I wish that FP had retained Twinscroll architecture and not abandoned the divided, pulsed, housing design. I would have preferred to see a non-gated, divided, housing instead of what they ended up with.

The problem with the original factory MHI 10.5 casting is that it is restrictive at the turbine inlet area which creates relatively high levels of exhaust backpressure. I think that we can all agree on that. But, why abandon altogether the TS concept with it's inherent advantages in rate of spool? Why give up 300-500 RPM in spool?

I just wish that FP had instead designed a non-gated, divided(TS) housing instead of a non-divided housing with a provision for a single V-Band gate at the turbine inlet.

Granted, a non-gated divided housing would require a purpose built tubular manifold with paired runners flanged for dual gates, but it would retain pulsed flow and thus the benefits of the original MHI factory TS design.

 

anybody have any videos with the new housing? Curious to see how much the exhaust note changes

 

I have videos of it on my car. PM me your number and I'll send you a couple

 

Doesn't it sound about the same?

 

I spoke with Michael@FP about it and he explained how the TS is really only effective on a motor that is setup for it, like in stock form. As soon as you put cams in it the advantages of the pulsed flow design are gone and would take extensive testing and tuning to get back any of it. Adding more changes to your setup increases the TS's ineffectiveness.
I think they posted some dyno charts earlier in the thread and the difference in spool was almost nothing.

 

^i would have to disagree. spool might be not that much but the question is the transient response going off and on the throttle.

 

Just stating what Michael@FP said, I think he even sated this and proof in this thread. I believe he posted saying that transient response was unchanged going from the TS to the new setup.
If you want to know for sure call him, they have tested these theories.


I went with a BBK 3B 'for a few reasons but this new housing and the results made me think twice about another DBB Green with the new housing. The results are pretty freakin good for what is changed.

 

Buy the single scroll DBB Green and compare. I guarantee you'll be able to sell either turbo after you decide which one you like better. This is what I did. It costs some money, but for me, the piece of mind was worth it.

 

The car is at CBRD now getting a BBK-3B. I had had thoughts of going to the new housing DBB Green but I am not going to go through all of those changes. After your review and info I decided it was going to be 3B.

 

I didn't notice much of a change a little louder and deeper but once the waste gate opens I can't hear it anyways haha

 

FP, Will you EVER be offering this in a twin scroll design? Perhaps later in the future plans maybe?


I really like the idea of a green with a quicker spool than even what that 2.3 on e85 showed. Seemed like the power is far to the right of the MHI housing. I could be remembering things incorrectly though.

 

FP stated that there was almost no difference in spool.
Also, after speaking to Michael@FP he explained how TS only works when everything is stock or spend tons of time tuning and researching to make work once you add some modifications.
As soon as you throw cams in the motor TS goes out the door.

 

Not from what I've found. On what I assume is the same car even looks like a 500 rpm difference from where we see here. This is a graph I found in a thread about eh 65 vs 67 FP Green located here: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...pare-pics.html

Post 36 in particular intrigues me.

 

Looking at all the designs that are offered for the o2 eliminator, I wonder why nobody is willing to just make it into an o2 housing. It appears that there is plenty of room to make it happen so that nobody has to change downpipes.

 

Have you looked back through this whole thread?
I think there was proof made that the difference was 100-200 rpms difference.