Anybody runing S362sxe?
nice..
04-13-17, 06:27 PM
#27
I am also getting ready to run the bw s362. Mine is 68mm with .91 a/r so we will see how it goes. I am doing a rebuild before hand with a mild street port, going to break it in for a solid 1500-2000km then take her over to the dyno to get it tuned here in Germany. Am debating on if I want to get my power fc tuned or upgrading to the adoptronic ecu. One tuner does the fc, the other does the adoptronic. I'm leaning torwards selling the fc and getting the adoptronic. My tuner recommended 1000cc and 2000cc injectors, yes they're over kill he said but with a tune it'll be alright and if you ever want to upgrade you can. Aiming to build 400ish hp. Probably upgrading fuel pump. Already have full exhaust, minus the downpipe which is going to be fabricated by ir performance on Facebook. They build a solid turbo kit for the bw turbos. So we shall see how this goes! Hoping for a solid build. Any input would be great!
04-17-17, 07:29 AM
#29
how are the id 1000/2000? Does it idle fine? Mine will be a street car so I'm looking for a good smooth idle
04-29-17, 10:21 PM
#33
Nateness, do you have pics of your s362sxe installed in the engine bay? I have the same manifold and can't seem to find a positioning for the compressor housing that will allow it to fit in the engine bay. The housing on this thing is huge. It's hitting the side of chassis structure towards the shock tower. As far as I understand there's only a single compressor housing A/R option so I'm not really sure how to make this thing fit other than cutting into the chassis, but I'm not really keen on doing that. Thanks.
06-05-17, 06:25 PM
#37
Made 438 WHP and 359 WTQ at 25 PSI tapering to 20 PSI on CA 91 octane gas with a single 250cc water injection nozzle.
Tuner commented that power curve appeared to be heading towards ~470 WHP. After several runs, fuel temps became high, which resulted in lower fuel pressure. I'm on 550cc primary and 1,300cc secondary injectors with a MkIV Supra TT fuel pump. My setup appears to be fuel limited.
Tuner commented that power curve appeared to be heading towards ~470 WHP. After several runs, fuel temps became high, which resulted in lower fuel pressure. I'm on 550cc primary and 1,300cc secondary injectors with a MkIV Supra TT fuel pump. My setup appears to be fuel limited.
06-06-17, 02:29 PM
#40
Dyno jet.
Tuner experienced low fuel pressure at power above 438. Issue got worse as the day went on. Turned out to be an issue with the fuel sender. Issue resolved and now power is higher than before at 25 PSI, but we have not returned to the dyno for new numbers. Concerned about the longetivity of the motor and rear end now. Set at 19 PSI for daily street use.
If you're going for an all out numbers run, it's likely that with enough fuel, 500+ may be possible at the ragged edge based on the data we observed on my setup.
Tuner experienced low fuel pressure at power above 438. Issue got worse as the day went on. Turned out to be an issue with the fuel sender. Issue resolved and now power is higher than before at 25 PSI, but we have not returned to the dyno for new numbers. Concerned about the longetivity of the motor and rear end now. Set at 19 PSI for daily street use.
If you're going for an all out numbers run, it's likely that with enough fuel, 500+ may be possible at the ragged edge based on the data we observed on my setup.
06-06-17, 11:03 PM
#42
?
06-07-17, 09:16 AM
#44
Something isn't adding up here.
When I run 450-470WHP here in CO, I am doing it at 6,000FT above sea level and at 18PSI.
I am using 3,816CC of fuel and I was running a M7 nozzle with 50/50 water/meth. you only have 3,700cc of fuel.
With 3,700cc of fuel and 75% duty cycle you probably have around 350WHP. Sounds like the dyno is off.
When I run 450-470WHP here in CO, I am doing it at 6,000FT above sea level and at 18PSI.
I am using 3,816CC of fuel and I was running a M7 nozzle with 50/50 water/meth. you only have 3,700cc of fuel.
With 3,700cc of fuel and 75% duty cycle you probably have around 350WHP. Sounds like the dyno is off.
06-07-17, 06:09 PM
#45
I tried taking a look at a couple of rotary fuel calculators and came up with a wide range of possible power levels depending on fuel pressure. My FPR increases fuel pressure 1:1 with positive manifold pressure. Under peak load, fuel pressure is ~59 PSI on my setup. Am I missing something?
As far as the dyno goes, my setup made ~425 WHP on the HPS hub dyno last week. The 438 WHP figure is on the Lucky Seven dyno jet dyno this week.
As far as the dyno goes, my setup made ~425 WHP on the HPS hub dyno last week. The 438 WHP figure is on the Lucky Seven dyno jet dyno this week.
