Self oil burning

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
Why limit your RPMs to 2500?

Just how the cards that are in play pan out. First the twin hx35s with 10cm housing by estimate, will start building boost at 1000rpm and be at the limit around 2400. Second is Im going to get cummins marine injectors from @CBRF3, he say there good to 2500. Third is I like the zf 460 ratio with 3.73 gears, this will be in the window of 1500 to 2400 rpm. If down the road I add in a type4 cam, that would also give benifit in this range. Also this range would give good fuel economy, in the end adds up to a beneficial range.


Running 20lbs at <1500rpm is how you bend rods

This build is using powerstroke rods, it will take a bit to bend them.


Seriously every big HP diesel built right I've seen or read about runs high RPMs not lower. The bottom end can't handle that kind of torque, so move it up the RPM scale.

Parts are on the table and cant change them, so there is no changing the target scale.


But say 40psi at 3000rpm would be comparatively much gentler on the same setup.


30psi at 2800rpm was a though but has issues with durability in the long run. That could get me close to the 350whp range running a 130cc pump. But am told that is were pistons and precups crack, see a lot of mention of it in the 6.2/6.5 forums as well. So would need to scrafice the 6.9 for testing to see if a resolution can be found, Im not in a state to do such so not valid path. This is what I found would need to be tested and where a posible resolution can be found.

So might see a solution to the cracked cups, it may be stagnet thremal expansion out the cup and across the piston. The sister engine sees this piston cut and pre-cup shape as the solution to get the heat out the cup. This could be a starting point for testing, just have a guinea pig engine with egt sensor in place of glow plug straped to some load. The 6.9 can have new bearings slaped in her and set to be killed again like kenny.


You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach


EDIT: found another variant of a cut for bowls

You must be registered for see images attach
What I have gathered about cup port is they need to match fuel supply given. This is a photo I found of 6.5/6.2 precups, the ones for the 7.3/6.9 are around size of one the top three. They found best life of the cup using one the bottom two when going for power, that is T and diamond cups. On the other hand the small port ones work out best for N/A and low power turbo setups.

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach
 
Last edited:

CBRF3

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Posts
238
Reaction score
158
Location
Southern Illinois
Why limit your RPMs to 2500?

I find it so funny you guys are trying to keep the RPMs down...when it's much safer to run high boost at high RPMs. Running 20lbs at <1500rpm is how you bend rods. But say 40psi at 3000rpm would be comparatively much gentler on the same setup.
Seriously every big HP diesel built right I've seen or read about runs high RPMs not lower. The bottom end can't handle that kind of torque, so move it up the RPM scale.
The issue is the entire fuel system is not designed for high RPM's even hopped up DB2 injection pumps tend to have issues above 3500rpm's also because we are dealing with a indirect injected mechanical injection setup with flame cups in the head pushing the RPM's high means more heat saturation and stress on the pistons and flame cups our pistons are cast aluminum not forged nor are they steal topped so they swell alot when you push the RPM's up on ours you don't give the oil squirters in the bore / block enough time to get the heat out of the pistons meaning they swell pinch a ring then piston siezes in the bore and a rod makes a big hole in the block or oil pan or both.

I want to also point out once you get out of our torque curve EGT's spike heavily and this causes alot of nightmares down the road that becomes a chain reaction if can keep RPM's down in the power range our motors tend to handle temps of coolant / engine oil and EGT's much better and last much longer.


I also want to point out the high rpm diesels you speak of are direct injected and are not high compression ours are indirect injected and high compressoin and we can only decompress so much till we run into issues with starting and well slobbery white smoke filling the neighborhood everytime we start our motors even warm our motors heavily decompressed smoke.


RPM's and EGT's are main killers of our motors and they go hand in hand also as you go up in RPM's you take away time for the heat to be removed and also you drop out of the efficiency zone of the engine design aka more wasted fuel going out exhaust instead of making power and producing higher EGT's our motors love the 1200-2500 RPM range and our torque curve starts dropping heavily above 2200rpm so again this all plays a role.
 
Last edited:

CBRF3

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Posts
238
Reaction score
158
Location
Southern Illinois
Just how the cards that are in play pan out. First the twin hx35s with 10cm housing by estimate, will start building boost at 1000rpm and be at the limit around 2400. Second is Im going to get cummins marine injectors from @CBRF3, he say there good to 2500. Third is I like the zf 460 ratio with 3.75 gears, this will be in the window of 1500 to 2400 rpm. If down the road I add in a type4 cam, that would also give benifit in this range. Also this range would give good fuel economy, in the end adds up to a beneficial range.




