my 2 cents on this is that its the first independent test, as more people do tests we will be able to compare data and see if it was a one car fluke or if the white really isn't that great of a real world car turbo.

 

I guess this means "White Turbo" is neutral in power hence the color code "White" J/K!!!

"Green Turbo" is good in power hence the color code "Green"

"Red Turbo" I hope this does not mean bad in power hence the color code "Red" J/K!!!!

So far the Green Turbo is the king for now

Lets get those 91oct Red Turbo Numbers!!!

 

Yean man, much thanks for sharing the info.

 

Tone it down? Unfairly negative comments? One post destroying countless hours and hard work?

Sure some of my comments may be in jest and a bit harsh, but lets look at it this simply.

Would we agree that Razorlab is a good guy whos fair and unbiased? Yes. Is he a knowledeable tuner and has a good understanding of evos, hardware, and how to make **** work? Yes. Does he have substantially more experience than most people on this board - meaning we the sheep? yes.

So.. we have a guy, who takes this new product, installs it on a car with the upper end of boltons. This isnt a car with an ebay turbo back, and an mbc, self flashed out of cheapness running slightly better than average.. its a car with a good few piece of hardware on it - good gsc cams, injectors, ets intake * ic setup.

Tested within a month of the previous turbo.. temperature isnt mentioned, but the man we trust says it wasnt unnatually hot or cool (vs all those X dyno sheets we saw in the dead middle of winter from shops with snow on the ground and 30s air temps...)

And he gets nothing.. he gets a loss of power.

Hes experienced, hes trusted.. and he doesnt see anything massively wrong with the car.. didnt spot any possible problem that he must have thats robbing that rightfull 20whp gain or whatever it is that must have been expected for it to be a rightfull or fair review in the eyes of those with a hand in the manufacturing process.. i dont get it.

Everytime he reposts it further shows due dilligence on his part to troubleshooting and proper tuning & setup.

Either you trust the guy or you dont.

I guess you shouldve tested it on a car with 9 second hardware like all the other guys do to extrapolate every possible gain.


<- dissappointed sheep who apparently isnt capable of making an informed decision if it contradicts the developer passed on PEER REVIEWED information.

 

I don't think anyone in their right mind is jumping to conclusions so let's not get too premature. Time will tell, this is just the beginning and just one car but already I can see two polarities of opinion forming. Fine and whatever, but let's keep it objective - I highly doubt that the intention of posting these results was to start a flame war or something.

It's wiely known that Evos have a high variance rate in terms of output even with similar or idential setups. No two are alike! Only time will tell what the "average" is, so puhleeeze let's keep open minds for now so that hearsay doesn't start to drown out the objectity of the OP.

 

And what are you trying to say, unfavorable results shouldn't be posted? In my opinion the test isn't perfect but it is far from calling it a wash for the simple fact because of a back to back and a small temp variation. There are plenty of threads that are flying around with tests from vendors that have far less variables removed from them that could have altered the results that don't get this much negativity towards how the results came about. I think the results are very close to what I would expect for a moderate bolt on car running 91 octane with sane boost levels. I would expect the white to shine more then the 9 turbo when getting closer to the 25-28psi level for the fact of pure flow. This test is what it is. If people are clueless enough to throw money at parts because of one test whether geared towards their setup they plan to run or not then so be it. The same to if they chose not purchase a part because of single test. Personally, I think Buschur and AMS do some of the best testing you could ask for when it comes to back to back parts comparison. Its just unfortunate that the majority of time it is not on your everyday, average bolt on evo where the gains/losses would be more realistic to the customer. This is definately not a complaint because, just like this test, you test on the car you have on hand to test with.

 

I'd have to go out on a limb to say it was probably one of THE MOST informative comparisons based purely on the amount of DATA provided by any tuning facility yet..
I agree with Phalse 100%

I also think FP is doing a GREAT job, it's not easy to improve on theese factory turbos as they are GREAT units from the factory..

 

Doesn't it flow a few more lb/min of air from 6krpm on out to redline? Isn't that what the turbo was supposed to deliver? To me looking at that data, the White model turbo outflows the EVO9 from 6krpm and above without giving up any spool up on the bottom end.

