When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Looks like our dyno sensor data was NOT working effectively, so take the power numbers as simply a reference. The car moves out and does a nasty 60-130mph time.
Anyways, Mike, here is how plugs should look at this power level with conservative tuning.
Looks like our dyno sensor data was NOT working effectively, so take the power numbers as simply a reference. The car moves out and does a nasty 60-130mph time.
Anyways, Mike, here is how plugs should look at this power level with conservative tuning.
Gucci,
Thank you for the information. I see your running the plugs Howard has been testing. They look interesting..
No. Howard and I are doing separate, but similar testing on different plugs.
I have 8x new ones I've had here, some in which I've posted in that thread. Some CDI specific.
At the end of the day, the IRE01-34 Leading, IRE01-35 Trailing are the plug I've made the most power on without a shadow of a doubt.
These are my budget plugs, the S31As that all my clients run after break-in.
Thank you for the clarification. How much premix do you run in these cars? I run 2 oz per gallon at least and I run the redline synthetic premix the gas one not the e85 one.
Denso SA31 p/n 3111 about five bucks from Rock Auto. same as 10 heat range NGK, resistor and 21.5 (correct) length. surface gap/no ground strap to potentially turn into a glow plug and cause interior mayhem.
surface gap strongly recommended by Richard Green for trail position for those making over 400.
Gucci, thanks for the pictures. it appears that your lead plug is running hotter in the front and your trail plug is running hotter in the rear.. what turbo?
Denso SA31 p/n 3111 about five bucks from Rock Auto. same as 10 heat range NGK, resistor and 21.5 (correct) length. surface gap/no ground strap to potentially turn into a glow plug and cause interior mayhem.
surface gap strongly recommended by Richard Green for trail position for those making over 400.
Gucci, thanks for the pictures. it appears that your lead plug is running hotter in the front and your trail plug is running hotter in the rear.. what turbo?
Very interesting, maybe I'll give them a try next plug change. Thank you for the input Howard, did you get the chance to take apart your opr?
yes, i found exactly similar marks on the interior. 4 marks, 2 3/8 of an inch apart and 180 degrees from each other. my O ring is perfect. i sent a lengthy detailed email to TurbosmartUSA as background for a call to them Monday.
This is being fed from the front iron like a normal stock car.
@Howard,
Have a look below at the pictures I took under my work magnifier. I have not changed the filter since I got it with the turbo. The filter didn't seem too dirty to me considering its been through 2 engine teardowns but defiantly should have been changing it. There are some large witness marks on the inside of the OPR though where the regulator "diaphragm" moves up and down. You can also see on the piston that there is a rough spot on it. There are 3 of these rougher spots and they are perfectly spaced away from each other which is odd. The witness marks are on both sides of the opr and they are 180 degrees out from each other. Possibly the piston gets stuck in a position resulting in low flow? Please let me know your thoughts
going to go out on a limb and say this is a non-issue, as long as the piston is sliding OK and the o-ring is holding pressure.
maybe use a brake piston honing tool (and clean up the burr on the piston) if piston isn't sliding well.
Unless there is a very fine through drilling or cross cuts on the seat face, it's pretty reasonable to assume a dead head reg will completely lock up if inlet pressure is above design. At the end of the day it's just a spring acting again pressure over area. The square root orifice flow ratio low is your friend,there are places where convolution has genuine benefits but KISS is probably the winner here.
Denso SA31 p/n 3111 about five bucks from Rock Auto. same as 10 heat range NGK, resistor and 21.5 (correct) length. surface gap/no ground strap to potentially turn into a glow plug and cause interior mayhem.
surface gap strongly recommended by Richard Green for trail position for those making over 400.
Gucci, thanks for the pictures. it appears that your lead plug is running hotter in the front and your trail plug is running hotter in the rear.. what turbo?
Are the SA31 safe or appropriate for use with IGN1A inductive coils? I am looking to try these or the R6601 on an IGN1A equipped rx8. Clearly from what I have read in this thread the SA31 are the appropriate length compared to the shorter R6601s.