This build is using powerstroke rods, it will take a bit to bend them.




Parts are on the table and cant change them, so there is no changing the target scale.





30psi at 2800rpm was a though but has issues with durability in the long run. That could get me close to the 350whp range running a 130cc pump. But am told that is were pistons and precups crack, see a lot of mention of it in the 6.2/6.5 forums as well. So would need to scrafice the 6.9 for testing to see if a resolution can be found, Im not in a state to do such so not valid path. This is what I found would need to be tested and where a posible resolution can be found.
you forgot to mention that exhaust back pressure becomes a major issue in our engines also if you set them up to run high RPM's will then have tons of turbo lag because you then have to dial system in to handle that amount of exhaust flow for the high RPM's making them not very driveable / useable nor reliable.

The point is you either spool up down low or up top and if your stretching the RPM's much higher you then have to increase the exhaust flow otherwise you will be overdriving the turbo and hot boxing the turbo ( aka causing intake charge air temps to sky rocket ) and well your EGT's would be thru the roof LOL and the turbo would be trying to jump out of truck and outrun you along with the turbo's life would be very short.

oh and its 3.73 gears for our trucks / difs I know a odd number but its what it is

 
Last edited:

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
oh and its 3.73 gears for our trucks / difs I know a odd number but its what it is

I dont know why I am messing up that, even past me did with the f100 in the signature but has been corrected it.

you forgot to mention that exhaust back pressure becomes a major issue in our engines also if you set them up to run high RPM's will then have tons of turbo lag because you then have to dial system in to handle that amount of exhaust flow for the high RPM's making them not very driveable / useable nor reliable.

The point is you either spool up down low or up top and if your stretching the RPM's much higher you then have to increase the exhaust flow otherwise you will be overdriving the turbo and hot boxing the turbo ( aka causing intake charge air temps to sky rocket ) and well your EGT's would be thru the roof LOL and the turbo would be trying to jump out of truck and outrun you along with the turbo's life would be very short.


Yea there is that variable as well. Also forgot to mention that would need the 14cm housing on the turbos for them to be good to 2800rpm, those would not that think about boost till around 1500rpm by estimate and could come in violent like the hx50 you mentioned.
 

CBRF3

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Posts
238
Reaction score
158
Location
Southern Illinois
I dont know why I am messing up that, even past me did with the f100 in the signature but has been corrected it.




Yea there is that variable as well. Also forgot to mention that would need the 14cm housing on the turbos for them to be good to 2800rpm, those would not that think about boost till around 1500rpm by estimate and could come in violent like the hx50 you mentioned.
lol yeah dual 14cm housings would be even higher than that around 1800rpm by my math and peak just over 3000rpms which is to high on our motors our motors like down low in rpm's for power as thats where theyre efficiency curve is to high in rpm's we lose efficiency and only gain heat out of deal not alot of power gained and driveability goes out window add to it the violent light off of the turbo nothing nothing nothing then oh crap here we go. The 12cm housings would be around 1500rpms to around 2600rpm ish maybe a bit higher but again alot of variables especially with dual turbo's very hard to factor in this stuff and fact we are indirect injected is one of those if we were direct injected would be much easier but high compression and indirect injected make it hard to factor in.

Because we are indirect injected and high compression we dont produce much exhaust heat down low but our motors by design like to be ran down low so we then need to find the happy medium we either increase the fuel aka heat or we iincrease back pressure aka turbine drive pressures the facts are there is little scientific info out there about our engines because our engines were limited by theyre design. So in short alot of the big wigs / science guys didn't research ours much so we didn't have alot of info / designs to work with ouur engines were designed as reliable / efficient non fuel source finicky motors in short our engines were designed for tractors before put into a truck hince the fact ours are International Harvester Navistar diesel engines not straight navistar. They also designed our motors as low horsepower for a reason again for tractors and they made our engines simple by design in doing so.
 
