The Project Pad

Yeah, meth is definitely something I'll consider, but if I can make 340 whp on 93 safely, I won't need it

You will. I did 360 in the 4k at 23psi with pretty minimal timing.

chaloux wrote:You will. I did 360 in the 4k at 23psi with pretty minimal timing.

Yes, but with a bigger turbo no?

Sure, but again with "low" boost and timing. I'd expect 350 would be a pretty safe pump gas tune, I think Hank gas a dyno somewhere that I can't be arsed to find

E85 I know, but:

Says 340 right on the site! With 91! Bud...

Yes, 340~ or so on pump 91, 355whp on 93.

Side note, Colin put this kit on his stock 200+K mile 7a for the last 6 months or so. Made 349whp at ~19psi on my dyno on e85 the other day. It is a riot I hear.

Yes that's pretty impressive. I'd probably try to keep it a little conservative for the sake of longevity of the 235k engine.

Only problem is that 7163 will make more power and not lose anything down low. I don't want to go back on my word to buy the 6758 though. The advantage will be that I won't be as tempted to rev the hell out of the thing and/or try to make more power with the 6758 vs the 7163. It'll save a few bucks while making as much power as I need.

I can't stop thinking about more boost at the moment.

loxxrider wrote:more boost

The answer to literally every problem in life

loxxrider wrote:The advantage will be that I won't be as tempted to rev the hell out of the thing and/or try to make more power

I know I'm the FNG but you're lying to yourself if you think this. I've known absolutely 0 people that have done the "get the smaller turbo and I won't abuse it" and said it was worthwhile. They all say "man, I wished I went bigger. Now I've spent 2x the money on the turbo".

Oldestof11 wrote:

loxxrider wrote:The advantage will be that I won't be as tempted to rev the hell out of the thing and/or try to make more power

I know I'm the FNG but you're lying to yourself if you think this. I've known absolutely 0 people that have done the "get the smaller turbo and I won't abuse it" and said it was worthwhile. They all say "man, I wished I went bigger. Now I've spent 2x the money on the turbo".

Though true, a 7163 is rod swap territory... I'm not sure he's going there on this car... ( unless Im missing something)

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

the extra power the 7163 makes is in to top end. THe torque/rod limit is virtually the same.

I think the 6758 makes a better daily turbo. The 7163 is fun, but really requires octane to make the huge gains. The 7163 is 100% more laggy than the 6758. about 300-400rpm worth. Stick with the 6758 IMO, though if you want me to sell you a bigger turbo, I will.

Colin just ran a 12.4 with his 7aT with a pretty easy launch because Torsen rear diff. I think it has a 11.8 or so in it at about 113 at current boost. Pretty cool

Oldestof11 wrote:

loxxrider wrote:The advantage will be that I won't be as tempted to rev the hell out of the thing and/or try to make more power

I know I'm the FNG but you're lying to yourself if you think this. I've known absolutely 0 people that have done the "get the smaller turbo and I won't abuse it" and said it was worthwhile. They all say "man, I wished I went bigger. Now I've spent 2x the money on the turbo".

Get out of here FNG!

I think the situation is a little different for me. I don't need more power as I have plenty of other cars to fulfill that need. I'm happy even with the stock turbo. I'd just like to get a little more power with similar spool. If I'm sacrificing spool, its not worth it in this car.

As hank said, the 6758 spools faster, but the 7163 makes just as much torque at the same rpm either way. But I couldn't utilize the extra power of the 7163 easily without meth at least.

Hank wrote:Colin just ran a 12.4 with his 7aT with a pretty easy launch because Torsen rear diff. I think it has a 11.8 or so in it at about 113 at current boost. Pretty cool

He needs a thread for all this great 7at info

Hank,

Do you think the 6758 is a better daily turbo because of its superior transient response? You said both turbos we're talking about make approximately the same torque at low rpms even though the 6758 spools faster (one makes torque with boost, the other with good low pressure ratio flow out of the hot and cold sides?). So I would think the only thing left to gain would be transient response. Is that correct?

No, I meant that they make the same amount of torque period on pump gas, not at the same RPM. AKA, the rod limit is nearly identical on either. The 7163 100% spools later. THe 6758 is nice on these cars because they are at the cusp of full boost at 65-75mph, where the 7163 really needs to be closer to 85-90 and 4000rpm to get boiling. This means that the 6758 is not a gear dropper, despite being only slightly lower thresh.

Both are fantastic turbos.

