• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Stock B230FK/FT with Pulsar/Garrett GTX3076R - Dyno Result

mertz said:
I'm honestly surprised. Fair play!

How's it for longevity?
Click to expand...
Longevity is the big question haha, I’ve really not put any real milage on it yet. It’s my daily driver so will see about just shy of 1k miles a month through the winter, be interesting to see how it fairs
 
Jamesmoore said:
Ok so the klr t3 could be a worthwhile upgrade, don’t you have to use lash caps to run that cam ? I’ve seen questionable issues running those

I Remeber doing a lot of research when doing my build and the ipd came out ontop for my requirements, giving good idle and low down power for a daily driver
Click to expand...
Keep the IPD turbo cam, it’s great. T3 is for when you want that lumpy idle and run a bigger turbo with higher rpm power.

Lash caps are fine if the valvetrain is controlled, you don’t want valve float with lash caps (or really ever!). I usually longer custom valves and dual springs, so no lash caps and no valve float :)

mertz said:
I'm honestly surprised. Fair play!

How's it for longevity?
Click to expand...
Replying here to your other post as well.
The larger turbos aren’t that much of a slower turbo to spool up. The AR has a big impact on that, but that also drives top end performance (or the lack of) and smaller AR turbine housings increase EGTs a lot.

A 0.48 AR on a GTX2860 would hit 20psi at ~2500rpm but drop off really hard at higher rpm’s (even with a massively ported wastegate opening). The 0.63 SR housing was the same boost at ~2900-3000 rpm but had 1500+ rpm of pulling on the top end. So overall a longer rev range of torque and power, and increased power as well.

Tossing in a 0.63 AR 3071 Pulsar you end up with nearly identical characteristics as the smaller 2860 with a 0.63 AR, but with cooler charge temps and a lot more power potential.
 
Last edited:
culberro said:
Keep the IPD turbo cam, it’s great. T3 is for when you want that lumpy idle and run a bigger turbo with higher rpm power.

Lash caps are fine if the valvetrain is controlled, you don’t want valve float with lash caps (or really ever!). I usually longer custom valves and dual springs, so no lash caps and no valve float :)


Replying here to your other post as well.
The larger turbos aren’t that much of a slower turbo to spool up. The AR has a big impact on that, but that also drives top end performance (or the lack of) and smaller AR turbine housings increase EGTs a lot.

A 0.48 AR on a GTX2860 would hit 20psi at ~2500rpm but drop off really hard at higher rpm’s (even with a massively ported wastegate opening). The 0.63 SR housing was the same boost at ~2900-3000 rpm but had 1500+ rpm of pulling on the top end. So overall a longer rev range of torque and power, and increased power as well.

Tossing in a 0.63 AR 3071 Pulsar you end up with nearly identical characteristics as the smaller 2860 with a 0.63 AR, but with cooler charge temps and a lot more power potential.
Click to expand...
Hey man thanks !

Odd one, but I’ve seen you a lot in the forum and you seem really knowledgeable, don’t suppose you could check out my latest post and advise me on my clutch shimming ?
Cheers
 
There are so many variables to consider when choosing turbine A/R. The answers to all of the below questions will have an impact on the "right" A/R for your needs.

What's the intended usage of the vehicle / how would you like it to drive?
Power target at the flywheel?
Supporting mods like head work, valves, cam, etc?
Exhaust setup - size, cat, muffler?
Fuel type?

Then there are practical choices like internal vs. external wastegating, connection flange geometry, and material choice if available.

If you just have to pull the trigger and choose a housing, the middle A/R in the family is usually a good compromise.
 
Ok,
The car will have to pass emissions testing (uk mot) and I would like to be able to drive it anywhere. Doesn't have to have good manners though.
I would like it to be as fast as I can get it. Head's been mildly ported with larger valves (on stock seats). Looking at KLR t3 cam.Tight squish. Electric water pump going on.
4" downpipe to 3" cat etc.
Fuel at moment is petrol as no ethanol here. However, I am toying with the idea of using a seperate fuel system to supply a different set of injectors with methanol to take over as boost increases. My a/m ECU (speeduino) can run two different sets of injectors on a percentage basis.
I realise much of the above is probably unrealistic, but you did ask....
Tim
 
I won't be able to tell you which housing is best just from this, more illustrating the different factors that go into it. Without an actual flywheel bhp target and engine data it's all a guessing exercise.

But it sounds like you've got a good plan for mods. You could start with an 0.83 A/R housing and work on tuning for power. If you reach a power plateau where the engine seems to just get hotter and angrier with more boost, a larger housing may help at that point. Exhaust backpressure is never a good thing on a turbocharged engine. With a smaller housing it will choke out sooner and start to stop up the engine and impede breathing.
 
Just adding a data point here to @ludi post. Not a stock engine though.

Recent engine I put together for a friends rally car did a smidge over 300whp at 20psi with the 0.63AR version of this turbo. 210whp at 6psi as well.

Revs out to 8k rpm with just a slight drop in power on the top end. Positive pressure is over a 5k rpm range, huuuuge usable torque curve. Used in a rally car so it’s tuned conservatively, very stable coolant temps when driven at full load.