Last edited:

Farmer Rock

just a fella' without a 10mm socket
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Posts
1,423
Reaction score
1,313
Location
Glen Rock,PA
lol yeah dual 14cm housings would be even higher than that around 1800rpm by my math and peak just over 3000rpms which is to high on our motors our motors like down low in rpm's for power as thats where theyre efficiency curve is to high in rpm's we lose efficiency and only gain heat out of deal not alot of power gained and driveability goes out window add to it the violent light off of the turbo nothing nothing nothing then oh crap here we go. The 12cm housings would be around 1500rpms to around 2600rpm ish maybe a bit higher but again alot of variables especially with dual turbo's very hard to factor in this stuff and fact we are indirect injected is one of those if we were direct injected would be much easier but high compression and indirect injected make it hard to factor in.

Because we are indirect injected and high compression we dont produce much exhaust heat down low but our motors by design like to be ran down low so we then need to find the happy medium we either increase the fuel aka heat or we iincrease back pressure aka turbine drive pressures the facts are there is little scientific info out there about our engines because our engines were limited by theyre design. So in short alot of the big wigs / science guys didn't research ours much so we didn't have alot of info / designs to work with ouur engines were designed as reliable / efficient non fuel source finicky motors in short our engines were designed for tractors before put into a truck hince the fact ours are International Harvester Navistar diesel engines not straight navistar. They also designed our motors as low horsepower for a reason again for tractors and they made our engines simple by design in doing so.
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that IDIs were never used in international tractors. Only the medium duty trucks. The 9.0l,dt360,dt466 we're all used in international tractors and construction equipment, but never the IDI that I'm aware of.
Navister was a completely different company until 1985 I believe, around when IH crashed, J.I case bought out the farm and heavy equipment line, while navister bought out the truck line. The "International" trucks around now aren't international trucks, they are navister. They just use the name.
As far as high RPMs go, I'll add my 2 cents.
I don't see why you guys think it's bad to run over 2500. Imo, that's where the power starts. I realize you guys are talking high performance stuff, but shouldn't it be the same principle? Going back a few posts, there is quite a gap between 2500 and the governor 34-500ish. As far as heavy towing goes with all my IDI trucks I had, it was let the clutch out and keep it at 3k going up hills. Those trucks would pull anything at high rpm. Around 2500 they would fall on there face. I'm talking heavy loads. I personally never felt that they actually had that much low end power, they really drive more like 2 stroke Detroits. Anything down low is very reliant on your gearing and transmission.
IDI are one of the few motors I actually think you will do more harm than good at lower rpms, especially pumping that much boost through it.
I don't know much about this high performance stuff y'all are doing, so I may be way off, but as long as the truck gets worked, I don't see how you would want to in anyway limit yourself to low rpms.


Rock
 

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
I don't see why you guys think it's bad to run over 2500. Imo, that's where the power starts. I realize you guys are talking high performance stuff, but shouldn't it be the same principle? Going back a few posts, there is quite a gap between 2500 and the governor 34-500ish. As far as heavy towing goes with all my IDI trucks I had, it was let the clutch out and keep it at 3k going up hills. Those trucks would pull anything at high rpm. Around 2500 they would fall on there face. I'm talking heavy loads. I personally never felt that they actually had that much low end power, they really drive more like 2 stroke Detroits. Anything down low is very reliant on your gearing and transmission.
IDI are one of the few motors I actually think you will do more harm than good at lower rpms, especially pumping that much boost through it.
I don't know much about this high performance stuff y'all are doing, so I may be way off, but as long as the truck gets worked, I don't see how you would want to in anyway limit yourself to low rpms.


Let me try to make it simple, think about when you money shift. You are mechanically overdriving the engine well past red line, in turn your going to scatter that engine. Now replace that engine with turbos in this equation, there drive is heat from combustion. This heat makes thermal expansion that is the drive pressure to turn the turbo. Sizing of the turbo I have dictates that at around that rpm, the turbo is at max drive pressure and back pressure starts to build. This back pressure is what will force the turbo past its max rpm, this is rpm of the turbine. This will blow the turbo up and not sure how well the wastegates I have bypass this pressure. So specing normal operating rpm below the 2500rpm will be a good safe zone for the turbo.
 
Last edited:

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
lol yeah dual 14cm housings would be even higher than that around 1800rpm by my math and peak just over 3000rpms which is to high on our motors our motors like down low in rpm's for power as thats where theyre efficiency curve is to high in rpm's we lose efficiency and only gain heat out of deal not alot of power gained and driveability goes out window add to it the violent light off of the turbo nothing nothing nothing then oh crap here we go. The 12cm housings would be around 1500rpms to around 2600rpm ish maybe a bit higher but again alot of variables especially with dual turbo's very hard to factor in this stuff and fact we are indirect injected is one of those if we were direct injected would be much easier but high compression and indirect injected make it hard to factor in.


