Just got my car back; Gt3574 + New engine
02-14-10, 11:43 AM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just got my car back; Gt3574 + New engine
Hello,
I have finally registered after lurking for years. My previous car was a C5 z06, and I've owned this Rx-7 for a little over 4 years now. When I purchased the car it had the basic bolt on mods and a street-ported engine. The mods were apexi pfc, downpipe, RB single tip catback, and an intake. I brought it by a local dealership and they told me the car was mechanically sound. I found a local shop on here, Turblown, and they showed me otherwise. They installed a water/alcohol injection kit, an ambient air intake( where the R2 oil cooler would be), and did some toe end links, fuel filter, and a full fuel system(1680cc secondaries/FJO injection driver/FPR etc). Last year the the twins went out, and I opted for them to build a new engine and go the single turbo route. The old rebuild was a turd as I was shown, and that is what we figured anyhow. Fast forward to what I had done;
- ALS seals, small street-port, studs, coated bearings/oil pump, loop lines
-Xcessive Oil Pan
Gt3574( P trim T4 1.15 Garret GT35R) @ 16psi
.120" wall 304L manifold, 3.5" downpipe, hardlined coolant and oil lines, Tial 44mm waste-gate to atmosphere
3.5" Muffled Midpipe
Switch from 600cc of methanol to 50/50
Custom Greddy Intercooler installation with Ron Davis Radiator
Knightsports Style Vented Hood
Tial Q 50mm bov
Remote Oil filter
Premix
Tweakit Idler
Relocated Battery to passenger side bin
This car is a hell of a lot faster than my old z06. The tires boil on the freeway. I was told my someone following me that it lays two big patches down.
We are hitting the dyno later this week. I will post video and the sheets. Here are some photos;
I have finally registered after lurking for years. My previous car was a C5 z06, and I've owned this Rx-7 for a little over 4 years now. When I purchased the car it had the basic bolt on mods and a street-ported engine. The mods were apexi pfc, downpipe, RB single tip catback, and an intake. I brought it by a local dealership and they told me the car was mechanically sound. I found a local shop on here, Turblown, and they showed me otherwise. They installed a water/alcohol injection kit, an ambient air intake( where the R2 oil cooler would be), and did some toe end links, fuel filter, and a full fuel system(1680cc secondaries/FJO injection driver/FPR etc). Last year the the twins went out, and I opted for them to build a new engine and go the single turbo route. The old rebuild was a turd as I was shown, and that is what we figured anyhow. Fast forward to what I had done;
- ALS seals, small street-port, studs, coated bearings/oil pump, loop lines
-Xcessive Oil Pan
Gt3574( P trim T4 1.15 Garret GT35R) @ 16psi
.120" wall 304L manifold, 3.5" downpipe, hardlined coolant and oil lines, Tial 44mm waste-gate to atmosphere
3.5" Muffled Midpipe
Switch from 600cc of methanol to 50/50
Custom Greddy Intercooler installation with Ron Davis Radiator
Knightsports Style Vented Hood
Tial Q 50mm bov
Remote Oil filter
Premix
Tweakit Idler
Relocated Battery to passenger side bin
This car is a hell of a lot faster than my old z06. The tires boil on the freeway. I was told my someone following me that it lays two big patches down.
We are hitting the dyno later this week. I will post video and the sheets. Here are some photos;
02-14-10, 05:17 PM
#4
Full Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: England
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i may sound a bit daft here or this might be because the pics were taken when you were still working on the engine bay, put where are your radiator fans? the oil filter looks like it would get in the way when you come them in, are you going for some slimline ones?
02-17-10, 03:10 PM
#5
Come pickup your car 
1.15 Bar, 13degree ignition adv, 1100 degree F post turbo EGTS
448rwhp, 388 ft lbs of torque. Not bad for a tiny streetport and 61mm of turbo..
10psi by 2800rpms
Ran into a bottle neck at 6200rpms, was on its way to more...
