2010 Borg Warner Airwerks Turbo catalog
Jun 9, 2010, 07:54 PM
#196
Thanks alot for posting up your experience. You are absolutely correct that the 1.10 ar works great on the 83mm turbine wheel. In my experience ive seen that very high boost cars will gain top end power with the 1.25 a/r at high boost on engines that flow a lot in the cyl head. did you have a chance to test the 1.25 out also?
Kevin
Jun 9, 2010, 11:22 PM
#197
good info Kevin. We are about to test the 1.10 on a 2.1 with E85. Geoff has me thinking we may do a back to back on the 1.10 and 1.25 to see the difference tho. I am anxious to check this sucker out as im not to sure anyone in the evo world other than Mike R is using a s400 on one. Althought i believe he is using a 74mm we are using the smaller compressor
Jun 10, 2010, 05:36 PM
#198
The car doesn't get on the converter quick enough with the 1.25AR housing to race on a pro tree. I'm going to try some changes later this season that will hopefully alleviate that issue. At the 40psi-ish and 950-1000whp-ish level, how much power have you seen from the 1.1 to the 1.25AR swap?
good info Kevin. We are about to test the 1.10 on a 2.1 with E85. Geoff has me thinking we may do a back to back on the 1.10 and 1.25 to see the difference tho. I am anxious to check this sucker out as im not to sure anyone in the evo world other than Mike R is using a s400 on one. Althought i believe he is using a 74mm we are using the smaller compressor
do the swap!
Jun 24, 2010, 02:48 PM
#200
we just got a HUGE shipment in from BW, weve been waiting for this giant order for months.
(4) S400SX 71mm
(5) S400SX 67mm
(16) S300SX 91-79
(10) S300SX 88-75
(3) S300SX 83-75
all in stock (most of the 83-75s were already sold from being on backorder, for the ppl PMing)
(4) S400SX 71mm
(5) S400SX 67mm
(16) S300SX 91-79
(10) S300SX 88-75
(3) S300SX 83-75
all in stock (most of the 83-75s were already sold from being on backorder, for the ppl PMing)
Jun 29, 2010, 03:31 PM
#205
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S200P --This is basically an S200SX on steroids. It uses a vband ported shroud compressor housing, 4" inlet, OD is identical to the S300P i ran a few months back. the vband compressor housing is a huge feature, and they way they machine precise countersunk steps, its impossible to leak.
^^i would consider this turbo to be a potential twinscroll 30R killer
and also, do we still needs to port the SX200P turbine flange to t4 ts opening?
thanks
look very promising so far
Jun 29, 2010, 03:46 PM
#206
a cool article was just released on BW and the expected growth of turbocharging over the next few years:
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...od=BOL_hps_mag
i will keep you guys posted once the smaller turbos arrive
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...od=BOL_hps_mag
i will keep you guys posted once the smaller turbos arrive
Jun 29, 2010, 03:56 PM
#207
Typically I recommend purchasing (2) housings, starting with the 1.22, then after tuning swap to the 1.15 and see which you prefer. These are all the same housings with the smaller openings, so porting out is advised to suit the manifold flange. Also they are far more affordable than what most are used to paying for a garrett turbine housing.
apparently these vband compressor housings may not make it into production after all, and instead the S200SX will be updated to use the 4" inlet ported shroud standard (bolted on, not vbanded) instead of bringing the s200P to market... I will keep you guys posted, but it looks like this would shave a bunch of cost off the turbo this way and its the identical wheels either way.
Jul 1, 2010, 10:45 AM
#208
a cool article was just released on BW and the expected growth of turbocharging over the next few years:
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...od=BOL_hps_mag
i will keep you guys posted once the smaller turbos arrive
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...od=BOL_hps_mag
i will keep you guys posted once the smaller turbos arrive
I find it interesting we, as a society, insist on using "improved technology" to meet our goals. Realistically, if we just focused on improving long-range public transportation and eliminating heavy vehicles from urban areas we could go to lighter, more simple cars without an impact on safety and would see much better improvements in fuel economy. The transportation infrastructure maintenance costs would also be greatly reduced by eliminating overloading of road ways.
Oh well, soon enough, we will all be driving over priced, highly technologically advanced, 5000 pound cars that get 32mpg... My wife's new 2010 Corrolla is the perfect example of the failure in the automotive community. It averages 34mpg where her older 2004 Corrolla use to average 42mpg. 6 years later after we as a society have focused so much on fuel economy and her car now gets 20% WORSE fuel economy.
Oh well, I'm sure the extra 300 pounds they added on improved safety leap and bounds since now every other car is packing that extra 300 pounds too...
We apparently are incapable of looking past the next 3-5 years. Oh well
/Rant
That S200P looks pretty sick, other then that big cast iron back plate and lack of turbine diffuser.
Last edited by 03whitegsr; Jul 1, 2010 at 10:52 AM.
Jul 1, 2010, 11:58 AM
#209
i hear your points, and dont disagree. However people continue to buy "normal" cars, not tiny electric cars or hybrids. The market drives technology, and the only way for a "safe" vehicle to get good gas mileage is with a tiny little slow engine OR have a car that is fun to drive = turbocharged small displacement. so the direct injection and turbocharging technologies are getting all the attention as car mfg's clearly see demand for this arena. the electric car markets just arent there yet, despite what tesla's IPO would have investors believe
Last edited by Geoff Raicer; Jul 1, 2010 at 12:00 PM.