I was going by this and yea I know there is not enough live data on the table for a accurate prediction. So going to have to do some data loging to find how far off the ratio of boost vs backpressure is when is running, and if is a issue that needs corrected.


turbo housings 12cm should spool around the 1200rpm-1400rpm happy spot and be good till around 2200rpm-2400rpm 14cm housing will light off around the 1400rpm-1600rpm area and be good upto around 2400rpm-2600rpm our torque peaks around 1400rpm-1600rpm HP peaks around 2600rpm-2800rpm
 

The_Josh_Bear

Full Access Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Posts
1,916
Reaction score
1,498
Location
Western WA
Well as I have been for a while, I'm interested in seeing how this rage monster turns out. Something tells me you'll be able to run past 2400 rpm just fine but I'm not too deep in the numbers. It'll be cool and fun and lots to learn all around. It doesn't take much wastegate to lose a TON of pressure, they just have to blow open a little bit on my stock ATS setup to stop building pressure. So I wouldn't worry too much about it, however you set up the reliefs should be fine.

Are you going to run a hot-side pressure gauge to see what your drive pressure is like? That'll give you about all the extra data you need to find operating RPM, as long as there is a turbo map for the 10cm housing.

:popcorn:popcorn:popcorn
 

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
Are you going to run a hot-side pressure gauge to see what your drive pressure is like? That'll give you about all the extra data you need to find operating RPM, as long as there is a turbo map for the 10cm housing.

Yes, that needs to be a knows to variable in the equation. There is no map avable on the 10cm, flow should be just a hair more than a t04e 50/54/57 trim turbo.
 

CBRF3

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Posts
238
Reaction score
158
Location
Southern Illinois
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that IDIs were never used in international tractors. Only the medium duty trucks. The 9.0l,dt360,dt466 we're all used in international tractors and construction equipment, but never the IDI that I'm aware of.
Navister was a completely different company until 1985 I believe, around when IH crashed, J.I case bought out the farm and heavy equipment line, while navister bought out the truck line. The "International" trucks around now aren't international trucks, they are navister. They just use the name.
As far as high RPMs go, I'll add my 2 cents.
I don't see why you guys think it's bad to run over 2500. Imo, that's where the power starts. I realize you guys are talking high performance stuff, but shouldn't it be the same principle? Going back a few posts, there is quite a gap between 2500 and the governor 34-500ish. As far as heavy towing goes with all my IDI trucks I had, it was let the clutch out and keep it at 3k going up hills. Those trucks would pull anything at high rpm. Around 2500 they would fall on there face. I'm talking heavy loads. I personally never felt that they actually had that much low end power, they really drive more like 2 stroke Detroits. Anything down low is very reliant on your gearing and transmission.
IDI are one of the few motors I actually think you will do more harm than good at lower rpms, especially pumping that much boost through it.
I don't know much about this high performance stuff y'all are doing, so I may be way off, but as long as the truck gets worked, I don't see how you would want to in anyway limit yourself to low rpms.


Rock
yes theyre HP is up top but your also playing in a RPM where its like riding a razors edge at that RPM there is so much exhaust flow things get finicky with a twin turbo setup a larger single turbo would have no issue its the fact he is using a turbo for each manifold so he is then restricting the turbine drive housing to get better driveability this means he will have to run down lower in the RPM's to keep things happy and useable / driveable for what he is doing and the fact he is converting to a DI injector nozzle as I have you lose alot of the top end but gain alot down low starting is much easier fuel efficiency / to power is much better and well my experience causes the turbos to be easier driven to operating range on less fuel being injected meaning less wasted heat / fuel our engine deasign as for oem nozzle type was not designed for efficiency but simplicity and ability to easily run questionable fuel LOL.