1.15 Bar, 13degree ignition adv, 1100 degree F post turbo EGTS
448rwhp, 388 ft lbs of torque. Not bad for a tiny streetport and 61mm of turbo..
10psi by 2800rpms
Ran into a bottle neck at 6200rpms, was on its way to more...
Trending Topics
02-19-10, 09:02 AM
#8
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
love Sean's GT3574...
i have always believed that journal bearing turbos are under-appreciated... not saying they are better than BBs, just that the diff is much less than most realise.
also, the big deal w the GT3574 is the hot side.
consider:
GT3582r
compressor average sq inch area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.171
GT3574
compress area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.89
cheap and deadly
are the dyno numbers SAE?
hc
i have always believed that journal bearing turbos are under-appreciated... not saying they are better than BBs, just that the diff is much less than most realise.
also, the big deal w the GT3574 is the hot side.
consider:
GT3582r
compressor average sq inch area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.171
GT3574
compress area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.89
cheap and deadly
are the dyno numbers SAE?
hc
02-19-10, 09:15 AM
#9
love Sean's GT3574...
i have always believed that journal bearing turbos are under-appreciated... not saying they are better than BBs, just that the diff is much less than most realise.
also, the big deal w the GT3574 is the hot side.
consider:
GT3582r
compressor average sq inch area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.171
GT3574
compress area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.89
cheap and deadly
are the dyno numbers SAE?
hc
i have always believed that journal bearing turbos are under-appreciated... not saying they are better than BBs, just that the diff is much less than most realise.
also, the big deal w the GT3574 is the hot side.
consider:
GT3582r
compressor average sq inch area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.171
GT3574
compress area: 6.386
turbine average area: 5.89
cheap and deadly
are the dyno numbers SAE?
hc
This isn't Sean's turbo. I didn't realize until recently that we've been running this exact turbo combination for at least 4/5 years. I just never threw a catchy name together, I always called it a P trim GT35R...
Dyno numbers aren't SAE. Can I have them corrected to SAE? I am not super familiar with chassis dynos. Only reason we use one really is so we don't have to get arrested tuning a car in 4th gear on the street, and its always nice to be able to look under the hood for a 4th gear pull...
02-19-10, 10:11 AM
#12
Doritos on a toothpick
Lookin good.....but I have a couple of questions about the dyno sheet.....
1. Why was the pull aborted at 6000rpm?
2. what was the Air fuel ratio at higher RPM (looks like a leaning trend in the graph)
3. what was boost at 4000rpm vs 6000rpm
4. why was the input weight changed?..
.....in the future try using one side of the graph for your HP/Tq scales and the other for Afr's or boost....just a suggestion
1. Why was the pull aborted at 6000rpm?
2. what was the Air fuel ratio at higher RPM (looks like a leaning trend in the graph)
3. what was boost at 4000rpm vs 6000rpm
4. why was the input weight changed?..
.....in the future try using one side of the graph for your HP/Tq scales and the other for Afr's or boost....just a suggestion
02-19-10, 11:21 AM
#13
Lookin good.....but I have a couple of questions about the dyno sheet.....
1. Why was the pull aborted at 6000rpm?
2. what was the Air fuel ratio at higher RPM (looks like a leaning trend in the graph)
3. what was boost at 4000rpm vs 6000rpm
4. why was the input weight changed?..
.....in the future try using one side of the graph for your HP/Tq scales and the other for Afr's or boost....just a suggestion
1. Why was the pull aborted at 6000rpm?
2. what was the Air fuel ratio at higher RPM (looks like a leaning trend in the graph)
3. what was boost at 4000rpm vs 6000rpm
4. why was the input weight changed?..
