Ad: VTT N54 GC -Full ReBrand!
- Thread starter Chris@VargasTurboTech
- Start date
-
- Tags
- featured
Here were Terry's dyno graphs. Spool on these is lightning quick... We were ramping in boost a little slow on these. You can see 500WTQ around 3000 RPM expect that around 2700 on the street. The FRB with the larger turbine housing will spool slightly slower but will flow much better.
Got Carl's ultimate 335xi sleeper on the dyno for just a quick session with the F-RB's (regular, i.e. not lites, not the +). Turbos did not disappoint. The car has the most basic of mods, outlined below. We only ran it 3 times, and out of time as we are leaving half a day for the new year. I believe this is about the max of this basic fuel system, but we will try to squeak some more out next week. We are testing a new product PFS has cooked up, and so far it's doing a very good job.
Boost was 26 psi, Timing set around 10-11 degrees but getting some corrections. 26 psi held to redline with only 57% WGDC. Run 2 it was over-boosting on the tune it came in on, as the turbos flow a TON more. We made some adjustments to the adder and got boost back under target so it wasn't closing the throttle. Results perfectly smooth graph.
It's quite clear these out-spool the competition, and on a car with a real fuel system I.E. PI, Dual Walbro Fuel pump, no cats, 700 would a walk in the park.
Mods:
We overlaid the runs with the last time the car was here on GC Lites, Stock HPFP, and E50. You can see the F-RB's give up a tiny bit to the GC Lites in spool, about 100 RPM not much, and lots left looking at the WGDC.
We have some decisions to make add a Double shot pump to the tank to get the LPFP up a bit, and possibly add some better fuel in it like 117 One Ethanol, but that is about 90% ethanol and will compound the fuel system being on the limit.
For the first test on a car that has minimal mods, very impressed. We will also be doing some pump testing as this car is flex-fuel. We can get 93 about 45 minutes away.
F-RB - Best Bang For Your Buck - Period...
Logs:
Run 2: https://datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/12-30-20-carl-morris-f-rbpod-1?log=0&data=3-4-23-27&zoom=87-154
Run 3: https://datazap.me/u/vargasturbotec...f-rbpod-1?log=1&data=3-4-23-27-30&zoom=83-152
Boost was 26 psi, Timing set around 10-11 degrees but getting some corrections. 26 psi held to redline with only 57% WGDC. Run 2 it was over-boosting on the tune it came in on, as the turbos flow a TON more. We made some adjustments to the adder and got boost back under target so it wasn't closing the throttle. Results perfectly smooth graph.
It's quite clear these out-spool the competition, and on a car with a real fuel system I.E. PI, Dual Walbro Fuel pump, no cats, 700 would a walk in the park.
Mods:
- 335 XI (X-delete)
- Pump E85 (reads E75)
- Stock N54 engine
- Stock N54 head
- Stock cat back exhaust (secondary cats IN PLACE)
- Stock intake manifold
- Stock PCV system with VTT Breather
- VTT F-RB's
- VTT Aluminum outlet
- VTT 2" Inlets
- VTT Dual cone filters
- PFS Single-shot LPFP (single 274 Walbro)
- PFS Soon to be announced HPFP upgrade
- VRSF DP's
- NO PI
- NO Stage 3 or Dual Walbro pump
- NO Meth
- 1 revision from what the car was brought in with GC Lites
We overlaid the runs with the last time the car was here on GC Lites, Stock HPFP, and E50. You can see the F-RB's give up a tiny bit to the GC Lites in spool, about 100 RPM not much, and lots left looking at the WGDC.
We have some decisions to make add a Double shot pump to the tank to get the LPFP up a bit, and possibly add some better fuel in it like 117 One Ethanol, but that is about 90% ethanol and will compound the fuel system being on the limit.
For the first test on a car that has minimal mods, very impressed. We will also be doing some pump testing as this car is flex-fuel. We can get 93 about 45 minutes away.
F-RB - Best Bang For Your Buck - Period...
Logs:
Run 2: https://datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/12-30-20-carl-morris-f-rbpod-1?log=0&data=3-4-23-27&zoom=87-154
Run 3: https://datazap.me/u/vargasturbotec...f-rbpod-1?log=1&data=3-4-23-27-30&zoom=83-152
The gc's are a brilliant turbo and will do more than any stock motor will handle so I wouldn't worry.
My atmospheric pressure is 12psi at my altitude. Any turbo that flows better will be safer up here in that they won’t have to be spun as fast.
