Jaraxle

I have decided to try the popular overseas turbo maker KAMAK

http://www.kamakdynamics.com/

There was enough good information to be found to push me over the edge.

What I ordered was an Evo X 20g compressor cover, TD05 center section with the following turbine/compressor:

GTX style 11 blade 52.56 MM Inducer X 68.01 MM Exducer (71.02 MM Extended Tip)
Paired with a KAMAK STS 56mm 9 blade (vice 12 blade) turbine made from 718 inconel.

The compressor is "gtx style" because they have copied the 11 blade Garrett GTX71mm compressor and simply scaled it to fit a standard 20g compressor housing. The turbine is a 9 blade design they call "STS" and according to them flows 15% more than the MHI TD05 12 blade design. They made it from a decent material: 718 Inconel, but make no mistake it is NOT even close to BorgWarner gamma-ti (the best.period.), and is a slight notch down from Inconel 713c used by Garrett and MHI. Due to the lower blade count: The result on the turbine side is a quick(er) spooling high(er) flowing exhaust. The result on the compressor side should be similar but not equal to the true Garrett GTX 71mm map. The OEM Evo X turbine housing will be reused keeping the nice twin scroll design with a roomy .89 a/r.
I was bothered that I wouldn't have a true real compressor map, but who does these days? Only an official Borg Warner, Garrett, or ancient MHI (never even saw one for the 152g6).

The compressor to turbine ratio is inline with the original GT3071R specs:
53.1 / 71 mm inducer/exducer
56.5mm turbine
The turbine housing A/R for that turbo is also a near match.

Surge is a concern, and I have a shop lined up to machine/port for anti-surge. [edit: surge never happened and I never ported the cover]
Final balancing is also a concern because I am of the belief the CHRA is only component balanced, and I cannot get the seller to confirm component,assembly, or VSR balanced. I will be sending the CHRA for VSR balancing to be safe.

Why am I doing this, when there are simple bolt on answers? Cost to performance ratio. Period. All the data says this would be a killer setup. The only "speed shop" I can find that sells this kind of combo is on the Subaru side; by an outfit called Steam Speed (www.steamspeed.com). Guys have reported and posted up to 450awhp. Interestingly they don't have our nice twin scroll .89 a/r in TD05 and therefor the 8cm2 becomes a choke point IMO. I will update this thread in the future as I get results, post pics, etc etc. I am not rushing this project because fall in NY is short, and modding to a new turbo in winter is not my bag of fun. Love to hear from some turbo-tech guys on this endeavor.

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

I have used and done a lot of researched on the kamak parts. thats a good combo you got. the 9 blade wheel is not just 3 dropped blades. the profile was changed and the blades made much larger. power numbers will fall between hta 71 and hta green. closer to hta 71. hard to find people pushing the billet 20g wheels. best I found was 465ish whp on a fwd srt. thats about what it can do on a nice e85 setup. hta71 would only be about 15whp short. but with a good bit better response. it will be way short of gtx71. that wheel can do 530whp, and has.

hokiruu

iTrader: (19)

Very interesting turbo choice and thread. Please keep us updated.

What will be the rest of your related setup for fuel, bottom end, cams, etc. ?

Jaraxle

I also believe this to be a very responsive turbo choice, that should be quick LIKE the stock turbo; without the downward tapering boost to redline. I do road/race track events and I am not looking for a dyno queen. Also this is my daily, and snowmobile.

Car: '12 MR
Current:
Custom hybrid Apexi/Aem intake (not for performance; the sound is pure sex) Will post pics if requested.
Cobb silicone turbo inlet
AGP catchcan (was afraid of cyl-1 knock)
MAP SS upper hard pipe
3.5" DEPO bar/plate intercooler - fantastic for the money; sans bling
3" SS Magnaflow catback
Accesstuner Custom Tune (currently on my 20th version)

Todo to support turbo:

CNT drop in fuel pump
Cobb 1000cc injectors
[maybe downpipe + cat]

Tuning plan: LIMIT TORQUE to 300-330 ft-lb on the dyno. This may mean a boost curve that is lower at peak torque and then increasing after. Plan to stay with my current 11.32:1 AFR and DO NOT attempt to lean out. These engines want to be rich, and to survive road-race track events I want to keep it that way. Timing - currently running v403 93 octane timing. I will have to see how that performs with increased boost. That is the area I need the tuner to focus on. No bottom end or SST upgrade plans, hence the torque limiting goal.

