LUPE

I doubt he'll have problems with his axles as long as he doesn't get into wheel hop. He's only running like some 195 series tires

I don't doubt the power...... When I trapped 122mph, that dyno showed that I had 315hp (Corrected 378). My car is light.

johnrxt2

carl the dyno reads low do to the other threads where we dicussed this already. Look at the power the other cars made there all damn close to being right. im trying to locate a dyno jet near by.

Carl Byck

Don't sweat it, I should have left you alone, Have fun, and take care of your equipment. Regards, Carl

johnrxt2

thanks carl im just going by what we were told if any thing is off im sorry. im happy with the way my car runs and the power it makes.

KNONFS

iTrader: (14)

Or is this a secret

finnicky7

Latley it sure seems like every dyno post is turning into a full on Soap Opera.

Zero R

iTrader: (1)

And that is all that should matter. Enjoy!!

EFINI_RX-7_RZ

Ok, from the creator of the AF61R himself, here are the specs (he posted them on 2 other threads, should have posted them on this thread, too):

Now, this is going to be SO MUCH MORE constructive than what has been done up to this point on this thread: people, analize the specs on this turbo, you WILL find that, indeed, it is a quite smart piece of hardware. Both turbine and compressor are larger than GT35R's, but not by much, in fact, it fits nicely between the GT35R and the GT40R size-wise. But the smartest thing about it lies in the fact that it uses a "small "Q" trim turbine". Remember the teachings from Mazda and Hitachi about best turbines for rotaries: the easier flowing the turbine is, the higher the volumetric eficiency achieved, and the straighter the blades on the turbine (nearest to perpendicular to flow), the easier it is to spool up. This is because rotary turbine logic is somewhat opposite piston turbine logic: instead of a smaller, more restrictive turbine helping fast spool up as on piston engines, a larger, more open turbine actually achieves faster spool on a rotary engine, while helping flow at the top end at the same time . The explanation for this lies on the nature of the rotary engine: its flow speed is much slower than on piston engines at the same given speed (at least 2/3 as slow), this given the fact that air moves at 2/3 the crank speed on a rotary, compared to a similar piston engine (rotary needs 3 turns on the crank to complete the 4 "Otto" strokes, pistons need 2, so don´t think of your 13B as a 4 cyl. 2.6 piston engine running running at the same speed, but rather think of it as a 6 cyl. 3.9 piston engine running at 2/3 the RPM of your 13B), but the pulse, or "impact", as Mazda calls it, is much stronger since the ports are fully open much faster than on a poppet valve piston engine. Thus, slow flow speed, high flow volumes need the least back pressure to flow out easily: that is one of the smart things about using a "Q" trim turbine: less back pressure, which equals higher power at high RPMs. The other smart thing about the "Q" trim is that its blades are straighter, more perpendicular to flow, the same way the '97 up 280hp FDs have straighter blades than the early FDs, this makes the best use of the strong exhaust pulse or "impact" forces, thus the fast spool up. Plus, it already has a divided housing. Now, after saying all this, I must add that I can't find a turbine nor a compressor with these specs on any of my catalogs, not from Garrett, not from Precision, not from Turbonetics, in fact, this is the first time I have ever heard of a "small" Q trim turbine being mentioned by anybody. Either Ron has really dug down and into the depths of the Garrett parts bin or Garrett has really made custom turbines and compressors for Ron. Also Ron, would you care to provide us with the A/R of the compressor housing, also? He fails to mention it, but from the E-Bay photos you can also see that the compressor housing he uses has got an anti-surge mouth, too.

NOW, let us all analyze all these points and provide CONSTRUCTIVE discussion to this thread, which basically is all about confirming or refuting, in one way or another, even without the grace of a dyno sheet (which somehow even up to this point nobody seems to be able to get a hold of), that this turbo really is a great new option available to us all and that Ron at DaVinci really did assamble with Garrett the ultimate turbo for rotary engines. Let the COSTRUCTIVE discussion begin!

LUPE

Carl Byck

If you are correct, then my T66 .81 Q trim should spool faster than my PT67 .81 P trim. The T66 has a smaller compressor in a bigger housing, but a larger Q trim turbine. My spool is pretty slow(still enough to roast 13" slicks), but past 5200rpm I surpass pretty much every turbo on the comparison site in terms of spool, and power. I think this is due to incorrect start duty, and feedback settings on my AVCR, you feel that the Q trim will spool faster. On a piston engine the Q trim will spool ~250-450 rpm later than a comparable P trim(this I know), perhaps when I get some time, I will try the T66. I supect I will loose a little top end, but we shall see. Carl

Carl Byck

FWIW, CARX7 made the same power with faster spool with a PT68 Q trim BB.84 divided, than my PT67 .81 P trim log manifold. This comes as no suprise, my set-up is a dinosoar by way of comparison, it will be interesting to see if the AVCR can make up for the short comings of the Turbo/manifold combo...