I love mine and they deliver the results I was after, just be carefull I lifted the head on my built motor and had to do head studs
Most don't realise how much these can flow, we will be fitting the new F-RB's to my new track car and see if we can raise the bar again and set a new twin turbo 93 record here in oz to beat my old one.
Most don't realise how much these can flow, we will be fitting the new F-RB's to my new track car and see if we can raise the bar again and set a new twin turbo 93 record here in oz to beat my old one.
Last edited:
Great early results with just a few tweaks. Good job VTT !
Again, great to see the investment in development for the platform and inprovement in your product design.
I am keen to see them turned up to thier 800rwhp potential. If so we are talking 9 second full weight potential , with decent response to boot.
Again, great to see the investment in development for the platform and inprovement in your product design.
I am keen to see them turned up to thier 800rwhp potential. If so we are talking 9 second full weight potential , with decent response to boot.
You might not hold that record for long brother , my flex fuel tune has netted me same power on E15 to my 10.7@131mph run now. So you better hurry up
(plus my tyres are waaay better now)My cars off the road waiting for new coils ,plus I was going to hit you up for some of those RHD VTT outlets, if you have some in stock? So you could get to the track well before me and make my life twice as hard to catch you.
Good to see you are getting improvements out of your engine. What tyres have you got now? When do you expect to be running it down the strip next? It would be great to see it get below 10.5s on twins here in Australia.You might not hold that record for long brother , my flex fuel tune has netted me same power on E15 to my 10.7@131mph run now. So you better hurry up
My cars off the road waiting for new coils ,plus I was going to hit you up for some of those RHD VTT outlets, if you have some in stock? So you could get to the track well before me and make my life twice as hard to catch you.
Kumho v70A 285/18's in a medium compound. They are awesome. I cut 4second 0-100 in the rain too ,so unlike r888rs you wont die.
The cars twisted tune on E85 flex right now is at 28psi and 10deg , vs 24psi and 0 deg when I ran 10.7.... It's much faster.
Even my E15 level is 24psi and 6deg (no timing pulls on a 30deg day too)
Not to derail the thread but, if the F-RBs
can make sauce then they will be 9 second twins, easy. Doesnt look like they give up much down low ,so thats going to make Martymill's efforts important to set the bar here in Aus.
9s on twins (full weight) in Aus first guys! Martymill stick the E85 in and get it bro!
Easy on e85 but I want to run 93 for now, I do have my personal set unopened outlets you can have if your in a hurry.
I'm in no hurry as I have a few custom parts we have to finish, with the outlets its going to make it easy to run TFT style inlets.
I'm trying to hit 400rwk on 93 and Im only 5rwk shy.
I like competition so keep it up and if you need help don't be afraid to ask if you need it.
I'm in no hurry as I have a few custom parts we have to finish, with the outlets its going to make it easy to run TFT style inlets.
I'm trying to hit 400rwk on 93 and Im only 5rwk shy.
I like competition so keep it up and if you need help don't be afraid to ask if you need it.
Something fun to point out. We all know how important WGDC is to showing how efficient a turbo is, and can be used to determined "how much they have left" in most cases
Picture one GF 26.6 PSI 6700 RPM E85 car with PI, dual pump all that jazz almost 67% WGDC
Picture two F-RB 26.6 psi 6700 RPM E85 car with a PFS POD, and a single Walbro 274 52.8% WGDC
We all know the closer you get to redline the harder it is to keep boost target. So here are two more at a basic factory redline of around 7100
Picture one GF 27 psi 68.5% WGDC
Picture two F-RB 26 psi 56.7% WGDC
But but but those bigger compressor housings... Numbers don't lie.
Picture one GF 26.6 PSI 6700 RPM E85 car with PI, dual pump all that jazz almost 67% WGDC
Picture two F-RB 26.6 psi 6700 RPM E85 car with a PFS POD, and a single Walbro 274 52.8% WGDC
We all know the closer you get to redline the harder it is to keep boost target. So here are two more at a basic factory redline of around 7100
Picture one GF 27 psi 68.5% WGDC
Picture two F-RB 26 psi 56.7% WGDC
But but but those bigger compressor housings... Numbers don't lie.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think without knowing how the Wastegates are set up it is quite challenging to compare both duty cycles based from a log.
Certainly, the turbos deliver. But I don´t understand how it was proven that they outspool the comparable competition. I think also the Hydras try to place them in that league.