06-08-17, 12:50 PM
#46
this is the turbo I ordered for my single turbo conversion .91 a/r 61mm compressor 76mm turbine. I am running this on a hks stainless manifold with haltech ps1000 ems. Plan on running a aeromotive stealth 340lph fuel pump. My question is would 1000cc primaries and 2000cc secondaries be overkill for this setup if im shooting for 400 - 450? Is there such thing as too much fuel? if it helps I plan on running this on 93 pump and water injection. Thanks in advance for the help
06-09-17, 05:33 AM
#47
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
https://www.full-race.com/store/borg...sxe-8376-62mm/
Guys, if you need any support on the turbo and accessories themselves, let me know. I'd be more than willing to answer a few of your questions regarding the product selection to match your intended goals.
-SLA
Guys, if you need any support on the turbo and accessories themselves, let me know. I'd be more than willing to answer a few of your questions regarding the product selection to match your intended goals.
-SLA
06-09-17, 05:42 AM
#48
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
this is the turbo I ordered for my single turbo conversion .91 a/r 61mm compressor 76mm turbine. I am running this on a hks stainless manifold with haltech ps1000 ems. Plan on running a aeromotive stealth 340lph fuel pump. My question is would 1000cc primaries and 2000cc secondaries be overkill for this setup if im shooting for 400 - 450? Is there such thing as too much fuel? if it helps I plan on running this on 93 pump and water injection. Thanks in advance for the help
Assuming you are set at 3 Bar since you're not saying otherwise, that's 6000cc/min at 100% DC. So, let's say a nice 80% DC gets you 4800cc/min. If that pump actually had PERFECT flow with no restriction, no lines, etc, 340lph converts to 5667cc/min of fuel delivery @ a little under 3 Bar. Looking at a graph of it's output and the understanding that pump reference pressure must increase to overcome BOOST in a system, then I can tell you from experience that this setup won't work. So running 1 Bar of boost (14.7psi), you're looking at only around 270lph (4500cc/min) of output at the pump (due to the pressure head the fuel now has to work against), and that's not even including the loss from lines, filters, etc. WAY underpowered for pump.
Luckily the Walbro F90000274 DOES work for this application and is damn near the same size. Run 10ga wire to it with a 30/40A relay and do it right.
The HKS Stainless Manifold is an Undivided T4, right? Ehh, kinda a waste on this turbo that has a Divided T4 Turbine Housing.
Last edited by RGHTBrainDesign; 06-09-17 at 05:45 AM.
06-09-17, 07:03 AM
#49
That's not even close to the right sized pump for that system.
Assuming you are set at 3 Bar since you're not saying otherwise, that's 6000cc/min at 100% DC. So, let's say a nice 80% DC gets you 4800cc/min. If that pump actually had PERFECT flow with no restriction, no lines, etc, 340lph converts to 5667cc/min of fuel delivery @ a little under 3 Bar. Looking at a graph of it's output and the understanding that pump reference pressure must increase to overcome BOOST in a system, then I can tell you from experience that this setup won't work. So running 1 Bar of boost (14.7psi), you're looking at only around 270lph (4500cc/min) of output at the pump (due to the pressure head the fuel now has to work against), and that's not even including the loss from lines, filters, etc. WAY underpowered for pump.
Luckily the Walbro F90000274 DOES work for this application and is damn near the same size. Run 10ga wire to it with a 30/40A relay and do it right.
The HKS Stainless Manifold is an Undivided T4, right? Ehh, kinda a waste on this turbo that has a Divided T4 Turbine Housing.
Assuming you are set at 3 Bar since you're not saying otherwise, that's 6000cc/min at 100% DC. So, let's say a nice 80% DC gets you 4800cc/min. If that pump actually had PERFECT flow with no restriction, no lines, etc, 340lph converts to 5667cc/min of fuel delivery @ a little under 3 Bar. Looking at a graph of it's output and the understanding that pump reference pressure must increase to overcome BOOST in a system, then I can tell you from experience that this setup won't work. So running 1 Bar of boost (14.7psi), you're looking at only around 270lph (4500cc/min) of output at the pump (due to the pressure head the fuel now has to work against), and that's not even including the loss from lines, filters, etc. WAY underpowered for pump.
Luckily the Walbro F90000274 DOES work for this application and is damn near the same size. Run 10ga wire to it with a 30/40A relay and do it right.
The HKS Stainless Manifold is an Undivided T4, right? Ehh, kinda a waste on this turbo that has a Divided T4 Turbine Housing.