I would also be interested in the reliability/concerns of the Densos if any. I currently run r7420-10s in the leading and bur9eqs in the trailing's. I know the ground straps can turn to glow plugs as mentioned in many threads. Surface discharge is also oem design...
Update: Fuel map is nicely adjusted for the new turbo. I have moved to the 500cc (from 250) wm nozzle and adjusted down the pwm map. Went out and did some heavy 3rd, 4th and 5th pulls but no track oriented driving. Datapoint snippet from the logs reads:
13.0 PSI
10.6 afr
6600 rpm
11 Degrees Ign
Peak fuel load saw 63% duty cycle on primaries and secondarys (ID 1050x & 1700XDS)
83 PSI oil pressure
Egts peaked at ~1530 w/ the front rotor being 10 degrees f hotter than the rear
Fuel pressure maintained with no issues
Car feels much more torquey with the "smaller" turbo (369 to 364.5) and the lower boost/build feels much more torquey than before. Very happy with the turbo choice.
Michael. i am happy you like your SX-E 64.5. it is one of my favorite turbos and so overlooked. good for you for your pick.
as to the Turbosmart OPR... i sent them a lengthy email as background for my call Monday and received a very helpful response that answered all my questions. i have found it rare to get a response let alone a lengthy on point answer to my concerns..
here's the slice and dice of it:
re the "witness marks" that appear on both of our OPRs
"Witness marks are likely not from the piston moving up and down the but rather they are an artifact of how the OPR jig holds the piece in the anodizing bath. Our anodizing facility uses a rectangular jig that slides into the bore there, these witness marks align with where the jig makes contact with the housing preventing the anodizing fluid from fully penetrating the aluminum in this area. Its unsightly, but in no way effects the performance on the OPR."
re my question as to what would happen if the piston would hang up (might oil flow be lost)
"Your assumption is correct that if the piston were to catch and hang on the bore this would cause an increase in oil pressure at the turbo not a decrease".
re why use an OPR, rather just use a proper sized oil flow jet:
"On the issue of restrictor vs OPR, both methods are attempting to achieve the same outcome, limiting the flow of oil into the turbo bearing housing. So to fully understand the advantages of the OPR it's useful to have an understanding of why we need to limit oil flow to the turbo in the first place and that comes down to turbo design. Due to the extreme heat and rotational speed of the turbo's shaft (upwards of 100,000RPM) there is no rubber oil seal between the bearing housing and the compressor or turbine housing, but rather there is a gas ring and just like a piston ring, this gas ring doesn't fully seal - that would cause too much drag on the shaft slowing the turbo down preventing that sweet sweet boost.
The high RPM however does however work in our favor here for preventing oil from escaping the bearing housing into the compressor/turbine housing. The faster the turbo is spinning the more the oil wants to fly off the shaft, so oil is fed into the bearing cartridge and out to the bearing extremities it then exits the bearing and is slung off the shaft into the core of the turbo. Once in the core, gravity is the only thing pulling oil down into the drain.
So why the restrictor? In short if you stuff too much oil into the bearing housing it pushes right by that gas seal and ends up in the turbine housing or compressor housing characterized by that horrible blue smoke that we have all seen when a turbo needs replacing.
This issue isn't new, its been around since the dawn or turbo's which is why manufacturers have been putting restrictors in the turbo's oil feed line for decades. The restrictor limits the amount of oil that is delivered to the bearing housing effectively, but it has some major drawbacks. The first being the size of the orifice is very small and therefore requires somewhat precision machining to get the flow just right for the particular oil pressure/viscosity/turbo requirement. Small holes are also easily blocked by debris.
OEM manufacturers have the time, money, expertise and consistency to get this balance just right. Problems start to arise in the aftermarket however when we begin to modify the oil pump, the turbo, the oil feed and return lines to the turbo etc,. These factors can influence both the turbo bearing's oil requirement as well as the feed and drain capacity. It then becomes the owner/workshop's problem to balance the new oil flow inlet vs consumption requirement. The old fashion way was simply trial and error with various restrictors on the turbo feed line. This method is tried and true, but it does not address the underlying issue of a smaller orifice being more likely suffer from blockages/partial blockages further limiting oil flow to the bearing.
