Twin GT28r Turbo Kit Pics
03-30-05, 02:30 PM
#151
WTB** Very Low Miles 94-95
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tejas
Posts: 3,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AJatx
For folks who are speculating the spool time, you'll need to reference a non-sequential set-up instead of the stock sequential set-up.
The stock sequential set-up will use both runners for the smaller turbo before transitioning the vavle for the secondary turbo. That's what really makes the great spool and torque in the lower rpms in a stock set-up. I've looked at non-sequential dyno graphs and the torque and power curve don't even come close to the stock set-up. I haven't seen any set-up that can beat the stock twin sequentials as far as lower rpm (3krpm or lower) in torque.
J
The stock sequential set-up will use both runners for the smaller turbo before transitioning the vavle for the secondary turbo. That's what really makes the great spool and torque in the lower rpms in a stock set-up. I've looked at non-sequential dyno graphs and the torque and power curve don't even come close to the stock set-up. I haven't seen any set-up that can beat the stock twin sequentials as far as lower rpm (3krpm or lower) in torque.
J
how i miss them.
http://www.conceptart.org/dyno/ArtguyM2hpsheet.jpg
http://www.conceptart.org/dyno/ArtguyM2torquesheet.jpg
am watching this kit very closely...I have not yet seen a full custom twin setups performance. just the hybrids....
j
03-31-05, 07:29 PM
#152
Yeah, the anti-lag system is on the turbine wheel, not compressor wheel.
Thanks for catching it.
Art, nice torque curve! Last time I looked through dyno graphs in the forum was almost 3 yrs ago.
I meant to say the stock manifold (sequential) system rather than "stock turbos." The point being that you get both exhaust pulses (front and rear rotors) to spool the small primary turbo quickly and then transition the secondary turbo at higher rpm.
It's great for daily driving and parking lot events.
J
Thanks for catching it.
Art, nice torque curve! Last time I looked through dyno graphs in the forum was almost 3 yrs ago.
I meant to say the stock manifold (sequential) system rather than "stock turbos." The point being that you get both exhaust pulses (front and rear rotors) to spool the small primary turbo quickly and then transition the secondary turbo at higher rpm.
It's great for daily driving and parking lot events.
J
04-05-05, 07:23 AM
#154
"Challenged" since 1993
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpoolinRX
When is this thing gonna see the dyno? Or when are we gonna see the dyno numbers?
04-05-05, 01:47 PM
#156
To Live Is To Die
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mansfield Ohio
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't wait to see the dyno numbers, Mike showed me the kit on his car (wasn't complete) while i was their getting a new ignition. The turbos look bad ***, and those turbines spun so easy when Mike spun one.
Last edited by importrx7; 04-05-05 at 01:49 PM.
04-05-05, 10:43 PM
#158
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In the Sky
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jason
These are mustang dyno numbers, so on a dynojet they would be somewhere around 420 RWHP. I will post the dyno graphs tomorrow.
Jason
Jason
I think Mustang dyno sheets show some of those settings on the top of the dyno sheet?? I guess you could compare those to other sheets
04-05-05, 11:30 PM
#159
"Challenged" since 1993
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Poweraxel
not 100% true it all depends what the dyno operator puts in the car config settings of the dyno. My friends shop can make a supra w/ 500 rwhp (dynojet) 600rwhp or even 425 rwhp all with a couple of key strokes on his Mustang Dyno. I even saw a stock Evo spin 330WHP to all 4 wheels! This car was 100% completely stock! To really compare the 2 dynos you need to put the car on a dynojet in a similar enviorment.
I think Mustang dyno sheets show some of those settings on the top of the dyno sheet?? I guess you could compare those to other sheets
I think Mustang dyno sheets show some of those settings on the top of the dyno sheet?? I guess you could compare those to other sheets
Very true that you can make the #s come out any way you want, but the RX7Store's current dyno graphs are on base Mustang #s, meaning no correction #s entered and the lowest #s the dyno will produce as programmed from Mustang.
We have had several of our local customers tested on different dynos in the area and showed between 10 and 12% higher #s than on ours.
Last edited by Rotarded; 04-05-05 at 11:33 PM.
04-10-05, 08:23 PM
#161
EMPEROR
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Aumsville, OR
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jason
We did a bunch of pulls on the dyno today. As I recall we hit 379 RWHP at 16lbs of boost. These are mustang dyno numbers, so on a dynojet they would be somewhere around 420 RWHP. I will post the dyno graphs tomorrow.
Jason
Jason
Justus
04-17-05, 01:42 PM
#170
"Challenged" since 1993
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are still dialing in the boost control settings on the spec II. Our initial trails had the wastegate coming online at 10 psi. The spool RPMs were nearly identical to my ported, stock cassette, non-seq twins until 10 psi, and tapered a bit after. The internal wastegates on the GT28Rs have 4lb springs. We tuned for just under 17psi on the new set-up.
Other trace data showed my 50-120 mph time, on the dyno with inertia settings on, was .9 seconds quicker than the old set-up.
For comparison's sake, my 15psi, non-sequential set-up would jump a car length (from a 40 roll) on a 17 psi GT35R car instantly. It also ran a 11.83 @116.
I feel confident that we can reach 17psi by 4000 rpms and hope to get an opportunity to "re-tune" this week to confirm the data..
Other trace data showed my 50-120 mph time, on the dyno with inertia settings on, was .9 seconds quicker than the old set-up.
For comparison's sake, my 15psi, non-sequential set-up would jump a car length (from a 40 roll) on a 17 psi GT35R car instantly. It also ran a 11.83 @116.
I feel confident that we can reach 17psi by 4000 rpms and hope to get an opportunity to "re-tune" this week to confirm the data..
Last edited by Rotarded; 04-17-05 at 01:45 PM.
04-18-05, 03:35 AM
#173
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Chaosx1
Sorry if this has already been mentioned but can they successfully be run sequentially? And what's the recommended boost? Thanks.
The numbers look pretty unimpressive for the cash outlay and complexity, I suppose the kicker is that those turbos can run easily and reliably at those power levels? They seem to spool a bit quicker than stock non-seq as well.
04-18-05, 07:30 AM
#174
Lava Surfer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kailua, HI
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rotarded
We are still dialing in the boost control settings on the spec II. Our initial trails had the wastegate coming online at 10 psi. The spool RPMs were nearly identical to my ported, stock cassette, non-seq twins until 10 psi, and tapered a bit after. The internal wastegates on the GT28Rs have 4lb springs. We tuned for just under 17psi on the new set-up.
Other trace data showed my 50-120 mph time, on the dyno with inertia settings on, was .9 seconds quicker than the old set-up.
For comparison's sake, my 15psi, non-sequential set-up would jump a car length (from a 40 roll) on a 17 psi GT35R car instantly. It also ran a 11.83 @116.
I feel confident that we can reach 17psi by 4000 rpms and hope to get an opportunity to "re-tune" this week to confirm the data..
Other trace data showed my 50-120 mph time, on the dyno with inertia settings on, was .9 seconds quicker than the old set-up.
For comparison's sake, my 15psi, non-sequential set-up would jump a car length (from a 40 roll) on a 17 psi GT35R car instantly. It also ran a 11.83 @116.
I feel confident that we can reach 17psi by 4000 rpms and hope to get an opportunity to "re-tune" this week to confirm the data..
04-18-05, 07:39 AM
#175
Originally Posted by bingoboy
so are you saying that it ran at 10psi? or did you get it to go at 15psi? because the posted dyno sheet seems rather disappointing for that setup running @ 15psi.
Jason