Turbo system recommendation?

[OddJob]

I've got a 91 nsx with a 3.5L motor, rated for 800 bhp. I'm looking for turbo system recommendations capable of delivering over 600 whp on 91 octane pump gas (maybe as high as 95 octane, gets too pricey after that).


For a given system, I'd like configuration info: turbo, housing, fuel pump size, injector size required, etc., along with an idea of the RPMs at which power comes online.

A better torque-to-hp ratio than .8 would be nice. Ideas?

 

[NA1MT]

"I got a TT nsx as a DD, and a rossion q1 for fun. The nsx is probably as fast, maybe a bit faster now from a roll, but the q1 seems a bit more fun to drive because of its light weight. Just loves to corner, and the engine really sounds at home between 4K and 6K rpm...nsx not so much, just seems to strain at 5K and up."

"I was given four options: Two different turbos with two different housings, offering max capacities of 550, 600 (slower spool), 625, and 750 whp (slower spool). I took option 3 for $300. I'm only getting 550hp/470tq but working on rectifying that."

What happened to your current setup? I just really don't understand.....did you get bored of your turbo setup already? Why don't you tell us what your configuration is. I get it.....are you playing an April Fools joke on us?

 

[OddJob]

Lol, I hadn't considered it's april fools. Damned good catch, you are observant!

No joke, 100% real. I'd like to make more power and am weighing my options.

 

[turbolence46]

I have a brand new lovefab for sale, needs exhaust, bov, and sump pump, pm if interested.

 

[OddJob]

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I guess the first thing I should do is just scan some threads and see what kinda numbers single turbos get on 3.0 and 3.2L motors.

I know it sounds strange, but for example with the rossion, people often swap out the TTs for single turbo setups and get more power with comparable spool given the newer turbos available now. Figured I'd see what's possible before throwing more money into it.

 

[NA1MT]

If you look at the various dyno graphs at the power curves you will see the trend of the twin turbos making maximum power a little higher in the power band than comparable output single systems. Most of the plots I have seen of the twins don't make maximum power until 5500rpm and higher.

 

[OddJob]

Interesting observation, and exactly the kind of info I'm looking for. I'll dig around for single turbo dyno graphs.

Along the same lines, I only recently noticed that although (I believe) peiser and hugh's TT systems use the same turbo (GT2871R), with the same .86 AR housing, peiser's 3.2L appears to come online 500 rpm sooner than hugh's 3.5L, at least in terms of torque.

http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...n-the-garage?p=1772106&viewfull=1#post1772106

http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...dy-NSX/page3?p=1488587&viewfull=1#post1488587

So many variables.

 

[NA1MT]

You may find some of the plots in this thread interesting
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...plete-Package-A-Real-time-Documentation/page2

 

[OddJob]

Good info, thanks!

 

[E-Nough Logic]

Interesting observation, and exactly the kind of info I'm looking for. I'll dig around for single turbo dyno graphs.

Along the same lines, I only recently noticed that although (I believe) peiser and hugh's TT systems use the same turbo (GT2871R), with the same .86 AR housing, peiser's 3.2L appears to come online 500 rpm sooner than hugh's 3.5L, at least in terms of torque.

http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...n-the-garage?p=1772106&viewfull=1#post1772106

http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...dy-NSX/page3?p=1488587&viewfull=1#post1488587

So many variables.

I would question some of those results....The claimed 818whp is not even in the realm of possible on that fuel system using e85. Single Aero 340 + 1000cc injectors + e85 =/= 818whp...

919hp / 10lb hp per pound of air which is commonly used = 91.9 lbs of air per minute
91.6lbs of air per minute* 60 = 5514 lb of air per hour
5514lbs of air / 8.0 afr relatively lean = 689lb of fuel per hour....in reality at 64.5psi rail pressure an aero 340 can only flow ~475lb/hour
689lbs of fuel per hour / 1.58 = 436 liters per hour.

6 * 1000cc per min = 6 liters * 60minutes = 360 liters per hour.

Without running a higher base pressure the engine would require 1200cc injectors at a minimum. At approximately 63.5psi 1000cc injectors would flow enough. Running this high of a base pressure on top of 21psi would stress the fuel pump even more. The only way for this pump/injector combo to work would be if the pump was ran at ~26 volts.

