Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Full Race Twin scroll Results!!! GT35r

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 07:18 AM
  #31  
Ted B's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Liked
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,334
Likes: 63
From: Birmingham, AL
This car generates about the same peak hp vs. boost as my 35R did with regular .63 A/R T3 hotside. The difference is this car spools much better, has a better torque curve, and undoubtedly feels 100% better to drive on the street. That's the difference TS makes.
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 09:24 AM
  #32  
Jspec EVO VIII's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
From: Anc
Nice results. I'm curious myself what size A/R you're using?
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 12:18 PM
  #33  
Jasil's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,327
Likes: 1
From: NO
The issue has never been faster spool it's always been is there a loss in top end and when you factor in the increased price is it worth it?

Waiting for someone to actually push any TS 35R kit to 36+ psi and maybe we will see.
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 04:16 PM
  #34  
ofb73's Avatar
Thread Starter
Newbie
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: Ocean County, NJ
The housing is a t4 1.06. Just waiting to swap out cams with more aggressive ones. Im kinda of limited with choices for the 9. Updates soon.
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 04:47 PM
  #35  
CA$H's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: N.E. Seattle
These numbers in my opinion seem kinda low for a TS 35R? Was it really worth 7 large for this kit? Turn the boost up! Lets see what this thing can do?!?!
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 04:48 PM
  #36  
CA$H's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: N.E. Seattle
When I saw this thread I was thinking 550+whp 500+wtq with a sick a$$ power band and about full spool by 4500.
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 05:12 PM
  #37  
nasty8evo's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
From: ATL
very nice numbers
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 05:19 PM
  #38  
Max Power's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
From: Chandler, AZ
Sigh... look at the numbers a little closer ca$h (with a screen name like that I'd think you wouldn't give a crap about "7 large"). This is at 23 psi - look at the torque and boost onset. There's no pleasing peak number people like you. He has at least 10 psi more to play with to hit the numbers you "think" it should. The car is hitting torque values 400-500 rpm sooner than before without losing top end. What more do you want?
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 05:31 PM
  #39  
thatguy's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
From: milfburn
edit nvm
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 06:40 PM
  #40  
555R's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 1
From: Dirrrty Jerzey
thats true...most of the opinions that are negative are those looking at the big number... and not whats below the curve... it peaks at the same hp numbers but everything below where you car is is where it counts...for ts...i drove the car and it makes other 35Rs seem extremely laggy or soft down low...once he gets the other cams it will probably be even sicker



Originally Posted by Max Power
Sigh... look at the numbers a little closer ca$h (with a screen name like that I'd think you wouldn't give a crap about "7 large"). This is at 23 psi - look at the torque and boost onset. There's no pleasing peak number people like you. He has at least 10 psi more to play with to hit the numbers you "think" it should. The car is hitting torque values 400-500 rpm sooner than before without losing top end. What more do you want?
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 10:01 PM
  #41  
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 30
From: Tampa
Originally Posted by robertrinaustin
Show me another 35R that hits 200 lb ft of torque at 3600 rpm. I've looked and couldn't find one.
My car last time on dyno made 230 at 3600, 310 at 4000 and 567 at 5500
That was with 35r. It now has even more with the HTA35! Good ole open scroll..

Last edited by 94AWDcoupe; Apr 12, 2008 at 10:04 PM.
Reply
Old Apr 12, 2008 | 10:12 PM
  #42  
wilson1's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (63)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
From: CA
Originally Posted by 94AWDcoupe
My car last time on dyno made 230 at 3600, 310 at 4000 and 567 at 5500
That was with 35r. It now has even more with the HTA35! Good ole open scroll..
is this on the same dyno?
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2008 | 06:34 AM
  #43  
robertrinaustin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,858
Likes: 0
From: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country
Originally Posted by 94AWDcoupe
My car last time on dyno made 230 at 3600, 310 at 4000 and 567 at 5500
That was with 35r. It now has even more with the HTA35! Good ole open scroll..
Let's see the graph. Is that with a stroker? If not, your outspooling every 35R I've seen on a 2.0 and that includes all those high power HTA cars from David. Those hit the same 200 lb ft around 4000-4100 rpm and that's on his Mustang dyno.

Yea, good ole open scroll. That's why nearly every OEM uses TS on their turboed cars, because it sucks so much.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2008 | 07:12 AM
  #44  
VincentX's Avatar
Account Disabled
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Wow. You don't even need a stroker to compensate for the lag.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2008 | 10:02 AM
  #45  
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 30
From: Tampa
Originally Posted by robertrinaustin
Let's see the graph. Is that with a stroker? If not, your out spooling every 35R I've seen on a 2.0 and that includes all those high power HTA cars from David. Those hit the same 200 lb ft around 4000-4100 rpm and that's on his Mustang dyno.

Yea, good ole open scroll. That's why nearly every OEM uses TS on their turboed cars, because it sucks so much.
My car does not prove anything in the TS debate. It only shows you can get great spool and great power with an open scroll. The argument has been that twin scroll spools faster and makes more power everywhere with no loss in max HP potential. So far It has shown that it spools about 4-500 rpm faster, looses a good bit between 5-6000rpm with NO results on a high power car. It has been my argument all along that TS is nothing new. Old school turbo guys that made big power have said that the housing IS a restriction on a high powered car. Till one of these setups is thrown on a 700hp buschur car that point has not yet been proven either way. My money is still on the old schoolers.

My second point all along is that doing a true back to back to show it spools faster is VERY difficult. No one has actually done what I would call a good back to back. A 63 housing spools faster than a 82 because it is more restrictive. I have seen 63 open spool faster than an 82 and not loose any hp up top. I would call this finding the ideal a/r housing for the setup. Switching to TS and getting better results CAN be attributed to finding the ideal a/r as well. How can you prove which is responsible for the gain? the ideal a/r gains or TS gains? Its difficult.

I have a good friend locally that did a twin scroll swap on 3071. That is to say he switched from the 63 open to the 78 TS. The car lost 400rpm spool and made 40hp less on the TS. what this means is for that particular setup the 63 a/r open was just far more ideal a/r for the setup. No TS benefits were realized.

What are you going to say when buschur bolts on a TS 35r finds he cant make that same killer power with it? people maxing out turbo setups could care less about what is happening at 3-5000rpm. Are you going to change the hype to "great for auto-crossers" but not good for drag racers?
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:04 AM.