Top mount turbo setups

[mason]

Originally Posted by Speedie6 Wouldn't 3" be too big? The bigger the pipe, the more lag, no? Well, I guess it depends on the turbo. But, the GT35 has 2.5" pipe, I believe. And our throttle body is about 2.75". There have been several people to do FMIC piping kits, I think. If you do a better one, it will sell for sure. Well, the core itself has 2.25" pipes. Would you modify the core's pipes?

im pretty sure the core connections are 2.5, they have reducer couplings on it. ill have to double check that. better have 2.5 or ill be pissed!!! lol.....

[mason]

ok, just checked, yes the core has reducing couplers on it. so it should be 2.5 to 2.25.
like other people have stated. a small change in pipe sizing make a huge difference. wile the 2.25 is fine for stock and 30 series turbos, it might be a lil small for bigger turbos. i could be wrong though..... any thoughts?
and the over, under car routing is mainly to take the shortest route, less couplers, and prolly a lil cooler, and free up space up top.

[madvillain]

The OD of the TB is 2.75" IIRC, the ID is 2.5".

I'm really curious to see what the difference would be with larger/smaller piping. Plus, the difference between these different piping routes. If you think about it, if you increase the diameter of the piping, you're simply increasing the amount of air in the system available to the motor, am I right? So isn't that the same thing as the Cp-e kit or something, where there is like 15ft of piping, even though it is 2.25"? Where as mine is like 6ft of piping at 2.5"?

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by mason ok, just checked, yes the core has reducing couplers on it. so it should be 2.5 to 2.25.

Really? You got a 3? The core on the CPE MS3 kit is totally different than the core on the MS6 kit. At any rate, my CPE MS6 core has 2.25" piping.

Originally Posted by mason like other people have stated. a small change in pipe sizing make a huge difference. wile the 2.25 is fine for stock and 30 series turbos, it might be a lil small for bigger turbos. i could be wrong though..... any thoughts?

GT35's come with, I believe, 2.5" pipe. So, yes, it makes sense to me to have bigger piping for a bigger turbo. And if your core has 2.5" pipes, then I agree totally, put 2.5" piping on it.

Originally Posted by madvillain The OD of the TB is 2.75" IIRC, the ID is 2.5".

Approx. The ID is 60 mm, which is actually closer to 2 3/8", but close enough. And the OD is within a few thousanths of 2.75".

Originally Posted by madvillain So isn't that the same thing as the Cp-e kit or something, where there is like 15ft of piping, even though it is 2.25"? Where as mine is like 6ft of piping at 2.5"?

You make a good point, that if you shorten the total pipe lengths, then a fatter pipe would still have less lag.

So, if going under the car shortens the pipe, that in itself is a good reason to go that route. If it also happens to help a bit with cooling the charge, even if only a small amount, that is just another bonus.

[bmylez]

Originally Posted by Speedie6 Wouldn't 3" be too big? The bigger the pipe, the more lag, no? Well, I guess it depends on the turbo. But, the GT35 has 2.5" pipe, I believe. And our throttle body is about 2.75".

A lot of people think that bigger I/C piping causes lag, but I have evidence of this not being the case. A guy on the Focus forums is running a GT35R with 3" hot side piping and 3.5" cold side piping. He used to run 2.5/3 and he said he most definitely picked up a couple hundred RPMs in spool, same turbo, same cams, all that.

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by bmylez A lot of people think that bigger I/C piping causes lag, but I have evidence of this not being the case. A guy on the Focus forums is running a GT35R with 3" hot side piping and 3.5" cold side piping. He used to run 2.5/3 and he said he most definitely picked up a couple hundred RPMs in spool, same turbo, same cams, all that.

Well, I'd like more than anecdotal evidence.

[06Speed6]

The stock TB is 60mm or 2.36", but if you take the area of that 2.36" bore it is 4.374"sq then subtract out the approx area of the blade and shaft which we will very conservatively call .125"x2.36", we get .295"sq from 4.374"sq or 4.079"sq of usable area or 2.279" diameter usable bore. Then after calculating in turbulence the effective flow is even less.

While mathematically all we actually need is a 2.25" ID pipe to match the flow of the TB, in the real world we could probably run a 2" ID pipe and be just fine.

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by 06Speed6 The stock TB is 60mm or 2.36", but if you take the area of that 2.36" bore it is 4.374"sq then subtract out the approx area of the blade and shaft which we will very conservatively call .125"x2.36", we get .295"sq from 4.374"sq or 4.079"sq of usable area or 2.279" diameter usable bore. Then after calculating in turbulence the effective flow is even less.

There is some debate on the value of boring a throttle body. But, it may be worthwhile for people running really big turbos.

[cld12pk2go]

Originally Posted by Dano2010 i'll jump out on that limb with you speedie...I don't think it matters where the pipe is nor if it is wrapped or not. That air is hotter than AMB engine bay air anyways and is moving waaay too fast for it to matter. I am not an engineer either but I am opinionated LOL

I am an engineer, and your intuition is dead on.