 

[Ko-nsx]

almost any of the current turbos on the market will hit your goals, just depends on what setup you want.

 

[blodi]

Here's my latest pull (dyno graph at end).......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbl_HGL4tjs

Build thread here....
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showthread.php/171472-Blodi-s-Lovefab-LF600-Engine-and-Turbo-Build

 

[E-Nough Logic]

For 600whp on pump gas you are going to need a single turbo capable of flowing 65lb per minute at roughly 13-16psi, or if running twins each would need to flow ~32lb per minute each...efficiently.

If you choose to runs twins gt2860rs would be a great choice if you had no intentions of going higher than 650whp. The gt2860rs is smaller than the 2871 so you can expect faster spool in comparison. A billet 62mm may be able to meet you needs if you were looking for the smallest single you could run but realistically 64mm+ may be a better choice though.

A drop in tank aero340 and id 1000cc injectors would be an excellent choice but if you already had 750cc or larger injectors they would support 600whp. You may want to plumb the fuel rails in parallel with this setup to to ensure front and rear get adequate fueling.

So you already have a kit and are looking to upgrade or replace the entire kit?

 

[NA1MT]

I am pretty sure peiserg has ID2000 like me. I had RC 1000's and they were at 80-85% duty cycle @12psi.......no good.

 

[OddJob]

If you choose to runs twins gt2860rs would be a great choice if you had no intentions of going higher than 650whp. The gt2860rs is smaller than the 2871 so you can expect faster spool in comparison.

I'm running a TT, GT2871R's with .64 housings making 550 whp, and am told they're maxed out on 91. I'd love to make ~650 whp on 91, but am told my current setup maxes out at 625 whp if I switch to E85, with larger fuel pump, regulator, etc.

E85 is not convenient for me, would like to stick with 91 if possible.

I've got 1000cc injectors fwiw, with a walbro 255, I do believe.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

Are you running the Science of speed kit? If you are running the .64 housings that could be a fairly big restriction. We always ran t3 housings on the gt28rs'. The gt2871r's are capable of more than 625whp with a well built system. How much boost are you pushing now at 550whp?

 

[OddJob]

Yup, spikes to 16.3 psi at about 3900 rpm, then at 4k and up it settles into 16 psi, maybe a tad under.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

Yup, spikes to 16.3 psi at about 3900 rpm, then at 4k and up it settles into 16 psi, maybe a tad under.

Everything is all relative, perhaps you are just on a very low reading dyno + a very conservative tune. I cant see this setup making under 600whp at 16psi even with the .64 a/r housings on your 3.5l setup.

 

[OddJob]

That's a great point, dynos are notorious there. UMS uses a dynapack, I believe, not sure how it compares to the other popular dynos. Maybe my first step should be to get a baseline at another shop or two, for some initial numbers.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

That's a great point, dynos are notorious there. UMS uses a dynapack, I believe, not sure how it compares to the other popular dynos. Maybe my first step should be to get a baseline at another shop or two, for some initial numbers.

Realistically you want relatively more power never the less. My only concern would be that there is a problem, or something causing an inefficiency.

 

[OddJob]

Interesting, hadn't considered that. Examples of things that could account for this level of inefficiency?

 

[jorligan]

I wonder if the housing s that restrictive. With a Lovefab single and I think a GT35R, over 600 RWHP on a Mustang Dyno with Kip Olson's old 3.5 race motor that was built by Shad. Don't know exact number because it kept breaking traction

 

[OddJob]

Now that's really interesting...I'm reading that if you take dynojets for comparison, mustangs read ~12% lower than dynojets, and dynapacks read ~8% higher than dynojets, just as a rule of thumb.

 

[kookoo4nsx]

Dang. I feel all alone with my lowly 400hp on a Mustang dyno.:smile:

 

[NA1MT]

Dynapack will typically read 15% higher than a dynojet and a mustang is usually 15-20% lower than a dynojet that is calibrated properly because you can make a mustang read whatever you want it to. They are all just numbers anyway....there are too many different variables.