When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Any particular reason you are running barbed fittings with Pushlok hose vs a braided SS line? I generally hate the braided SS as it sucks to work with, dont think i've ever not drawn blood, lol! However I opted ot use it for my turbo drain as felt it would hold up to the head of the downpipe better than the nylon hose. I will admit it doesnt have as much flex so perhaps that's why but I'm just curious how you came about with your line?
Any particular reason you are running barbed fittings with Pushlok hose vs a braided SS line? I generally hate the braided SS as it sucks to work with, dont think i've ever not drawn blood, lol! However I opted ot use it for my turbo drain as felt it would hold up to the head of the downpipe better than the nylon hose. I will admit it doesnt have as much flex so perhaps that's why but I'm just curious how you came about with your line?
Ideally I would use the teflon braided hose like I did on the oil supply lines, but not practical on such a short run. I'll see how this works, but I think it will be fine now that I ordered the correct hose rated for high temperature oil.
Thats one of the exact hoses I was going to use for my return
Borg Warner sell a special outlet which is bendable and has a convoluted (barbed) appearance which uses the hose clamp deal.
I was going to try the high temp cooler hose without braid first (like an OEM turbo on some cars use) so I can inspect it easy
Definitely hose clamps on appropriate cooler hoses > braided/AN fittings.
Not only does it make the hose easy to inspect (you can't see through braided) its easy to connect and seal (AN fittings don't seem to enjoy the heating)
And even if it does get crusty (they do even in OEM applications) The hose clamps and high quality hose seem to still seal up fine for years.
I'm just rlly happy to see you sorted that drain, had me worried for a while lol
Last edited by KingTal0n; Aug 13, 2019 at 07:59 PM.
True mine is sorta a PITA but seems to be OK for now. Just sucks when it comes to starting the connection as there isnt much play so I find keeping the manifold loose connecting the return then snugging up the manifold studs made that doable. But yeah mine seems to be OK but if I'm being honest I dont love it. Like I said was just curious why you did what you did.
Sooo, I've been following this thread for a while and love all the work and info you've put into it - but I thought I'd add something which I've discovered that I'm not sure if you realised or considered as there is a bit of misinformation on these units.
A car I tune has been running the old S300 8376 turbo, running a 60mm inducer and the .91a/r T4 twin scroll housing. This is a combo which is relatively average in terms of flow on both sides - and I suspect the turbine wheel used on that particular unit (and was available as an option for the older 61mm FMW wheel and some other S300 based units) is what has been responsible for people sometimes potentially oversizing their turbine housing if not actually going for too much turbine full stop - like going S300SX-E 8780s or even S300SX-E 8380s, thinking that the big hotside is necessary.
Anyway, we've just acquired an S300SX-E 8376 (same turbo as you, the 61.4mm inducer "S362SX-E) which we plan to fit in the same .91a/r turbine housing. Sure enough, the turbine wheel IS identical in profile and perfectly fits the exhaust housing... however the aero is significantly different, despite various claims that it's the exact same turbine wheel as used in the S300s.
Based off Borg Warner's tech data, the 76/68mm wheel used in the S300SX-E range when matched to a .91a/r housing is actually equivalent in flow to the 74mm EFR turbine wheel in the 1.05a/r divided housing - which is a pretty significant thing to know. I'm not sure if you know all this or not, but there could actually be some spool on the table which not come with any significant compromise... possibly? Either way, some stuff that you or others may be interested to know if you didn't already.
You're saying the 74mm efr wheel flows the same as the bigger SXE wheel?
Nope, I am saying the 74mm EFR wheel in a 1.05 housing flows the same as a 76mm SX-E wheel in a .91 housing... I haven't seen turbine flow info on the 1.00a/r housing but it stands to reason that it flows more than the 1.05a/r 74mm combo.
That's pretty interesting, thanks for sharing. I am highly considering an efr unit for my 2.2 build. I'll have to do some more research before I decide.
This was the response from AGP regarding the older wheels vs new wheels. And it is known there used to be variations of these wheels as well, but have since been standardized.
We use the “cup” wheels, as they are what come on the DT466 turbos we order, and that’s what also was adapted to the SXE line many years ago. Over the years, I never saw any difference with the flat wheels in spoolup or overall power, for what it’s worth. The International DT466 turbo is identical to the S362sxe, except for an oil feed inlet flange, thrust bearing (6pad vs 360). The cover is slightly smaller in diameter as well, but the same turbine wheel and same compressor wheel.
