Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So the Jew in me wants a cheap good turbo.

Orginally was looking at the Kando Turbos, but they seem to change design/specs every other week, so its hard to know exactly what will be delivered when bought.

I never relised how cheap these BW Airworks turbos were (cheaper than the Kando stuff)

Im looking at the S362 ala 83-75 for my 1JZ with the aim of 400+rwkws and a mid 10 in a full weight fat kent Snoarer (eventually)

So who has used these buggers?

Specifically the S300 series on a 2.5L six.

Cheers

Andrew

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/378995-bw-airworks-turbos/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Pretty sure I have mentioned these before in regards to being an ideal affordable turbo when the Kandofandom was getting hysterical and it wasn't really heard. I unfortunately have no results to directly share but they are well documented on various international forums.. I would happily run one :) The only thing to bare in mind with the S300s is they are physically quite large.

haha yep....

So 88-75 is the S372?

I just realised im looking at the S360 not the 362

The S372 is a big bugger, I cbf checking but would guess the S366 to be 8875 equivalent.

The 83/75 should be Gt3582r like in performance, on an RB25 if you are looking at results typical of folks here I would look at the S256.

Why are there so many names for the damn things?

Do we need to bloody research and document every model just like we did the bloody MHI units?

S366... S300SX... What is what and what does it mean?

I remember looking at the S200SX and being fairly impressed.

The 91/79 is a huge turbo - that amount of lag isn't too surprising... considering I'd not be surprised if an 88/75 punched as hard as a T04Z.

GTScoTT - when I first became interested in these turbos they were known as Schwitzer S300s etc, it seems when they started being sold as BW turbos the name convention changed but some people (ie, Bullseye power) who sell them seem to have stuck with the old Schwitzer naming. The naming Borg Warner use is much more informative, and closer to the current Garrett convention (ie, exducer size).

Last weekend after indulging in a bit of rum we decided to pull out some of the turbos that were floating around the house (and a random Honda City turbo for styles sake), the result was a few size comparison pics which might be interesting in this thread.

The turbos in question are a Borg Warner S300SX 83/75 with .91a/r T4 twin scroll turbine housing, a Garrett GT3582R with an ATP 1.06a/r T4 twin scroll housing, and a stock Series2 R33 turbo :)

post-11136-0-55181000-1317681854_thumb.jpg

post-11136-0-22482100-1317681880_thumb.jpg

post-11136-0-14071100-1317681888_thumb.jpg

Pretty sure I have mentioned these before in regards to being an ideal affordable turbo when the Kandofandom was getting hysterical and it wasn't really heard. I unfortunately have no results to directly share but they are well documented on various international forums.. I would happily run one :) The only thing to bare in mind with the S300s is they are physically quite large.

The S372 is a big bugger, I cbf checking but would guess the S366 to be 8875 equivalent.

The 83/75 should be Gt3582r like in performance, on an RB25 if you are looking at results typical of folks here I would look at the S256.

Yeah I remember them being mentioned, just never realized they were so cheap.

The big ft Snoarer has a big fat engine bay, so physical size isnt an issue...and besideds, we all know huge big turbos are cool ;)

Was looking at results on the 83-75 on 2JZ's and was really impressed. so even taking in 500cc less engine in my case it should be resonable, and very much similar to GT35Rs on RB25's

Also having seen Anna's (T04Daves gf's) car in action at wakie when it had a modified T04Z on a 25 it was a missle.

I have had a look at the S256. But if I do end up rebuilding the engine it will be a stroker 2JZ bottom end. So im thinking towards the future (as we all do)

ok guys. just ran up annas car,

9179 .91 twin entry, 6boost twin 44's

rb25, greddy plenum q45 tb 252 pon cam, type a tomie springs.splitfire coils haltech e11v2

25lb on 98 made 360rwkw. needs a cdi. could not get a smooth run out of it, had to gap plugs to 0.5mm also ignition timing not relly done yet. 10 degrees advance up top. was making roughly 10kw every 2 lbs boost.

had some major surge ramping up till i turned the gain down on the boost controller. having the run start a 3k.

all on by 4500. then it melts the tyres off...

need to heat wrap dump pipe, teflon wastgate hoses needed, and need to make a power steering belt guide for the pump pulley. any limmiter it chucks the belt off. (ross tuffbond balancer)

if i had a choice now i would be getting the 8875. but compared to the t04z the 9179 has heaps more power coming onto boost. seems more torquey

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • 49719 is the cooler loop. Right at the front, LHS of that diagram. Return line from rack (LP side) goes to cooler loop on RHS front of car, then back under engine and returns to bottom of tank. 49717M is feed from tank to pump. HP line out of pump is thick rubber, followed by the hard line that runs down to crossmember and runs in parallel (but opposite flow direction) to the LP return line. Nothing goes anywhere near the firewall or interior of car. The closest they get to that is the connections on the rack.
    • Thanks, plan is to drain all fluid tomorrow and do smoke test to find out the leak.   Appreciate your help and want to understand how the system work. So cooling is achieved by the long loop not any rad? The diagram seems to suggest it connects to somewhere inside the cabin and I thought that is a cooler inside firewall. If you look at the diagram it seems to show it connects to something inside firewall. I tried chasing it but not easy unless I take loads off   i am confident pump is good as fluid goes in and it gets soft( steering) but as soon as I turn engine off , loads of bubble come to surface and overflow. When engine is on , fluid level is below minimum but when off it shoots off and thinking it is sucking air in. I suspect aluminium pipe may have a crack line or whole   smoke test with no fluid should be a good start and if needed will remove the pump   In addition, the one going under the engine bay is high pressure line and one directly connecting from pump to resorvoir is return/ low pressure?   finally I searched and suggestion is to use dexron 2 but that is discontinued so bought dexron 3 as all research suggest it is compatible and shouldn’t cause any issues/ blow seals. I bought two liter of dexron 3 motul atf
    • Don't worry about. Just don't try to drive hard enough to make boost and you'll be fine.
    • Yes. This has already been said. It is a loop of hardline in front of the radiator. Because.... the pump is on the LHS and the steering rack hydraulic connections are where they always are on a RHD steering rack....on the RHS. The high pressure line goes down under the engine, along the crossmember, like it does on all Skylines. Don't just throw expensive braided hoses/other kits at it. Work out what is wrong and fix that.
    • Still got the afm on the intake, clamps are shut tight, only loose hose is the one that goes from the j pipe towards the IACV, since it's next to impossible to find a factory hose and the barbs are different sizes (I'm still using clamps on this hose to try and help it seal on the iacv side) I've ordered parts to make up the hotside of the intercooler pipes, I'll plumb it in and see what happens in a few days I suppose The turbo's internally gated, can I just unscrew the tension rod to let the gate open?
×
×
  • Create New...