Jaraxle

Someone tell me how to change the title of this thread! Ghetto does not describe this unit at all I will let the pictures speak for themselves. Shipped from Kinugawa in Taiwan very WELL wrapped in a bubble-wrap cocoon, and then foam padded. This is good considering I ordered without turbine housing or actuator so the turbine is exposed. This is most certainly something of an impressive hybrid. It is a 20g "form factor" compressor shaped in the same profile as an 11 blade Garrett GTX 71mm (found in GTX3071r), but with the Borg Warner tech - extended tip. I have read that the GTX does have something of an extended tip but it is not advertised I think for obvious reasons. I am slightly concerned that my Evo X turbine (12 blade) is made of TiAl and even though this one is 9 blade (STS) for lightness I will add lag by the fact it is 718 Inconel = heavy. Since I am not going to break down the CHRA I will not be able to do a weight comparison. I have decided not to send the compressor housing out for "porting" because this service would have done the small MAP style EF2 holes that I do not believe are effective. Furthermore the GTX compressor map has a very favorable surge line; better than the 7+7 HTA style or the 6 + 6 MHI style. Surge can also be eliminated using the 3d boost curve we are blessed with in the factory ecu. So I do not have worries on that front. On paper I cannot figure out for the life of me why this turbo isn't as popular as crack I included a close up of the "extended tip", which you can see protrudes beyond the wheel itself.

The CHRA will be VSR balanced to the tune of a whopping 100 bucks. This is because there are NO grind marks on the compressor nut, only the turbine. So it appears it is component balanced and then assembled. Not good enough for me. With VSR balancing they feed pressurized oil and therefore test the entire unit, which means if it fails I can send back to Kinugawa asap. To be continued...

foxbat

Ghetto Garrett! LOL
Is this ball bearing or journal?
I have used the Kamak before, a 16G on a Genesis coupe, @22psi it's been on the car for year now, everything seems perfectly fine.

Jaraxle

Your ? = Journal

So I have been reading looking for anyone with a similar setup. Most common is with a smaller turbine A/R (DSM or Subaru) and usually the 7+7 BW style compressor (lord knows why). One of the complaints is always "more lag than expected". This is usually with a TD05 turbine and a SMALLER A/R on the turbine side. So we all know the turbine has a BIG(er) impact on spool than the compressor (void of massive mismatch). The KAMAK and other turbines are inconel. The turbine I bought has 3 blades wacked (aero I believe is the same). If the EVO X OEM turbine is TiAl as reported, then moving to Inconel 718 is still :

Inconel 718 = 0.297 lb/in^3 x (9 blades) [KAMAK STS]
TiAl = 0.144 lb/in^3 x (12 blades) [Mitsubishi Evo X OEM]

Mitsubishi Evo X turbine is ~55% lighter even though it has 3 more blades !!
This I believe is the ticket why the OEM Evo X turbo spools like a ****, and replacing it with something close to size induces lag, leaving guys scratching their heads.

Now I have to decide if I want to go lighter with slightly more restriction, or heavier with only 9 blades.

http://www.specialmetals.com/documen...lloy%20718.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_aluminide
Thoughts anyone?

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

oem X turbos are not TIAL. dont know where you got that. JDM market MR yes. USA no.

there are at least a dozen different 20g billet wheels. and three sizes of turbine wheels. the original 20g wheel flows more than the small td05 turbine can support. billet 20g wheels need the bigger turbines. that 7 blade billet flow a tonne. there was a very laggy 600whp graph on here earlier this year mated to big 6h turbine and 14cm open scroll housing.

thatguy5

iTrader: (1)

still waiting on an sts 9 blade td05hr turbine wheel to be released

Jaraxle

I was unable to verify this 100%. Sounds like you know for sure, which means the STS 9 blade is only an improvement in performance.

My thread is specific to the GTX 11 blade style 20g. As for it flowing more than the td05 can support: I do not agree with this. Back in the days of DSM TD05 (6-8cm2 housings) 20g mash ups; sure this was a problematic mismatch. The turbine housing was just too tight, choking the exhaust side and inducing massive surge because the shaft speed to engine flow rate was undesirable. But the EVO X has a .89 A/R housing (12cm2) of twin scroll design. Furthermore, my specific turbine is an STS 9 blade which further increases exhaust flow. The turbine and compressor also match the GT3071 in size and ratios as previously mentioned. I am not trying to make dyno queen power, but rather mimic the performance and response of that Garrett turbocharger (roughly, and for 1/4 the cost).

I am using the GTX style 11 blade compressor, not the 7 blade design. I am aware of the dyno queen run made with that compressor and I don't see it relevant to my goals or configuration.