When under WOT conditions, wrapping the pipe will result in < 1°F temp changes (completely negligible). Under very light load conditions (idle/cruise), it is possible this could result in 10-20°F differences. But there is no reason to go there with respect to power/longevity.

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by cld12pk2go I am an engineer, and your intuition is dead on. When under WOT conditions, wrapping the pipe is result in < 1°F temp changes (completely negligible). Under very light load conditions (idle/cruise), it is possible this could result in 10-20°F differences. But there is no reason to go there with respect to power/longevity.

Agreed, no sense in turning the hot pipe into an intercooler.... that's why we have intercoolers lol.



As far as piping diameters go.... it's all bout volume.

Calculate the total volume of the piping, and the intercooler... and you get something fairly small... like 6 ft of piping (you can assume square pipes to make things simple, concept still applies), and say the pipe is 2" dia. The piping volume is 6 x 0.167 x 0.167 (dimensions in feet) = 0.167 cubic feet. Negligible. Throw in the intercooler volume for giggles, assuming like 24" x 10" x 3.5" super core like mine... you get 2 x 0.83 x 0.29 = 0.48.

So were looking at a whopping 0.65 Cubic Feet of charge volume.



When you consider the motor is basically pumping about 121 CFM @ 3000rpm, or 2 cubic feet per second... You could run 5 in charge piping and probably not make too much of a difference on spool. In fact, if the piping is a restriction... you may actually gain spool as the bmylez explained.

[xcoldricex]

Originally Posted by bmylez Exhaust wrap on charge pipes is ugly, heh. I'd rather get the shiny stuff. I'm definitely planning on wrapping the over-engine pipe.

shiny stuff:

[tbot]

^^i think there is the reason why "rice" is in your username...just saying...

[bmylez]

Well, it's not *that* ricey considering he did it for a practical reason and it's done cleanly. Not my style, but at least it's on the inside instead of sweet vinyls and huge spoilers on the outside...

[MS3-a(sore)ASS-rex]

That gold heat tape works fucking magic man. Sucks it's super expensive for being just tape lol.
Turboxs fmic FTMFW!!!!

[Speedie6]

By the way, what xcoldricex did looks totally fine to me. I think most people think it is of negligible value, but, it looks fine to me.

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn Agreed, no sense in turning the hot pipe into an intercooler.... that's why we have intercoolers lol.

Well, if there was some way to add to the total cooling, then why not? But, doesn't look like anybody has.

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn You could run 5 in charge piping and probably not make too much of a difference on spool. In fact, if the piping is a restriction... you may actually gain spool as the bmylez explained.

Okay, so, what would be the ideal size piping? Particularly given that the throttle body is only 60 mm, or perhaps near 65mm if you've had it bored, and that most turbos have 2" to 2 1/2" pipes, doesn't seem like anything bigger than that would buy you anything?

Seems to me, correct me if I'm wrong, but 2 1/4" pipe should be enough unless you have a huge turbo and a bored throttle body. And at that point, 2 1/2" should cover you, no?

[tbot]

Think of the difference of blowing air thru a coffee stirrer straw vs a one of those big ass straws Burger King has for their shakes...

[bmylez]

Yes, the throttle body becomes the big restriction when trying to run large I/C pipes. The guy who ran 3.0/3.5 pipes also had an 80mm TB. Having such a big TB was definitely the key to utilizing the huge charge pipes. Looks like somebody needs to develop a dang bigger TB for us...

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by xcoldricex shiny stuff:

Back on the top mount topic lol.....


I think it'd be easy to make an intake that sits in the same position as this one. It would just kinda come over the hpfp area a tad, and tuck down in there.

Would everyone be okay with this? Also, i'll have to figure out how to add a recirc pipe to it. Cause i doubt you'll all wanna run cowboy vta like me lol.

I'm eager to do some fitment on an ms3 soon.

[MS3-a(sore)ASS-rex]

Intake idea is perfect!
I've been running vta for 20k miles, so I say FUCK A RECIRC FITTING!

[kilik2]

Sounds like a great idea dj, post pics when you test fit on the ms3. That's the only thing I am "slightly" worried about. I am sure it will fit though with maybe a smaller batt box?

[MS3-a(sore)ASS-rex]

It'll fit anyway. At least up to 3.25". CPE already sells an intake that size and it fits

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by MS3-asaurus rex Intake idea is perfect! I've been running vta for 20k miles, so I say FUCK A RECIRC FITTING!

I'll make it optional then lol. No since in putting a pipe there if it won't be used.


Tomorrow i'm going to make the first down pipe off my jig for ms6 and do a final test fit with the SS mani. After than i want to install it on a local's car. He already has all the stuff pretty much, just need to put it all together. If that goes well... i think i'll build up 5 ms6 kits and move on to the ms3.