So while restrictor can modulate oil flow, it simply reduces it with a hope of achieving the required pressure and cannot compensate for oil temperature, oil grade or the increase in pressure as a result of engines operating at higher RPM’s.
The OPR solves all of these issues with a single simple elegant solution as well as adding an oil filter to protect the turbochargers bearing from debris. Rather than reducing oil flow simply by squeezing oil through a small hole, flow is now limited by taking control of the pressure of the oil inlet feed. Now that the oil feed pressure is consistent the restrictor orifice is not doing all of the work."
one additional comment:
"One thing that I have seen in the past is customers running heavy weight oils showing low oil pressures at the OPR due to inadequate feed lines to the OPR. Oil pressure when measured at the engine has been strong, but by the time it gets to the OPR there is a significant drop. This may be something to look at here also."
i run a Dash 4 to my Turbosmart OPR. i wouldn't want to run anything smaller. i will continue to run and recommend the Turbosmart OPR. as mentioned above ball bearing turbos require a smaller oil service orifice and as the size goes down the possibility of it being restricted goes up. i really like the protection the filter delivers. ball bearing turbos are not inexpensive.
Last edited by Howard Coleman; 03-27-24 at 02:25 PM.
Michael. i am happy you like your SX-E 64.5. it is one of my favorite turbos and so overlooked. good for you for your pick.
as to the Turbosmart OPR... i sent them a lengthy email as background for my call Monday and received a very helpful response that answered all my questions. i have found it rare to get a response let alone a lengthy on point answer to my concerns..
here's the slice and dice of it:
re the "witness marks" that appear on both of our OPRs
Witness marks are likely not from the piston moving up and down the but rather they are an artifact of how the OPR jig holds the piece in the anodizing bath. Our anodizing facility uses a rectangular jig that slides into the bore there, these witness marks align with where the jig makes contact with the housing preventing the anodizing fluid from fully penetrating the aluminum in this area. Its unsightly, but in no way effects the performance on the OPR.
re my question as to what would happen if the piston would hang up (might oil flow be lost)
"Your assumption is correct that if the piston were to catch and hang on the bore this would cause an increase in oil pressure at the turbo not a decrease".
re why use an OPR, rather just use a proper sized oil flow jet:
"On the issue of restrictor vs OPR, both methods are attempting to achieve the same outcome, limiting the flow of oil into the turbo bearing housing. So to fully understand the advantages of the OPR it's useful to have an understanding of why we need to limit oil flow to the turbo in the first place and that comes down to turbo design. Due to the extreme heat and rotational speed of the turbo's shaft (upwards of 100,000RPM) there is no rubber oil seal between the bearing housing and the compressor or turbine housing, but rather there is a gas ring and just like a piston ring, this gas ring doesn't fully seal - that would cause too much drag on the shaft slowing the turbo down preventing that sweet sweet boost.
The high RPM however does however work in our favor here for preventing oil from escaping the bearing housing into the compressor/turbine housing. The faster the turbo is spinning the more the oil wants to fly off the shaft, so oil is fed into the bearing cartridge and out to the bearing extremities it then exits the bearing and is slung off the shaft into the core of the turbo. Once in the core, gravity is the only thing pulling oil down into the drain.
So why the restrictor? In short if you stuff too much oil into the bearing housing it pushes right by that gas seal and ends up in the turbine housing or compressor housing characterized by that horrible blue smoke that we have all seen when a turbo needs replacing.
This issue isn't new, its been around since the dawn or turbo's which is why manufacturers have been putting restrictors in the turbo's oil feed line for decades. The restrictor limits the amount of oil that is delivered to the bearing housing effectively, but it has some major drawbacks. The first being the size of the orifice is very small and therefore requires somewhat precision machining to get the flow just right for the particular oil pressure/viscosity/turbo requirement. Small holes are also easily blocked by debris.