.....in the future try using one side of the graph for your HP/Tq scales and the other for Afr's or boost....just a suggestion
That is not the best representation of AFR. We did almost 20 pulls, and didn't print every one. We ended up 13.1 out of boost, 12.9 up to 5psi and 11.8 to 16psi, past that it was tapering down to 11:1. Keep in mind there is water/alcohol injection and only 13 degrees total ignition advance from 15+psi
After we did a few pulls a subie tuner showed up and I had him resync the car and make sure all the dyno input numbers were correct. I just wanted to verify that everything was correct. He pulled up the MustangDyno's database and inputted their specifications.
02-19-10, 07:13 PM
#17
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
They have a resistor (R) which is a plus for rotaries running a CAS wrt EMF, they are the proper length and socket size, and (most importantly) they have the small iridium electrode with ground strap.
To quote Ari, "These things will fire even if they're immersed in a bucket of oil"
02-19-10, 09:31 PM
#19
dorito powered
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 2,839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow, this thing looks and sounds like a beast.
I really need to meet Ari in person, I've spoken with him a number of times over the phone and done quite a bit of business through him and he seems like a realy character.
I really need to meet Ari in person, I've spoken with him a number of times over the phone and done quite a bit of business through him and he seems like a realy character.
02-25-10, 12:24 AM
#22
Bosozoomku
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is very impressive. However, the large turbine A/R contradicts what I've read about quickly spooling a turbo.
From the Honeywell/Garrett webpage:
So why is it then, given the above statement from Garrett, that the large A/R of this setup is spooling so quick?
From the Honeywell/Garrett webpage:
Imagine two 3.5L engines both using GT30R turbochargers. The only difference between the two engines is a different turbine housing A/R; otherwise the two engines are identical:
1. Engine #1 has turbine housing with an A/R of 0.63
2. Engine #2 has a turbine housing with an A/R of 1.06.
What can we infer about the intended use and the turbocharger matching for each engine?
Engine#1: This engine is using a smaller A/R turbine housing (0.63) thus biased more towards low-end torque and optimal boost response. Many would describe this as being more "fun" to drive on the street, as normal daily driving habits tend to favor transient response. However, at higher engine speeds, this smaller A/R housing will result in high backpressure, which can result in a loss of top end power. This type of engine performance is desirable for street applications where the low speed boost response and transient conditions are more important than top end power.
Engine #2: This engine is using a larger A/R turbine housing (1.06) and is biased towards peak horsepower, while sacrificing transient response and torque at very low engine speeds. The larger A/R turbine housing will continue to minimize backpressure at high rpm, to the benefit of engine peak power. On the other hand, this will also raise the engine speed at which the turbo can provide boost, increasing time to boost. The performance of Engine #2 is more desirable for racing applications than Engine #1 since Engine #2 will be operating at high engine speeds most of the time.
1. Engine #1 has turbine housing with an A/R of 0.63
2. Engine #2 has a turbine housing with an A/R of 1.06.
What can we infer about the intended use and the turbocharger matching for each engine?
Engine#1: This engine is using a smaller A/R turbine housing (0.63) thus biased more towards low-end torque and optimal boost response. Many would describe this as being more "fun" to drive on the street, as normal daily driving habits tend to favor transient response. However, at higher engine speeds, this smaller A/R housing will result in high backpressure, which can result in a loss of top end power. This type of engine performance is desirable for street applications where the low speed boost response and transient conditions are more important than top end power.
Engine #2: This engine is using a larger A/R turbine housing (1.06) and is biased towards peak horsepower, while sacrificing transient response and torque at very low engine speeds. The larger A/R turbine housing will continue to minimize backpressure at high rpm, to the benefit of engine peak power. On the other hand, this will also raise the engine speed at which the turbo can provide boost, increasing time to boost. The performance of Engine #2 is more desirable for racing applications than Engine #1 since Engine #2 will be operating at high engine speeds most of the time.
02-25-10, 02:23 AM
#23
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to keep in mind that this is a GT3574, and it has the exhaust housing machined to take a larger turbine wheel. While you can compare the results to a GT35, you can't compare them apples to apples on their exhaust A/Rs because they aren't the same turbo (not that end anyway).
