S400sxe

cquestad said:
Not fair....I should be able to get a jab in!

Smokem is like the soup nazi and you get no soup. The best injectors happen to also come from another soup nazi...so it makes sense to not piss in the soup.
Click to expand...

Lol, good thing I dont like soup! Good times!:Cheer:
Howling said:
Back to turbo talk
Click to expand...
:bang Amen!

Smokem said:
Let's use an approach I think anyone can clearly see the point of;

I have dyno numbers hp/tq comparing different AR compressor housings on the same S400 turbo - Do you?

I have boost/drive data comparing different AR compressor housings on the same S400 turbo - Do you?

We have previously built and tested an 88mm S400 with an 0.72AR compressor housing - Have you?

You have no clue as to our technical approach, you simply are talking out of the area where your dyno is located.
Click to expand...

Your such a bafoon based on the hypocrisy in your statement lol, :hehe:!:doh:

What is it your not getting I DO NOT CARE about compressor data you have! Nor did I ever give a rats about it. This whole time I've told you ........T U R B I N E Efficiency maps!

You can try and pitch me your compressor map sales pitch and keep trying to cover your :shake:, but the reality is you've been called out and dont know how to take it.

I'm not going to sit and go in circles with the like of you, when you argue like a liberal teenage girl on her menstrual cycle. Good lord dude, quit getting so butt hurt that someone questions your intellectual capacity outside of a few bolt ons/ cover swaps/ and compressor maps!
 
Last edited:
I would really like to hear you do some explaining about turbine efficiency and how far a turbine can be pushed before it is no longer efficient and hurts power.
 
I don't get BlackMegaTard (a.k.a. Kevin the personal trainer).

Wants turbine maps, yet he does nothing but spew garbage and aggravate the folks who MIGHT have them.

Tell me BMT, how do you think that can possibly work out? All you're doing is wasting everyone's time.
 
nwpadmax said:
I don't get BlackMegaTard (a.k.a. Kevin the personal trainer).

Wants turbine maps, yet he does nothing but spew garbage and aggravate the folks who MIGHT have them.

Tell me BMT, how do you think that can possibly work out? All you're doing is wasting everyone's time.
Click to expand...

But he talks to people that work with turbines and it's likely those turbines are axial flow that they deal with so comparisons aren't really pertinent to the radial turbines the small turbos we deal with use.
 
nwpadmax said:
I don't get BlackMegaTard (a.k.a. Kevin the personal trainer).

Wants turbine maps, yet he does nothing but spew garbage and aggravate the folks who MIGHT have them.

Tell me BMT, how do you think that can possibly work out? All you're doing is wasting everyone's time.
Click to expand...

Your time is nothing special buddy. Down boy, down.... lol

SmokinCAT said:
But he talks to people that work with turbines and it's likely those turbines are axial flow that they deal with so comparisons aren't really pertinent to the radial turbines the small turbos we deal with use.
Click to expand...

Heres 3 pages of fun for your reading pleasure. Literally covers everything regarding turbine efficiencies and associated mapping metrics.

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/ID/2366/Turbo-Tech-Compressor-and-Turbine-Map-Details.aspx



Cat, one thing you have to remember the larger the turbine becomes the radial turbine begins to loose it's benefit over an axial turbine. Just due to the rotational mass and diameter. Remember my original comment was only associated with large turbines!
 
BlackMegaTard, keep typing. No maps are ever coming your way. Enjoy the "Turbine Maps for Dummies" versions you keep posting.
 
Last edited:
Smokem said:
Let's use an approach I think anyone can clearly see the point of;

I have dyno numbers hp/tq comparing different AR compressor housings on the same S400 turbo - Do you?

I have boost/drive data comparing different AR compressor housings on the same S400 turbo - Do you?

We have previously built and tested an 88mm S400 with an 0.72AR compressor housing - Have you?

You have no clue as to our technical approach, you simply are talking out of the area where your dyno is located.
Click to expand...


Smokem would you say that the newest compressor covers are worth using in a compound setup? I'm having a hard time getting my hands on one for either a 467 or 475 to go with my 591sx. Im feeling tempted to just use a standard cover but I also really want the speed port on both my turbos for mapping purposes. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
1000orbust said:
Smokem would you say that the newest compressor covers are worth using in a compound setup? I'm having a hard time getting my hands on one for either a 467 or 475 to go with my 591sx. Im feeling tempted to just use a standard cover but I also really want the speed port on both my turbos for mapping purposes. What do you think?
Click to expand...

It's a nice cover, but in my opinion, and from what real world testing has shown, the smaller AR covers tend to make a bit more power. I personally would not be looking to use anything larger than a 0.63AR cover on anything 75mm and smaller.
 
blackmega3500 said:
What is it your not getting I DO NOT CARE about compressor data you have! Nor did I ever give a rats about it. This whole time I've told you ........T U R B I N E Efficiency maps!

You can try and pitch me your compressor map sales pitch and keep trying to cover your :shake:, but the reality is you've been called out and dont know how to take it.
Click to expand...

I'll put the following in this thread since you decided to not respond in the other.

Smokem said:
Let's use an approach I think anyone can clearly see the point of;

I have dyno numbers hp/tq comparing different turbine wheel designs of the same size - Do you?

I have boost/drive data comparing different turbine wheel designs of the same size - Do you?

We have compared multiple turbine wheel designs with nearly identical compressor setups - Have you?

Our data sources are Land and Sea dynos, one in Georgia and one in Indiana, what are yours?
Click to expand...

I also find it funny how you go straight to belittling nwpadmax, not knowing who he is employed by and what information he is able to obtain...
 
Smokem said:
I'll put the following in this thread since you decided to not respond in the other.



I also find it funny how you go straight to belittling nwpadmax, not knowing who he is employed by and what information he is able to obtain...
Click to expand...

