The TME turbo is worth very little HP over an VIII turbo. The turbine is aerodynamically the same, it is just lighter giving it quicker transient response. The compressor is identical to the EVOIII. The turbine housings a better material and a 10.5 A/R, but the larger housing is only worth a little HP too. As I said, it's worth about 150 RPM quicker boost threshold from what others have seen.

The inconel turbine is $250, the titanium is $450. The question is, is it worth the extra money to put it in an IX turbo? The IX turbine housing and compressor side is superior to the TME6.5 turbo.

 

with this turbo in a t3 open scroll configuration with the stock engine your car will suck and be much much slower than stock on an auto cross track. You will pretty much never be in boot

 

A few people have the HKS GT7460R ball-bearing turbo, and they say it spools like stock or better. Not sure how that's possible, but then HKS wouldn't release something that sucks...or blows...or...
...well, it's a turbocharger...
...but you know what I mean.

 

The theory of why it spools faster is that it has a smaller nozzle on the turbine side.

That looks to be the case in the pictures too, but it is hard to tell.

Regardless, the HKS turbo looks to spool sooner and makes at least as much power as stock, typically a good deal more power though some want to argue otherwise.

 

I was wondering if that might be it.

To spool faster than stock means it's much faster than a GT3071R. The one dyno chart I've seen comparing stock and Garrett setups made the car look weaker than stock below 3500rpm.

Garrett didn't publish turbine exducer sizes in their big, bad chart of specs, but if "trim" is the area ratio, and a GT3071R has a 60mm "90-trim" turbine, then the diameter of the exducer must be 56.9mm. That's bigger than the exducer on the HKS, and it stands to reason that it would have a bigger nozzle to go with it.

So, it really makes that big a difference? Even though the compressor wheel is bigger than the Garrett and WAY bigger than stock? I know a turbine has to be built chunkier than a compressor, but...
Does the difference in the compressor inlets and inducers play a part?

I wasn't going to mess with my stock turbo, but between my friend's SRT-4 and the articles about the Disco Potato I'm fascinated with the prospect of instantaneous lag-free response.

Now that I've researched the specs on a few dozen turbos, I'm sure a Disco Potato turbo is too small for an Evo, and TD04 on a Neon or Ralliart is even smaller, but the HKS unit sounds pretty nice.

With the turbine and compressors both being larger than stock (and the compressor being larger than the Garrett's) it stands to reason this turbo could make more power than a GT3071R. It's the no-lag claims that have me wondering about the differences.

 

WOuldnt a stroker kit be an autocrossers best bet?

Seems like a simpler way to go about not worrying about lag.

 

It's certainly a good idea, but I'm under the impression it's cheaper and easier to swap your turbo than get an Evo engine rebuilt right.

Most of the shops in my area amount to Billy Bob's Chevy Shack, and I wouldn't trust them with much beyond an oil change.
If I wanted a built long-block I'd have to order it.

Using Works as an example, I think they sell a stroker motor that I think is good for at least 8000rpm, but it costs $3700 (plus core charge) just for the short block.

A ball-bearing turbo for $2300 or so is an easier option.

 

No question that a stroker is a good mod, but if you have a perfectly good engine that's a very expensive upgrade - particularly if you aren't doing the R&R yourself.

 

The stock 9 turbo is great for auto-x.

 

Indeed, I'll be using my stock turbocharger until I run it into the ground.

...then I'll go for a ball-bearing turbo of some kind.

 

For auto-x, it's tough to beat the stock turbo. Not much out there will beat it for response purely due to the fact that it is the smallest. Though, a GT3071 isn't too much bigger and ball bearing, so the transient respone might be similar. Though the stock turbo will have the smallest turbine housing of anything out there which should make the spoolup point the earliest.

I would do anything to free up flow as much as possible into and out of the stock turbo. Most free flowing intake, most free flowing exhaust, and extrude hone the stock exhaust manifold.

You have an Evo X? The Garrett bolt-on GT3071 might be your best bet for max response and more power.

 

It would be real interesting to make the auto xers use turbo air restrictors like Grp A and WRC rally classes had to . What they do is force you to make torque with an forced airflow rate ceiling . I wouldn't think a works Grp A Evo 6 with suitable gearing would be slow at auto X .
Admittedly with ALS they made strong torque and got podium finishes for Mitsi .

Its not through experience but I tend to think that a car that makes a lot of low to mid range torque isn't going to need to be spun too fast and maybe custom gearbox ratios would make all the difference as well .

I know people there have had FP spec turbos converted to ball bearing centers but has anyone considered a ball bearing standard configuration turbocharger ? If a TD05 16G can make 400 Hp/400 Ft Lbs of torque then getting more down could be difficult .
I really don't know how much difference the 9 turbos compressor housing would have made in restricted rally car guise , the earlier Evos didn't have them so was it really a later Mitsy road car update for the 9 ?

I'm sort of hoping that somewhere in the background FP and or CBRD are looking into ball bearing center sections that they can shove non std (for 4g63T's) turbines and compressors into and machine the housings as they see fit . I reckon a BB TD05 16G would spin up real quick particularly if the exhaust tract and housing was working as well as possible .

I think there is a lot of talk here about turbos alone here but remember that they are only one part of a "system" and not the whole system .
I'd be looking at higher than standard static CR and cam profiles that give good dynamic compression without moonshot revs .

I would be trying to find out what the works rally 4G63T engines had and see if you could afford the bits to make your engine and exhaust stand up to the ALS working .

Some think larger turbos and biggish cams are used to shift the power range upwards but the problem is the further it climbs the less suitable the factory gearing is . It also makes the engines harder to drive competitively in some peoples opinions .

DB may be capable of flying around at 10500 in first but I'm not sure most would like to do that often or at all .

Just my 2c , cheers A .

 

+1

 

Yes! I have! But who do I go to to get a BB center retrofitted to a turbocharger?

 

I don't know how much of the rally car parts transfer over to the average auto-x car,really.

That ALS gives you a lot of freedom to go to a larger turbo and mitsu went over to the TR30R after the TME6.5. I'm looking more into getting ALS going and good left foot braking performance and less into finding the fastest spooling turbo. The idea being to keep turbo shaft speed high at all times and then who cares about transient response.