Agreed. Have you actually capped off the gate? Ive seen some weird things happen doing it the way you are doing it. Another thing to test, food for thought
Hellen Keller sent this?
.90ar vs 1.0ar
- Thread starter mike diesel
- Start date
Agreed. Have you actually capped off the gate? Ive seen some weird things happen doing it the way you are doing it. Another thing to test, food for thought
Hellen Keller sent this?
I had a buddy weld this up for me. I pull the turbo and cap the pedestal. This will test the intake and exhaust side.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you are not gating at all around your secondary all the exhaust energy is being used to make pressure with the secondary. That 88mm is nowhere near its sweet spot at 25psi. If you can find a way to drive it at say 40psi and only run a pressure ratio of two on the primary you should see much better performance.
This is exactly what I have been trying to do. But i am not able to get it there. I have played with the gate in every way possible. I am seeing the best performance with the gate completely closed. Doesn't matter what psi i start to open the gate at, the secondary just falls right off. I've tried opening the gate at 25 psi, 35 psi, 50 psi...same result every time, secondary just falls off and performance suffers. Supply full boost to the top port to force the gate closed at all times and I see 60 psi and it will run 11.2's with fuel left to burn. Absolutely can not get the turbos to drive any harder.
Just checked for boost leaks again and it is good.
Do you guys think the 1.23ar housing is killing the potential of the atmo? See if i can find a 1.0 housing or what? I'd just hate to spend 500 bucks on a housing (if they even make anything different for the F1 turbine) and see no difference.
Do you guys think the 1.23ar housing is killing the potential of the atmo? See if i can find a 1.0 housing or what? I'd just hate to spend 500 bucks on a housing (if they even make anything different for the F1 turbine) and see no difference.
A housing change may be in order on the primary. A 1.23 is a relatively large a/r for a gt55 sized turbine. I bet a drop to a 1.0ish a/r would help out a ton. I ran a gt47 88mm upwards of 60psi as a single with a 1.39a/r. That turbine section flows probably a good 10-15lbs min less that what you are running now. I think a smaller a/r def help you out.
I just sent Turbonetics an email in regards to the turbine housing. We will see what they have to offer.
How do you think a gt47 would do in place of the turbonetics? The gt47 has a considerably smaller turbine wheel with several options for turbine housings. Ugh
Not trying to cut up your selection of primary,but it is a fairly large turbine for the compressor size. Something a little closer to turbine exducer would be happier. The tighter a/r will help get the shaft speed up on the primary. Although it may not be enough to reach your goals. Hope this helps!
A 5541 has a 106mm comp inducer. Big difference in airflow at the same shaft speed compared to any 88mm compressor.
Very true. For some reason I was thinking of the smaller compressor 5541. I plan on spraying mine a little bit without a gate and see if I have the same issues as mike as my new engine will have the identicle setup.
I believe if it is a 94mm or larger you wont have much trouble. The comp inducer and exhaust exducer relationship is very important. A big spread can be quite troublesome on smaller displacement engines. Now if we had 900ci like a semi truck that 88mm would be spot on.
I also talked with a local shop and he said he could swap in a larger compressor. Kind of pricing out a few different options at this point to see what is the best route to go.
Can't imagine soot all over inside the gate is normal?
There should not be soot in the springs. The gate must be damaged. That would be a reason for your problems as well.
The diaphram looks good. I tested the gate with shop air and it functions properly.