OEM manufacturers have the time, money, expertise and consistency to get this balance just right. Problems start to arise in the aftermarket however when we begin to modify the oil pump, the turbo, the oil feed and return lines to the turbo etc,. These factors can influence both the turbo bearing's oil requirement as well as the feed and drain capacity. It then becomes the owner/workshop's problem to balance the new oil flow inlet vs consumption requirement. The old fashion way was simply trial and error with various restrictors on the turbo feed line. This method is tried and true, but it does not address the underlying issue of a smaller orifice being more likely suffer from blockages/partial blockages further limiting oil flow to the bearing.
So while restrictor can modulate oil flow, it simply reduces it with a hope of achieving the required pressure and cannot compensate for oil temperature, oil grade or the increase in pressure as a result of engines operating at higher RPM’s.
The OPR solves all of these issues with a single simple elegant solution as well as adding an oil filter to protect the turbochargers bearing from debris. Rather than reducing oil flow simply by squeezing oil through a small hole, flow is now limited by taking control of the pressure of the oil inlet feed. Now that the oil feed pressure is consistent the restrictor orifice is not doing all of the work."
one additional comment:
"One thing that I have seen in the past is customers running heavy weight oils showing low oil pressures at the OPR due to inadequate feed lines to the OPR. Oil pressure when measured at the engine has been strong, but by the time it gets to the OPR there is a significant drop. This may be something to look at here also."
i run a Dash 4 to my Turbosmart OPR. i wouldn't want to run anything smaller. i will continue to run and recommend the Turbosmart OPR. as mentioned above ball bearing turbos require a smaller oil service orifice and as the size goes down the possibility of it being restricted goes up. i really like the protection the filter delivers. ball bearing turbos are not inexpensive.
Howard,
Thank you for posting their reply and your thoughts. Still puzzling as to why the turbo failed so quickly. My new chra hasn't turned blue and still holds the normal color. I'll be keeping an eye on it and will update if it changes
Thank you for posting their reply and your thoughts. Still puzzling as to why the turbo failed so quickly. My new chra hasn't turned blue and still holds the normal color. I'll be keeping an eye on it and will update if it changes
Was the failed turbo on when your timing was retarded? May have just cooked it?
I went ahead and ordered 8 Denso S-31A plugs from rock auto. 2 of them appear to be from a different factory/source and do not have the red protector for the threads they are marked EB, the other 6 are marked DK and have red covers. Not sure when I will install them as I am scared to change things when they are working...Also added some pictures of an r7420 for the internet archives. I noticed the 7420 is much more polished/smooth in the tip area that is exposed to combustion where the denso looks kind of rough. Obviously a massive price difference though.
Took the car out to do some test driving and I have to say I immediately noticed a decrease in the idle quality and the smoothness of the engine. I will be putting back the 7420s and calling it a day.
Took the car out to do some test driving and I have to say I immediately noticed a decrease in the idle quality and the smoothness of the engine. I will be putting back the 7420s and calling it a day.
Took the car out to do some test driving and I have to say I immediately noticed a decrease in the idle quality and the smoothness of the engine. I will be putting back the 7420s and calling it a day.
I'm sorry I could not help it. It's amazing when someone puts bullshit to the real world test. Too many idiots in this forum who have little to no experience using people as guinea pigs lol.
Have you had a chance to test out the NGK 4586 R6601-10/11's?
Haven't been able to test those yet but may try them in the future.
I'm more interested now in turning the boost up. Right now car holds 13 psi strong. I am planning to increase it to around 16 or 17 and will see how everything holds up...wish me luck!
recently purchased multiple sets of NOS NGK R6725-11 in sets of 4 for $11.25/ea ($45 USD/4-pack)
I prefer the R7440/7420 Iridium plugs, but the R6725 Platinum was the competition rotary standard previously. At that price they can be used for break-in etc., cleaned and used again.
03-22-24, 06:24 PM