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

Finally someone who agrees with me on the GTQ wheels .

I am running a modded tiny stock S5 1.00AR exhaust housing that provides high velocity and going from "O" trim to clipped "O" trim to clipped "P" trim the turbo response kept IMPROVING with same 60-1 compressor.

Big turbine in a conservitive housing will spool well and flow well; a good compromise.

Carl Byck

I used to say that, but somewhere along the wa, I convined myself that the rotary, and piston differences should not be that large, and that spool would uffer with the Q trim, though not as much as a piston engine. The premis would be that the additional mass is more than offset by the better geometry, and greater flow of a Q trim. Carl

EFINI_RX-7_RZ

Size-wise, and thus mass-wise too, DaVinci's "small" Q trim wheel specs smaller than what we commonly know as the Q trim, or GTQ trim wheel. Perhaps this, too, helps spool up? The truth is, the more perpendicular turbine blade area facing the exhaust flow, the more can be extracted from the sudden "impact" of the opening exhaust port, and at low turbine speeds, mass might not play such a high braking role. Weirdest thing is that Mazda and Hitachi both had to re-learn this 2 times: first while going from the S4 "variable A/R" turbo to the S5 full twin scroll, and then when going from the early FD design to the later, 280 hp spec. They had it right the first time, though, on the 12A-T. Yeah, normal piston engine logic sticks so hard, even Mazda and Hitachi have trouble getting unstuck out of it. At least Mazda has always been aware that rotary engines are "better suited" to turbocharging than piston engines. Perhaps Mazda, again, forgot this when they made the Renesis. Hope they re-remember it again soon.

sub-zero

I think anybody interested in this turbo should talk to Ron himself. He is a very helpful honest guy and I would deal with him anytime. I think I will try this turbo out myself after talking to Ron.

Good job Ron.

Zero R

iTrader: (1)

AF61R 434@15lbs Torque 322
35RT4 436@16lbs Torque 324

I am not seeing any real difference here as far as small Q trim versus GT turbines, Who knows how well they will perform up top.Time will tell. These are both very similar sized turbo's one is BB one is not. I haven't been in a AF61R powered car. But I will say it would need to respond better than the stock twins to beat the response broken09's car has. The turbo is literally connected to your right foot. It's that transient response that makes the turbo shine.

Carl Byck

Those numbers are very like my PT67 449/330

meddle

Price becomes a factor here as well. The turbo goes for $750.

LUPE

i did fail to mention that ron said this is a hybrid that 80% of parts are completely custom made and also, the cover does have anti-surge slots as well.

Carl Byck

Interesting, why the anti surge housing? I have not gheard of 61s surging, and it definitely slows spool. Carl

EFINI_RX-7_RZ

If DaVinci's AF61R spools as good or better than A-Spec's GT35R T4, and its transient response is comparable, then, yes, cost-wise, the smart money will move to the AF61R. Sleeve bearings are so much cheaper to repair, and the turbo costs itself but half the price of the GT35R T4. I wonder how an AF61R BB will behave?

It's amazing that at this date and age such a highly customized turbo can be realized at such ridiculously low price. Does it has 100% Garrett parts? Sure it doesn't have any sub-standard parts on it?

The anti-surge cover might be needed to counter surge at low RPMs. If it really spools like twins on drugs, then the anti-surge cover will be a MUST.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

Hmm, do you think an anti surge cover help my 60-1? Do they even make one in TO4B size?

I was just get positive manifold pressure ~1,500rpm, 3-4psi by 2,000rpm, 8psi by 2,500rpm, 10psi by 3,000 and full 17psi ~3,500rpm.

pluto

honestly, if you're gonna compare #'s. at least compare apples to apples.

you can't compare #'s between 2nd gen vs. 3rd gen. and also 15psi vs. 16psi.

Zero R

iTrader: (1)

Then quote the whole other thread and everyone in it as well. Don't direct you crap at me. Got it........ good.

BOOSTD 7

Again, WTF is wrong with you people?