06-09-17, 08:47 AM
#50
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
assuming 43.5 static fuel pressure, 3700 CC/Minute Gross fuel capacity, 85% duty cycle, deducting 13% for lag you have 2740 CC Net going into your engine.
you state you are at 75% duty so you have 2414 CC/min of base fuel at 13.5 V assuming (generously) you have no line restriction.
2414 CC/Min is .637 GPM or 4.04 pounds of air per minute
4.04 X 11.3 AFR is 45.6 pounds of air.
45.6 X 14.471 = 659 CFM = 343 rw rotary hp at 75% IDC.
389 rw at 85%.
assuming all of the above is correct i would conclude that 390 is max.
certain variables could add or subtract:
static fuel pressure setting.
you mention 59 psi at peak load.
i am not certain what this represents...
if it is 59 psi at 25 psi boost and your static is set at 43.5 you have major fuel pressure degradation. at 25 psi boost fuel pressure should be 68.5. flow and power would decrease by 8% unless injector ontimes were increased to offset.
logging fuel pressure is essential. all turbo rotaries should have a digital fuel pressure sensor. there should never be any net fuel pressure degradation V boost. many newer ECUs log "Fuel Pressure Differential." FPD should not change with boost.
as was just posted the fuel pump not only needs to generate pressure by transporting the fuel but also must overcome 14.7 atmospheric pressure and the additional (boost) pressure generated by the turbo.
your power runs were at 25 tapering to 20.
at 25 PSI boost your pump (at 13.5 V) can make .98 GPM or 6.2 pounds of air per minute which can support between 420 and 460 rotary rwhp.
you can raise the static pressure to increase deliverability but higher pressure works against the pumps output and increases only w the square root of the increase. if you increase pump pressure 16% you increase flow by 4%.
the purpose of my post is not to question your dyno figures, rather to suggest that perhaps some of your other measurements might be off.
taking a step back and looking at the wider view, you have a turbo that can make 573 (max) rotary hp and you have a fuel injectors for 400. you have a fuel pump good for 500.
matching your fuel system to max air might be a wise long term plan.
one of my engine customers running the same turbo at 19 PSI made 519 rwhp/435 Tq on 91 octane at 5000 ft (Az) using 75/25 meth-water. he backed it up by smoking a C7 modded corvette and a turbo fox body mustang. the 62 SXE can get it done.
i can query him as to his injectors/duty cycle etc if you wish.
good luck
you state you are at 75% duty so you have 2414 CC/min of base fuel at 13.5 V assuming (generously) you have no line restriction.
2414 CC/Min is .637 GPM or 4.04 pounds of air per minute
4.04 X 11.3 AFR is 45.6 pounds of air.
45.6 X 14.471 = 659 CFM = 343 rw rotary hp at 75% IDC.
389 rw at 85%.
assuming all of the above is correct i would conclude that 390 is max.
certain variables could add or subtract:
static fuel pressure setting.
you mention 59 psi at peak load.
i am not certain what this represents...
if it is 59 psi at 25 psi boost and your static is set at 43.5 you have major fuel pressure degradation. at 25 psi boost fuel pressure should be 68.5. flow and power would decrease by 8% unless injector ontimes were increased to offset.
logging fuel pressure is essential. all turbo rotaries should have a digital fuel pressure sensor. there should never be any net fuel pressure degradation V boost. many newer ECUs log "Fuel Pressure Differential." FPD should not change with boost.
as was just posted the fuel pump not only needs to generate pressure by transporting the fuel but also must overcome 14.7 atmospheric pressure and the additional (boost) pressure generated by the turbo.
your power runs were at 25 tapering to 20.
at 25 PSI boost your pump (at 13.5 V) can make .98 GPM or 6.2 pounds of air per minute which can support between 420 and 460 rotary rwhp.
you can raise the static pressure to increase deliverability but higher pressure works against the pumps output and increases only w the square root of the increase. if you increase pump pressure 16% you increase flow by 4%.
the purpose of my post is not to question your dyno figures, rather to suggest that perhaps some of your other measurements might be off.
taking a step back and looking at the wider view, you have a turbo that can make 573 (max) rotary hp and you have a fuel injectors for 400. you have a fuel pump good for 500.
matching your fuel system to max air might be a wise long term plan.
one of my engine customers running the same turbo at 19 PSI made 519 rwhp/435 Tq on 91 octane at 5000 ft (Az) using 75/25 meth-water. he backed it up by smoking a C7 modded corvette and a turbo fox body mustang. the 62 SXE can get it done.
i can query him as to his injectors/duty cycle etc if you wish.
good luck