It would be pretty interesting to see how they (yours and the competition) spool during on/off throttle situations as you'd need on a circuit track when getting back on the throttle. Time to Torque comparison should identify the superior turbos imho (I may also be wrong)(when the rest is comparable of course).
Certainly, the turbos deliver. But I don´t understand how it was proven that they outspool the comparable competition. I think also the Hydras try to place them in that league.
It would be pretty interesting to see how they (yours and the competition) spool during on/off throttle situations as you'd need on a circuit track when getting back on the throttle. Time to Torque comparison should identify the superior turbos imho (I may also be wrong)(when the rest is comparable of course).
As for WGDC. There is a standard-setting for these N54 gates, and Rob has posted many times that he follows the factory spec as do we. Meaning we know exactly how the wastegates are set up. Simply another metric to show, all his claims of improved compressor housing design, blah blah blah are not doing squat except making the turbos harder to install. He was, and is buying off the shelf parts, and machining his logo into them.
As for the spool Plenty of GF dynos out there on a dynojet which are identical the world over as far as drum weight. Any 6MT N54 on a dyno jet would prove an easy comparison by simply looking at WTQ by 3000RPM. I have looked at quite a few. If you want to do that same, you will see the same trend. Much slower spool for the GF with similar power output, when with cars with much more modifications done. We have been doing this a long time, it's not hard to see how a set of N54 twins spool by looking at a dynojet graph as long as a few things are the same. Same Trans, same gear, etc.
Is it exact? No, it isn't, can you get a good idea from it? Absolutely
As for the spool Plenty of GF dynos out there on a dynojet which are identical the world over as far as drum weight. Any 6MT N54 on a dyno jet would prove an easy comparison by simply looking at WTQ by 3000RPM. I have looked at quite a few. If you want to do that same, you will see the same trend. Much slower spool for the GF with similar power output, when with cars with much more modifications done. We have been doing this a long time, it's not hard to see how a set of N54 twins spool by looking at a dynojet graph as long as a few things are the same. Same Trans, same gear, etc.
Is it exact? No, it isn't, can you get a good idea from it? Absolutely
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with you. So the last part i am wondering is my last part asked about time to torque. Speaking in theory the smaller comp housing should lead to faster time to torque at least in my head. Now that would be interesting to compare.
Also just out of theory. IF there was a difference for comp housing sizing. What would the differences be? Efficiency? Would a too small comp housing lead to higher IATs (not saying yours is)? I am in no means an expert but just want to learn. I have the HP650s which as you may know have the bigger comp housing. I am neutral here. Just curious and i know we are on theory grounds.
I am a circuit guy. Straight line pulls are not interesting to me.
Also just out of theory. IF there was a difference for comp housing sizing. What would the differences be? Efficiency? Would a too small comp housing lead to higher IATs (not saying yours is)? I am in no means an expert but just want to learn. I have the HP650s which as you may know have the bigger comp housing. I am neutral here. Just curious and i know we are on theory grounds.
I am a circuit guy. Straight line pulls are not interesting to me.
If there are different wastegate vent sizes, you'd see lower duty on the smaller one or the one that doesn't flow as well. If they're the same size, it's more apples to apples, if not, then all bets are off.
Turbo RPM or manifold pressure would be better indicators, but nobody is logging that :/
That said, the more aggressive upwards slope of WGDC to keep a static boost level as RPM increases will generally show you which turbo is being pushed harder.
Turbo RPM or manifold pressure would be better indicators, but nobody is logging that :/
That said, the more aggressive upwards slope of WGDC to keep a static boost level as RPM increases will generally show you which turbo is being pushed harder.
Last edited:
We logged mani pressure back on the original GC's. Actually stock turbos, stage 2's, 2+'s, GC's, GC lites, etc. etc. I know we (well, Tony, most of that was before I joined the team) had it posted forever ago on BB. Measured shaft speed and everything. These will absolutely flow better than the GC family, which already had some serious flow potential and by far the highest dynos (take your pick, ours or third party) on any twins.
Nevertheless, seeing more data out will be fantastic. Carl's car will have upgraded fueling very soon and take the turbos a little further. We're not going to go full kill tune on this, as that's not what Carl wants, but should be nice to see more data.
Nevertheless, seeing more data out will be fantastic. Carl's car will have upgraded fueling very soon and take the turbos a little further. We're not going to go full kill tune on this, as that's not what Carl wants, but should be nice to see more data.
Similar threads