Yes you are correct our engines were not actually used in tractors but were used in a international harvester combine and our engines wear the harvester name



 
Last edited:

Farmer Rock

just a fella' without a 10mm socket
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Posts
1,423
Reaction score
1,313
Location
Glen Rock,PA
I'm well aware that IDIs are made by IH. I've spent just as much time around international trucks as ford trucks with IDIs. I used to have an s1654 6.9.
That's not at all what I was talking about. I was referring to IDIs in tractors. Dv550 was used in 68 series tractors, and dts used in 86 series, combines, dozers,etc.
I've never seen or heard of an IDI in an off road application, so I'm curious what kind of combine you are referring to. 60 and 80s had dts. I'm just curious, I'd like to know.
As far as wearing the name, that has absolutely nothing to do with this. International Harvesters truck line made plenty of motors that were exclusive to trucks, such as all of the international harvester gas truck engines. It's the same company, of course it wears the name.





Rock
 

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
That'll give you about all the extra data you need to find operating RPM, as long as there is a turbo map for the 10cm housing.


You brought up maps, so I will put this out on what info I have found on them. @Thewespaul gave this for ploting turbo size.

Choosing a Turbo for your IDI
Okay, so you have you power number goal ready right? Go ahead and divide that by 2.75 For this example, I will be using 300 crank hp, which I get 109.1, this is approximately how many ccs of fuel you will need to make that power. This is the most common power level of idis I build, using my max-effort db2 build which makes around 110 ccs at 3000 rpms, general hp peak. From my experience, you need about 7.5 cfm to burn 1cc of fuel in an idi, so for 300 hp goal we need about 825 cfm minimum, however very few maps show cfm, so we will need to convert that to the most commonly used lbs/min. We can do this by dividing our target cfm by 14.47, which we get about 57 lbs/min. Looking at the map above of the factory turbo, you can see the turbo wasnt even tested past 53 lbs/min so you know instantly that this is not the turbo for you, so lets look at some options.


I took that data to plot for 350 crank hp, since target has changed will give 300 as well. Since the DI injector nozzle is said to be more efficiency, it could fall between these two point.

Code:
350 / 2.75 = 127.27
127.27 x 7.5 = 954.53
954.53 / 2 = 477.27
477.27 / 14.47 = 32.98

300 / 2.75 = 109.1
109.1 * 7.5 = 818.25
818.25 / 2 = 409.13
409.13 / 14.47 = 28.27


There is another variable on these maps that needs found and this is what I came up with.

Turbo Calculations

Code:
14.45 psi at 500 ft
boost is 20 psi

(20 + 14.45) / (14.7 - 1) = 2.51


Edit: Think missed a variable needed when ploting on these maps and dose not add up, so not sure on the this.

Choosing a Turbo for your IDI Part 2
Code:
20psi
3.65 x 2500 x 75 x 2.51 / 81032 = 21.198 lbs/min
6psi
3.65 x 1000 x 75 x 1.49 / 81032 = 5.03 lbs/min


For the 2.51 ratio and 30 lbs/min, these three t04e turbos fit the bill and like the 50 trim most. Issue I see is finding these cheap past peicing them together, also dont think they have a inconel turbine wheels. himni-racing carries them at a ok price and turbonetics aslo carries these sizes but is a worth a arm and a leg. The 54 and 57 are know working turbos in twin config, the 57 is said to have 10psi off idle.


You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach



A Borg Warner turbo has a inconel turbine wheels and the S252 SX-E has a map that is interesting. They do have a calculator you can play with to plot data on the map, but not sure on the data. This would be at about the same cost of the lesser t04e.

Bad math?

You must be registered for see images attach




Looking back at that bookmark, the Borg Warner S256 178034 would have a better compressor.

You must be registered for see images attach


This is the size of those turbos.

Code:
T04E
compressor
53.90mm inducer 76mm exducer (50 trim)
55mm inducer 75mm exducer (54 trim)
56.50mm inducer 75mm exducer (57 trim)
turbine .63 ar
56.3mm exducer 64mm inducer(77 trim)

S252 SX-E
compressor
52.17mm inducer 69.5mm exducer
turbine .63 ar
61mm exducer 70mm inducer

S256 178034
compressor
56mm inducer 76mm exducer
turbine .63 ar ?
61mm exducer 70mm inducer


As for holsets..

Edit:
These I belive are two different map for a hx35

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach



These two bring up a hy35, there is the us one with 9cm and euro with 10cm housing. Not sure if these are the reason in the difference, or whether ether is accurate.