I'll post some more pics tomorrow hopefully cause we all love pictures.

[tbot]

I wish I haz more monies...I'm excited for this!!!

[djuosnteisn]

No worries, i hope to keep at least 3 kits finished at any given time, so i'm sure i'll have one whenever your ready. Focus on your motor right now hahahaha.

[tbot]

Yeah likes that's easy with everyone in here making kick ass parts!

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by MS3-asaurus rex It'll fit anyway. At least up to 3.25". CPE already sells an intake that size and it fits

Well, no, they don't. They have an inlet pipe that fits big turbos, but it is a 3" inlet. Then they have the XcelXL intake which is 3.25" ID, 3.5" OD. So, to use those together, you need a 3.5" to 3" reducer.

In other words, CPE does NOT have a true 3.25" intake. Not with the parts they sell.

[djuosnteisn]

Well....... mine will be lol.


Worry not speedie6, i'll find a way to fit it.

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn Well....... mine will be lol.

I'm sure you can. My suggestion, which you can of course take or leave, but my suggestion would be to use a 3.25" ID on your MAF, simply so that some of the MAPs being made for the CPE XcelXL can be used as a good "starting point".

With all the cool stuff you are doing, I'm definitely regretting my current build, which is more conventional. I never heard the words "twin scroll" until after I had parts in hand.

To my understanding, the primary benefit to twin scroll is quicker spool. So you can have a bigger turbo with the spooling of a smaller turbo, correct? But, even with twin scroll, wouldn't a twin-scroll GT35 spool slower than, say a basic 3071? Would there be a twin scroll of something on the order of a GTX3076? Of course, other brands would be options as well.

[djuosnteisn]

Yeah, there's twin 3076's as well. it all depends on what hotside you equip the turbo with.

Here's ATP's 3076 page for instance. Just scroll down and look at all the different options:
Garrett GT3076R (aka GT30R aka GT3037) Ball Bearing Turbo : atpturbo.com

And you have the right idea behind a TS setup...

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn Yeah, there's twin 3076's as well. it all depends on what hotside you equip the turbo with.

Thanks for that. Presumably, you could get that GTX as well. So, perhaps, the GTX3076 twin scroll might be a good option for this system you got. If I was buying now, that is probably what I would look at getting.

[djuosnteisn]

The GTX series are pricey, but the performance seems to almost justify it. Their compressor maps look gorgeous.

[MS3-a(sore)ASS-rex]

GTX are so fucking expensive. I'm pretty sire the HTA is cheaper for primarily the same thing...

[MSP611]

So for a twin scroll turbo lets say like 3071 size wat would u guys get? This is to be used with this kit and the steedspeed Mani on a speed6

[doubleflusher]

I'm leaning towards the HTA3076R.

Convince me otherwise.

[MSP611]

I dunno if I wanna go tht big I was set on a gt2871 before, but tht was before knowing about twin scroll and if I'm gonna make this my weekend warrior and do this top mount setup might as well make it worth while. Any suggestions on twin scroll 3071's?

[Speedie6]

Originally Posted by doubleflusher I'm leaning towards the HTA3076R. Convince me otherwise.

HTA is something else I never heard of, but, I just googled it, and, sounds like a fine choice! Though since the HTA35 is supposed to spool about 400 RPMs sooner than a regular 35, that seems like a possibility too.

Originally Posted by MSP611 I dunno if I wanna go tht big I was set on a gt2871 before, but tht was before knowing about twin scroll and if I'm gonna make this my weekend warrior and do this top mount setup might as well make it worth while. Any suggestions on twin scroll 3071's?

Well, if you are going to go with this setup, seems to me that the 3076 range is a good option. Not really "bigger" than a 3071, really. Same housings. Just a different compressor wheel. And the twin scroll is, in theory, supposed to bring the spooling down.

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by doubleflusher I'm leaning towards the HTA3076R. Convince me otherwise.

I can't lol, that'd be the perfect turbo for this setup IMO. Put a 0.82 or 0.78 a/r TS hot side on it and call it a day. Fast spool and plenty of flow.

Originally Posted by MSP611 I dunno if I wanna go tht big I was set on a gt2871 before, but tht was before knowing about twin scroll and if I'm gonna make this my weekend warrior and do this top mount setup might as well make it worth while. Any suggestions on twin scroll 3071's?

3076 isn't really that big of a turbo. It's honestly the perfect size for the 2.3 MZR. Ask some of the guys who bought gt28's, and they'll agree they should have gone bigger to start with. The difference in spool between the two isn't all that big, and the 3076 will be able to support quite a bit more flow over the 28.

[spnkr21]

Maybe twin 28's with twin scroll.

[djuosnteisn]

That'd be fucking awesome lol.... but i wouldn't want to be the guy building the manifold. Twin k04's..... maaaybe...

[MSP611]

Hmm thx for convincing me . So any suggestions on twin scroll 3076's?