU hivemind would have you believe)

I would have thought as a complete layman that injector duty cycle is a good rule of thumb for power use at the engine, before restrictions everywhere else come into play. Especially restrictions to make that car look VIC Compatible, Mr Officer.