Why the car isnt making any extra power with the extra airflow is a good question. I think everyone glossed right past the data again.

BOOST ON!

Robert Young

 

the white seems doing good considering its much warmer now than the time the IX turbo was dynoed. pretty sure that if the dyno comparison was done on the same day it would have probably matched or out performed the IX turbo.

 

I am some what confused as to how the White can flow the same or more air at almost all RPM's yet come up so short in the midrange. Something isn't adding up.

 

^well its probably the temp difference in ambient temps.

 

Or ignition timing, or cam timing, or AFR, or.... long list. But the airflow part is all the turbo can do.

BOOST ON!

Robert Young

 

Air flow is air flow. If the temps are higher, how different are the timing maps?

looking at everything except the dyno plots says the white makes nearly exactly the same power as a 9 turbo except from 6k+ where it makes more power. why don't the dyno plots agree with the data?

 

Does anyone else find that amusing?

As I was once told by FP after having a problem.. because it couldnt possibly be their product, oh no, it HAD to be me

"did you check your downpipe for a shoprag? Anything that could possibly be blocking the exhaust flow"

While not word per word, as I dont have the direct quote, and while I'm not sure who said it.. yes, fp blamed the lacking performance of their product on a possible shop rag stuffed in my downpipe. This was a FP bolt up 50 trim for the DSM, somewhere around 02/03, and was spooling late 5k due to what FP later admitted to an improperly assembled turbo.

Still damned amusing.

 

What did FP repeatedly say about the advantages of the compressor wheel change in the White?

" Drastic improvement in compressor efficiency when mass flow got beyond 40lb/min and much more mass flow when driven out to it's max shaft speed of 165k compared to the stock EVO9 16g6 compressor."

"The difference in measured airflow thru the motor is about 10-12% different starting at about 5krpm on out to 8krpm (more difference the higher the RPM, duh), with the stock turbo really having no business even trying to run out past 7krpm due to the 450F+ degree air coming out of it at that point from the major overspeed condition resulting from trying to run more than 19psi at 7krpm (stock turbo)."

"This turbo is intended for people who need response and a low boost threshold, such as those who autocross, club rally, tight course road race or hillclimb or other similar applications. It works better than the factory 1580 at higher PR's, but is NOT intended to supersede the green or other larger flow rate turbine units that are more suitable for high RPM applications like open road course or drag racing. In reality there is a limited proper intended application for this turbo. If your needs don't fit, don't buy it."

"The 1580 (stock 9 turbo) was designed for the factory boost curve, but still does a good job at higher PR's. These were designed to work better at higher PR's, and they do. If you run at lower PR's it probably makes more difference what the temp is than what turbo is in it, until you significantly reduce the exhaust pressure or some other factor that attributes to engine power."

"The 1580 is very very well thought out and hard to improve on. This project sort of started out on a lark as a "well, it shouldn't work but go get some data" deal. As it turned out this comp wheel required such as significant amount less shaft power to operate in the target areas and enough extra flow capacity that a very clear improvement was seen without sacrificing any spool or recovery. I could readily make the 1580 hit true surge with minimal warning (it feels/acts like fuel cut) where as this unit would presurge a bit but drive thru it."

"The difference between this and the 1580 occurs at higher PR's. There is NOTHING you can do to make a TD05H work better at 7K plus. Its a 'small' turbine wheel, performance is going to suffer at high RPM. Look at the exhaust pressure. Eventually it goes sky high. It doesn't matter if Tom or Fred or FP or Joe Average is using it, it has certain characteristics, it has a performance window. ...DO NOT BUY a 'White' if your primary focus is drag racing. You'll lose too much top end. This unit is strictly for those who NEED response and low/mid."

Some important characteristics and parameters identified are not simply not depicted on a dyno chart, like shaft speed, PR, etc... Others simply do not exist because the dyno runs were stopped at 7000 or so. Perhaps the kind of test shown by this routine dyno graph does not demonstrate the differences in real world performance, or the circumstances under which significant differences will be shown...