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

I have run the 20g literally 20 different ways. including in the evo x exhaust housing. I have two different 11 blade billet wheels here and I know there is a third. you are asking for tips. I am giving them. that 11 blade wheel you have is a tall version. can flow 55lbs. the 5h turbine maxes out at 47lbs. so in a maxed out state if you are shooting for one the turbine side will hold the compressor back by about 70whp. in addition even the standard 20g is mismatch in that it is a bit heavy to hang on the 5h turbine. they never lasted long at all. the 6sl2 turbine maxes out at about 53lbs. just about right for that compressor wheel. it never hurts to have a bigger turbine. the standard 20g was very reliable mated to the 6h turbine. and has remained a street strip favorite for many who used it.

and your turbine housing assumptions are also incorrect. the 7cm single scroll flows better than the 10.5 twin scroll. less back pressure with less friction. dividers are very turbulent. makes for great spool but at a cost.

the gtx71 is 54.1mm not 53.1mm.

I could go on. but in short I would ask for the 61mm turbine 6sl2. much better idea for what you are doing.

Jaraxle

Since I am attempting to compare this turbocharger to the GT3071 I would be very happy with 470hp as you indicated that the TD05 turbine would be limited to. Keep in mind this would be through the STS 9 blade that is reported by marketing to flow 15% more than the MHI 12 blade. I am wanting to keep the highly responsive pro-daily-driver twin scroll (autocross/roadrace, etc). I am not trying to use every ounce of the compressor. Not using every inch of the compressor map is not such a bad idea either.

What I am more concerned is:

[QUOTE=even the standard 20g is mismatch in that it is a bit heavy to hang on the 5h turbine. they never lasted long at all.[/QUOTE]

The EVO X stock compressor is 68mm exducer and so is the GTX-20G. Your saying that even though this is a modern TD05 center (360 thrust, twin oil, etc) that I would be on borrowed time? Snapped shafts? Shaft play from overloading bearing? I am sending the unit for VSR balancing to insure longevity.

Jaraxle

The CHRA ships tomorrow to www.pureturbos.com where it will be VSR balanced with data printout. I am doing this because of the rare reports of Taiwan turbochargers (Kinugawa) pooping out at low miles. There are few reports, so I am being cautious. It will be interesting to see how out of balance it is brand new. It appears to be only component balanced at this point.

I had a conversation with Charles (at Pure Turbos) on the compressor I had mounted on a TD05. I asked if it was too big or mismatched to this size cartridge. I was told that it was not too large, and then he went on to compare the shaft size and turbine to a Garrett T3/T4 yada yada I don't remember. The short answer was it was more related to how much boost pressure was going to be asked of it; and hence the thrust bearing which isn't spectacular for TD05. According to the maker of this TD05 : "This core comes with KAMAK performance thrust bearing kit that can handle 52 Psi." So I am hoping that all is well in durability respect. Time will tell.

On to twin scroll: From some tech articles I have gathered twin scroll is the bomb, and has literally no losses. There is an interesting post on the mazda forums, with data from mazda on twin scroll versus single (it is old, but science is science):

http://www.rx7club.com/single-turbo-...turbos-903210/

According to Geoff at Full Race:
"We have found the twin-scroll systems have higher backpressure at low rpm (which is good for turbo spool-up) and lower backpressure at high rpm (which is good for top-end performance). On the other hand, single-scroll systems have lower backpressure at low rpm (bad for spool-up) and higher backpressure at high rpm (which hurts top-end performance)."
I am still trying to make up my mind whether to tune out torque to save the rods and SST, or drop in forged rods and pistons. I talked to Nick at Buschur racing who thought my mileage and usage made it a candidate for such a drop in. The SST would then be the weakest link, although many guys have pushed it pretty good. That seems luck of the draw, and can only be thwarted with nearly $3k and a trip to http://sheptrans.com/

The fuel pump arrived. Injectors next.

Jaraxle

I could not discover no matter how hard I tried if the Kinugawa turbochargers are component balanced, VSR balanced, or assembly balanced. To be safe, I shipped the CHRA to PureTurbos.com in California for VSR cartridge balancing. They did a fantastic job, and you can see by the data sheets they provide that there was substantial room for improvement. Charles said that he could not tell how it was initially balanced, but it was by no means a hand-grenade. The balancing that he provided did two things for me 1.) it verified the turbo doesn't have a defect in assembly by actually pressurizing the CHRA with oil and running it to speed and 2.) he balanced the turbo to a zen state that will promote longevity. Well worth 100 bucks in my opinion.

In the spring it will be installed and tuned, and the results will be posted in a new thread (more related to dyno).

camacho-1

:d