You can't actually compare the flow of the EFR vs SXE using the standard charts because they don't post flow as a function of shaft speed, which then ties back to compressor performance. You can use BorgWarner's MatchBot tool to make this comparison, but I would advise it is a theoretical approximation. The link below was what the Borg Warner engineer sent me based on my setup, but it was not accurate so I had to adjust the spool values based on what I was seeing as well as the type of fuel. You can then select various turbos to theorize their comparative performance.
We use the “cup” wheels, as they are what come on the DT466 turbos we order, and that’s what also was adapted to the SXE line many years ago. Over the years, I never saw any difference with the flat wheels in spoolup or overall power, for what it’s worth. The International DT466 turbo is identical to the S362sxe, except for an oil feed inlet flange, thrust bearing (6pad vs 360). The cover is slightly smaller in diameter as well, but the same turbine wheel and same compressor wheel.
You can't actually compare the flow of the EFR vs SXE using the standard charts because they don't post flow as a function of shaft speed, which then ties back to compressor performance. You can use BorgWarner's MatchBot tool to make this comparison, but I would advise it is a theoretical approximation. The link below was what the Borg Warner engineer sent me based on my setup, but it was not accurate so I had to adjust the spool values based on what I was seeing as well as the type of fuel. You can then select various turbos to theorize their comparative performance.
The quote from AGP mostly makes sense, definitely matches up with what I've seen and what I'd suspected before deciding on the 61.4mm SX-E - though I'm not convinced that there would be no real world difference between the two turbines, the aero looks considerably different and from what I've seen so far the setups which are definitely running the flat-tip turbine seem to really start hitting a wall around 600whp whereas the cupped tip setups seem capable of going north of 700whp... could be purely coincidence of other factors with the setups but there is limited evidence which would be anecdotal at best.
Hopefully we'll get to test the S362SX-E soon enough, granted changing both the compressor and the turbine at the same time means it will be hard to know how much to attribute the changes to the compressor change and how much to the turbine, though if we give away no response to the old turbo then that would awesome - we were definitely experiencing symptoms of high back pressure once we hit 600whp.
I am far from convinced at using Matchbot to predict spool, you having issues forecasting what really happens is no surprise at all to me - there are so many variables which can affect it (plenums, cams, runner diameters etc). Its a bit odd that the link you sent has the turbine sizing configured incorrectly!? You can see that the line above where your phi parameter points are plotted closest to matches both the 1.05a/r 74mm and .91a/r 76mm turbines though.
we were definitely experiencing symptoms of high back pressure once we hit 600whp.
I am far from convinced at using Matchbot to predict spool, you having issues forecasting what really happens is no surprise at all to me - there are so many variables which can affect it (plenums, cams, runner diameters etc). Its a bit odd that the link you sent has the turbine sizing configured incorrectly!? You can see that the line above where your phi parameter points are plotted closest to matches both the 1.05a/r 74mm and .91a/r 76mm turbines though.
What kind of pressure did you measure on the turbo?
MatchBot doesn't predict the spool so you have to estimate boost for given RPM and it then plots on the compressor map and plots turbine performance letting you know the optimal turbine size and a/r. If you plug in my values based on the plots I provided you can then map my engine using the current S362 SXE. You then can select all the other turbo's to estimate how they would do on my setup for relative comparison.
What kind of pressure did you measure on the turbo?
Didn't measure it directly, but between MAC valve DC etc it was pretty clear EMAP was going up - especially at higher rpm as boost targets went up. Obviously some of this will be due to running out of compressor, but it will be interesting to see how the relative gains go when the new one goes on. If it starts going up "pound for pound" across the board, not just where the compressor was starting to choke then it will be interesting.
MatchBot doesn't predict the spool so you have to estimate boost for given RPM and it then plots on the compressor map and plots turbine performance letting you know the optimal turbine size and a/r.
OK good, we're on the same page - I thought that's what you were implying. I'm very familiar with MatchBot, try matching a 61.4mm S300SX-E with .91a/r to your engine using Matchbot and then check the EFR8374 1.05a/r settings and you'll see where I am coming from.
etc). Its a bit odd that the link you sent has the turbine sizing configured incorrectly!? You can see that the line above where your phi parameter points are plotted closest to matches both the 1.05a/r 74mm and .91a/r 76mm turbines though.