9:1 CR, KL Racing t3 cam, kangaroos forward mounted exhaust manifold (burned all the plug wires tho, gotta get that sorted), KL Racing cast intake, ported 530 head with OS valves and dual springs. Stock HG, stock style head bolts.
 
culberro said:
Just adding a data point here to @ludi post. Not a stock engine though.

Recent engine I put together for a friends rally car did a smidge over 300whp at 20psi with the 0.63AR version of this turbo. 210whp at 6psi as well.

Revs out to 8k rpm with just a slight drop in power on the top end. Positive pressure is over a 5k rpm range, huuuuge usable torque curve. Used in a rally car so it’s tuned conservatively, very stable coolant temps when driven at full load.

9:1 CR, KL Racing t3 cam, kangaroos forward mounted exhaust manifold (burned all the plug wires tho, gotta get that sorted), KL Racing cast intake, ported 530 head with OS valves and dual springs. Stock HG, stock style head bolts.
Click to expand...
Is there any chance you could upload the dyno graphs here? I'd be interested to see them, including the torque, etc. I'm impressed that the engine revs up to 8000 rpm. What do you think are the key modifications for this? Thank you very much.

Best Regards, ludi
 
ludi said:
Is there any chance you could upload the dyno graphs here? I'd be interested to see them, including the torque, etc. I'm impressed that the engine revs up to 8000 rpm. What do you think are the key modifications for this? Thank you very much.

Best Regards, ludi
Click to expand...
First pic is at 6-7psi which is just on the wastegate spring (7psi spring).

2nd pic is at ~20psi. The red curve is the old b23 Turbo engine with a ford cawsie 0.48 turbo, tuned with the same MaxxECU Race by the same tuner on the same dyno.

The legends/scales were not in the pics, but vertical increments are steps of 50hp or lb-ft, horizontal increments of 500rpm.

For higher rpm’s you need dual springs for valve control, along with a cam that is happy to make power up at those revs. Then for more sustained power you need more flow, so new intake manifold and exhaust manifold. Porting and bigger valves are also part of that equation. You can see that torque is dropping off at higher revs, and I’m assuming that’s due to the smaller 0.63 AR housing. Might be able to pick that up with more boost at higher revs, though for now the engine is wayyy more power and torque than what the car had before. More timing could also help as well. There was zero recorded knock, and timing is 17deg at like 6k rpm and 20psi IIRC.

One thing to note, we haven’t played with cam timing at all. The t3 cam is installed per KL Racings TDC lift spec, and advancing the cam should bring in the bottom end a bit more which would be nice.



 
Last edited:
culberro said:
Just adding a data point here to @ludi post. Not a stock engine though.

Recent engine I put together for a friends rally car did a smidge over 300whp at 20psi with the 0.63AR version of this turbo. 210whp at 6psi as well.

Revs out to 8k rpm with just a slight drop in power on the top end. Positive pressure is over a 5k rpm range, huuuuge usable torque curve. Used in a rally car so it’s tuned conservatively, very stable coolant temps when driven at full load.

9:1 CR, KL Racing t3 cam, kangaroos forward mounted exhaust manifold (burned all the plug wires tho, gotta get that sorted), KL Racing cast intake, ported 530 head with OS valves and dual springs. Stock HG, stock style head bolts.
Click to expand...
How much impact do you think the KL racing intake manifold is having here ?

If you ran a stock B230FT intake manifold how different would you expect the results to be leaving everything else the same ?

What about the K-Jet intake ?
 
Jamesmoore said:
How much impact do you think the KL racing intake manifold is having here ?

If you ran a stock B230FT intake manifold how different would you expect the results to be leaving everything else the same ?

What about the K-Jet intake ?
Click to expand...

B230f I take would have torque and power drop of more severely as revs rise, or you’d need to increase boost to make more power. They are a huge flow restriction.

K-jet manifold is fine, but the plenum is too small imo. So the hp and torque lines would just shift down a smidge.
 
Last edited:
Jamesmoore said:
How much impact do you think the KL racing intake manifold is having here ?

If you ran a stock B230FT intake manifold how different would you expect the results to be leaving everything else the same ?

What about the K-Jet intake ?
Click to expand...
Martin Leaf does some very good K jet intakes with bigger plenums. Stock F manifold is pretty restrictive at higher RPM. I know a guy selling one with 960 TB on one of the UK pages also.
 
mertz said:
Martin Leaf does some very good K jet intakes with bigger plenums. Stock F manifold is pretty restrictive at higher RPM. I know a guy selling one with 960 TB on one of the UK pages also.
Click to expand...
I too know a guy selling one of martins earlier kjet intakes haha !

I’m tempted by it however I’m questioning its worth in my application as I’m only aiming for just over 300hp, the car is a daily and I do not want to sacrifice low throttle driving and bottom end torque

I’d be adapting it to fit a stock sized TB in an attempt to retain low throttle control, as the normal throttle body isn’t a restriction till well over 400hp as far as I’m aware.

The issue secondly with martins inlets as much as they are a work of art, they are double the cost of the KL racing intake which is hard to justify especially at my power level as I doubt the differences would be noticeable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top