Yeah not sure how when I multi-quote the comments it through it out of the thread and to this thread where apparently I had already clicked a multi-quote..... either way glad you got the response.



Now to follow up, first off guys I have nothing against either one of yall. If you were to go back and read the whole thread you'd see where things went array with using the wrong descriptive wording in the original question.

I understand that both of yall have a great deal of knowledge, but the fact that when a question was asked there was no positive contribution by either of yall. The response is followed with a pompous remark with lack up substance and structured around a topic that isn't even rooted to the question.

Now Smokem (Wesley) I would sit down and have this debate with you any day as that's what people do when there's a disagreement, and I'm sorry that your testing on the sxe66 vs. Sxe69 wasn't reflective of my real world application. As I've said the whole time, just read the maps and my previous responses.

Now NW, I don't know who you work for or what it is you have(nor do I care or want your info). You yourself know that BW Matchbot is the most accurate tool for sizing for a vehicle and requires very specific data that most will never know. It's accuracy is founded based on the technical application of the turbine efficiency and application, which is why if you map everything correctly the curve on the map should follow to a specific turbine chocie. This is one of the most accessible sources for maps aswell and you and I both know turbine maps are like trade secrets and are proprietary in nature to a business to help give them the upper hand without the competition being able to quickly replicate without reverse engineering.
 
Let's get back on track with the information, leave the bull **** a side.
 
It appears as though the new BW full bladed compressor wheel equipped turbochargers are made for specific classes, and most likely to compete with the GTX models.

This is a smart move on Borg Warner's part, however in my opinion these changes are not catered toward diesel applications. In most instances where the customer is not looking for every last bit of power, they will be very capable.
 
I have a list somewhere floating around in my notes where Garrett did this with the gtx. I was surprised how many options they had even before they released the gtx bomb to the public.
 
Y'all keep this thread on track. If you want to go back and forth about every single remark, I'd be happy to set up a death match and you two can hash it out.
 
Howling said:
Let's get back on track with the information, leave the bull **** a side.
Click to expand...

RascalMafia said:
Y'all keep this thread on track. If you want to go back and forth about every single remark, I'd be happy to set up a death match and you two can hash it out.
Click to expand...

:Cheer::poke::Cheer::poke:

It's like having sex with a girl having a chastity belt....... you wanna poke, but it's gonna hurt lol.

Any how, in for more details on the turbos!

Smokem, buddy when your in Texas again we need a :Cheer:! Good times!
 
blackmega3500 said:
Now NW, I don't know who you work for or what it is you have(nor do I care or want your info). You yourself know that BW Matchbot is the most accurate tool for sizing for a vehicle and requires very specific data that most will never know. It's accuracy is founded based on the technical application of the turbine efficiency and application, which is why if you map everything correctly the curve on the map should follow to a specific turbine chocie. This is one of the most accessible sources for maps aswell and you and I both know turbine maps are like trade secrets and are proprietary in nature to a business to help give them the upper hand without the competition being able to quickly replicate without reverse engineering.
Click to expand...

Fact: you cannot prove one way or the other that MatchBot is the most accurate tool since I don't think you have the skill to compare it to anything else. It may appear to you to be the most detailed public-domain accessible matching tool. I assure you there are other far more sophisticated tools available. My main complaint with MB is that its use of Phi makes it a crap ton of work to put it into the more universal corrected lbs/min that Garrett and Holset use.

If you put in the effort, you could generate an Excel spreadsheet that would do pretty much everything MB does. There's not much voodoo to it.

Even if you're not interested, you should at least get your head around the fact that MB is not giving you the efficiency curve of each turbine, so your point above lacks rigor. Without the corrected RPM, mass flow, and efficiency data, you cannot compare wheels except on a VERY rough basis.

To assume that TW efficiency is even close to flat across the mass flow range is completely wrong. Some wheels absolutely hate some housings. Some wheels work terrific over small mass flow ranges and then totally lay over at higher PRs.

But, like you said, you're not interested in any of that, so really this post is for those with interest and intelligence.
 
Last edited:
nwpadmax said:
Fact: you cannot prove one way or the other that MatchBot is the most accurate tool since I don't think you have the skill to compare it to anything else. It may appear to you to be the most detailed public-domain accessible matching tool. I assure you there are other far more sophisticated tools available. My main complaint with MB is that its use of Phi makes it a crap ton of work to put it into the more universal corrected lbs/min that Garrett and Holset use.

If you put in the effort, you could generate an Excel spreadsheet that would do pretty much everything MB does. There's not much voodoo to it.

Even if you're not interested, you should at least get your head around the fact that MB is not giving you the efficiency curve of each turbine, so your point above lacks rigor. Without the corrected RPM, mass flow, and efficiency data, you cannot compare wheels except on a VERY rough basis.

To assume that TW efficiency is even close to flat across the mass flow range is completely wrong. Some wheels absolutely hate some housings. Some wheels work terrific over small mass flow ranges and then totally lay over at higher PRs.

But, like you said, you're not interested in any of that, so really this post is for those with interest and intelligence.
Click to expand...
Expound, please.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 
I hate to derail this thread, but I've got a SXE400 question...

I've always been led to believe that 96mm turbine was maxed out pushing a decent 80mm wheel, and that the potential of 84-85 compressor wheel can't be realized with the 96mm turbine. So, I'm really surprised to see that BW is offering a 488 being driven by the 96.

So what's up with that??? Is this a different turbine, just with the same diameter? Or is it the same turbine that's being pushed really hard.

I'm particularly interested because a have a FI s488 and s491 that I plan on trying out next year. Originally, I was leary of their potential, and have been talking to Jose about possibly upgrading to their new 100mm turbine. But after reading this, maybe they'll perform better than expected?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top