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach




With all that and comparing to the t04e 50 trim. A hy35 is closest but the 10cm housing is bigger and the hx35 has a bigger turbine wheel, so both would spool slower. Having one hx35 in hand, ment I only needed a 10cm housing and a remain one that had one. For cost that had me in the ball park of buying only one the above turbos. So this is the data I went off in chosing the turbo I went with and will see how it pans out.

Code:
hx35
compressor
54mm inducer 78mm exducer
turbine 10cm = .65ar
60mm exducer 70mm inducer

hy35
compressor
54mm inducer 78mm exducer
turbine 10cm ~ .68ar
58mm exducer 65mm inducer
 
Last edited:

CBRF3

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Posts
238
Reaction score
158
Location
Southern Illinois
You brought up maps, so I will put this out on what info I have found on them. @Thewespaul gave this for ploting turbo size.

Choosing a Turbo for your IDI



I took that data to plot for 350 crank hp, since target has changed will give 300 as well. Since the DI injector nozzle is said to be more efficiency, it could fall between these two point.

Code:
350 / 2.75 = 127.27
127.27 x 7.5 = 954.53
954.53 / 2 = 477.27
477.27 / 14.47 = 32.98

300 / 2.75 = 109.1
109.1 * 7.5 = 818.25
818.25 / 2 = 409.13
409.13 / 14.47 = 28.27


There is another variable on these maps that needs found and this is what I came up with.

Turbo Calculations

Code:
14.45 psi at 500 ft
boost is 20 psi

(20 + 14.45) / (14.7 - 1) = 2.51


Edit: Think missed a variable needed when ploting on these maps, need to read this a few times and let the data soak in.

Choosing a Turbo for your IDI Part 2


For the 2.51 ratio and 30 lbs/min, these three t04e turbos fit the bill and like the 50 trim most. Issue I see is finding these cheap past peicing them together, also dont think they have a inconel turbine wheels. himni-racing carries them at a ok price and turbonetics aslo carries these sizes but is a worth a arm and a leg. The 54 and 57 are know working turbos in twin config, the 57 is said to have 10psi off idle.


You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach



A Borg Warner turbo has a inconel turbine wheels and the S252 SX-E has a map that is interesting. They do have a calculator you can play with to plot data on the map, but not sure on the data. This would be at about the same cost of the lesser t04e.

Bad math?

You must be registered for see images attach




Looking back at that bookmark, the Borg Warner S256 178034 would have a better compressor.

You must be registered for see images attach


This is the size of those turbos.

Code:
T04E
compressor
53.90mm inducer 76mm exducer (50 trim)
55mm inducer 75mm exducer (54 trim)
56.50mm inducer 75mm exducer (57 trim)
turbine .63 ar
56.3mm exducer 64mm inducer(77 trim)

S252 SX-E
compressor
52.17mm inducer 69.5mm exducer
turbine .63 ar
61mm exducer 70mm inducer

S256 178034
compressor
56mm inducer 76mm exducer
turbine .63 ar ?
61mm exducer 70mm inducer


As for holsets..

Edit:
These I belive are two different map for a hx35

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach



These two bring up a hy35, there is the us one with 9cm and euro with 10cm housing. Not sure if these are the reason in the difference, or whether ether is accurate.

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach




With all that and comparing to the t04e 50 trim. A hy35 is closest but the 10cm housing is bigger and the hx35 has a bigger turbine wheel, so both would spool slower. Having one hx35 in hand, ment I only needed a 10cm housing and a remain one that had one. For cost that had me in the ball park of buying only one the above turbos. So this is the data I went off in chosing the turbo I went with and will see how it pans out.

Code:
hx35
compressor
54mm inducer 78mm exducer
turbine 10cm = .65ar
60mm exducer 70mm inducer

hy35
compressor
54mm inducer 78mm exducer
turbine 10cm ~ .68ar
58mm exducer 65mm inducer
might want to look at the t04z turbos similar to this one



or this one

 

1mouse3

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Posts
1,367
Reaction score
948
Location
il
Im not sure a ebay speacal turbo would be good, think they need pulled apart for inspection and then sent to get ballenced, either way that t04z looks a bit big. As for the GT/GTX turbos, the GTX3071R looks to have a good map. So would consider this if have issues with the sizing of the hx35.


GTX3071R

You must be registered for see images attach


And the map for a t04z
You must be registered for see images attach
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
91,217
Posts
1,128,519
Members
24,045
Latest member
Ramtough01

Members online

No members online now.
Top