Hank

Hank wrote:No, I meant that they make the same amount of torque period on pump gas, not at the same RPM. AKA, the rod limit is nearly identical on either. The 7163 100% spools later. THe 6758 is nice on these cars because they are at the cusp of full boost at 65-75mph, where the 7163 really needs to be closer to 85-90 and 4000rpm to get boiling. This means that the 6758 is not a gear dropper, despite being only slightly lower thresh.

Both are fantastic turbos.

Hank

But isn't early torque what kills rods faster than it would if had a later onset? For example when we tune stock block cars a little softer in an effort to save the bottom end... Both 6758 and 7163 make the same torque but I'm under the impression the 7163 with it's softer(laggier) nature would be nicer to the bottom end. No?

Hank wrote:No, I meant that they make the same amount of torque period on pump gas, not at the same RPM. AKA, the rod limit is nearly identical on either. The 7163 100% spools later. THe 6758 is nice on these cars because they are at the cusp of full boost at 65-75mph, where the 7163 really needs to be closer to 85-90 and 4000rpm to get boiling. This means that the 6758 is not a gear dropper, despite being only slightly lower thresh.

Both are fantastic turbos.

Hank

Curious to hear if you’ve had any experience with the 7064 yet... playing around with it on BW’s matchbot it seems to sit nicely in between the 6758 & 7163 and offers more hot-side options.

Money has been spent!

I ordered some maintenance parts from Marc a month or more ago, but haven't been home to remind myself what I ordered. It was all basically maintenance-related, so that's not too exciting.

However, I did just order some cool stuff tonight and yesterday that I'm kinda excited about.

First, parts for making the future EFR downpipe meet up with my current exhaust:
- 304L U-bend to cut up (made in USA)
- 304L V-bands with interlocking "tongue/groove" (made in USA)

An added bonus of this will be that I can take out my exhaust dump if needed for some reason (car is still registered in FL ) because now there will be v-bands on both sides of it.


OK, a little more exciting this time... I've now got everything (well almost everything) I need to build my 1/4 wave resonator. Sorry Alex, the Helmholtz is too complicated at the moment... I may try it later on though!

If we recall from a few pages back, I need about 30-32-ish inches worth of arc length in piping to create my 1/4 wave resonator. I ordered:
- 24" 304L straight pipe (USA )
- 304L 90 deg bend (USA)
- Interlocking v-bands (USA)
- 304L Sanitary pipe flat end cap (??)

(all stainless pipe, bends, and v-bands from Himni-Racing)




If you recall again, the length of the resonator is crucial to it's effectiveness at attenuating the target frequency, so I need to know the approximate temperature of the gas inside the pipe while under operating conditions. I like to overdo things, so I spec'd an EGT sensor which I would trust for the job in one of the manifold runners for the revver in the future.

- Vibrant 304L EGT bungs (???)

- (I like this one) TheSensorSource.com EGT Sensor

• Exposed junction for fast response time (150 ms)
• 1/4" diameter
• -148°F to 2372°F range (-100°C to 1300°C)
• Special Limits of Error accuracy (+/- 0.4% of reading)
• Inconel 600 protective sheathing for longevity at high temperatures
• Sheath Wall Thickness 0.030" (.76 mm), MgO insulated
• Stainless steel over-braid cable with Teflon™ insulated conductors; 6 foot
• Our probe material is Inconel (Inconel is extremely corrosion resistant, maintains hardness at high temperatures)
• Our lead wires are Teflon insulated (cheaper probes often use Fiberglass insulation that can absorb moisture, wires prone to shorting & corrosion over time)
• We use top quality, high temperature, waterproof potting compound at the probe/wire transition
(cheaper probes often use an inferior potting compound which can allow moisture to enter into the transition causing shorts, these cheap potting compounds also prone to breaking down over time)(Hand-made in USA)

If you want a badass EGT, look no further... the tips can be cleaned too if you're worried about the exposed junction.



- Atkins type K thermometer for use with the thermocouple (made in Gainesville, FL USA!)



- Oh, and I bought one of those angle head 12mm Snap-On wrenches for removing/installing the exhaust manifold for the EFR when that time comes. (Made in USA, duh!)


Now you might be thinking to yourself by this point that I probably need something to stick all of this stuff together. Well, I'm pretty set on buying a Miller Diversion 180 for my fairly light duty TIG welding needs. I'm just waiting for a rebate or something to roll around unless someone has a TIG they want to sell! (Also made... well, assembled in USA ).

Oh, and I took some pictures last night.

Bruh. Bruuuuh... Bruh! Your car looks fantastic in that lighting! Even under all that dirt, it looks cleeeeaaan.

You're working your way to the most American-made T44 ever.

DROOOOOL.

Thanks guys! Buying this car has been one of the best decisions I've made in a while