Please, with your great wisdom, try contributing more than just this. I'm on here every day fixing **** on ECUs by other "tuners", trying to support a community that I love. I post up a corrected Matchbot and can confirm it is flawed. I'm asking for real data for those of us who have running cars (I do not) with turbo speed sensors so we can plot things out mathematically and correct these calculations on Matchbot using REAL WORLD **** (Ideal Gas Law).

I think instead of helping others, I need to simply go work on my car... Why should I care that you're wrong? Too many ***** have been given out for this forum with zero gain.

 

I guess EFR turbo's and TurboBlown don't help this community or know the same basic Gas Laws that you do either lol... get over yourself bud.. that's all.

 

Aren't you building your first single turbo rotary? Just now ditching the twins? Big talk from someone who hasn't actually been there or done that. How many data logs have you worked through on how many cars? Whatever you say chief.

How overly adult of you. You've now thrown both law and fact aside for name calling.

Me and my ideal gas law will be just fine, along with all 700hp my keg will hold for years due to all the bullshit laws and theories I used to balance the system up front. Literally every petrol fuel vehicle on the road today was designed by those principles and the rest of this is just apes turning wrenches. There's a reason the 787 did what it did, hell theres even hundreds of pages published by NASA on the mathematics behind the intake manifold gas flowpath of the 787 peripheral port. You sound like a honda hotboi, but then again most all of this forum does now.



Someone ban me, this is a neverending waste of my time

Skeese

 

I didn't say to go to a 1.45.

I shared my results using that housing.

Its not hypotheticals, or maths . It is actual data.

 

 

The compressor map on both turbos shows that 9280 being more efficient at the boost levels I will be set at. More efficiency means lower EMAP, that is a fact.
The combination of the compressor size and the turbine size allows for 130hp more. As stated by someone previously, the fact that it is capable of flowing more air (110 lbs) means that it actually is a more efficient unit after the crossover.

High emap occurs mainly beyond a turbo chargers efficiency limit, example, stock twins being pushed past 15psi, although the stock exhuast manifold on the twins adds to the emap as well.

Why would you not trust Borg Warner' s compressor map?

Also, that 1-1 emap at a high horspower/boost level is virtually unheard of in a Rotary engine with boost, especially with the massive overlap on Bridge/Pports.

 

Not that we weren't aware, but thank you for revalidating you have nothing to contribute.

 

Someone just do a back to back with sensors hooked up to log the data and post it. I tend to agree with the gas law, but it's been more than a decade since I took engineering classes haha.

I will send a brand new shiny 9280 to contribute. Who has a 9180? And who has a running car hahahha.....

 

Ideal gas law bro!

 

Mods should really not be instigating members of the community. It's not right because the mod can ban the member of the community for saying anything back and frame it as "picking a fight with a mod".

I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.

 

Yeah bro

Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.

Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.

Bro.

Skeese

 

You sir are a saint and a scholar. Godspeed.

Skeese

 

As a mod, I disagree. Most of the mods are enthusiasts and some have a very vast knowledge of these cars. We are here to help but we are also here to be a part of the community. As long as the mod can keep from getting their feelings hurt they should be afforded all the same joys as a regular member. Trolling(to some degree) and debate is as big of a part of motor sports as racing itself. Its unfortunate some have fragile egos and I will say unless someone posts some crazy over the line attack on someone I welcome the ribbing and passion that comes from these debates.

 

I totally agree with you DJ. It's the feelings hurt part that some can't handle haha. I'll probably get banned for this post.

 

Same team dude! I been against EMAP from day 1!

 

By the way, the ideal gas law assumes a closed system and doesn't account for fluid velocity or pumping efficiency. It's a complete overgeneralization of a very complicated system. Bernoulli is rolling in his grave, for one.

But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?

It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.

 

My guess is the Matchbot calculator is based on a 4-cycle IC process, which of course is not applicable to a rotary

 

No .... it's the same process . You just need to know which parameters to change to account for how rotaries are different .
IE : BSFC , volumetric efficiency and engine displacement.

 

It's actually just wrong. Call them and ask or talk to their engineers on the floor at SEMA. They'll admit it's simply a tool used to visualize and the math can be skewed.

 

An online, free, calculator that is only to be used as a rule of thumb/tool for guesstimation and to aid in visualization for marketing purposes you say? Nay, good sir, surely you jest!

 

As per below just saying "ideal gas law" then claiming one compressor "flows more at the same boost" ignoring required engine rpm/VE characteristics is a joke. It is a system, the engine displacement/VE doesn't magically change with a different compressor, what does happen on the far side of compressor maps is lower required shaft power for the same flow on the larger compressor meaning less EMP & temp at the upper limits of the 67mm inducer's range meaning VE improves. Beyond that the comparison is mute as you approach the limits of the larger as it is making significantly more power at a point the other can't reach, a rising EMP:IMP will happen but if you are making 15% more power who cares.

 

I mentioned this in the other thread. I think you're confusing isentropic efficiency of a compressor with work efficiency of a system.

 

Well yeah, DUH! Love ya, buddy!
Sorry, I gotta change my forum name to WRNGBrainDesign before I can reply in seriousness.

 

The compression and combustion phases of the cycle are both closed systems, which is exactly where I referenced boyle's law. Nice try dumbass.

Skeese

 

Oh right. Totally. I forgot the turbo doesn't matter. Did you call BNR and let them know all the compressor upsizes they do are ruining everyones EMAP?