Forced Performance Evo 8 turbo housing. 10.5cm2 worth it?
Jul 22, 2004, 12:21 PM
#1
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Import Image Racing
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forced Performance Evo 8 turbo housing. 10.5cm2 worth it?
Well I was waiting for forced performance to do something with the evo's. but for $245 bucks which is really cheap, a larger housing, is that worth it? im a turbo newbie so what are the real benefits of this?
http://linux.forcedperformance.net/m...ode=Lancer_EVO
there is the link.
thanks
anyone have it already?
http://linux.forcedperformance.net/m...ode=Lancer_EVO
there is the link.
thanks
anyone have it already?
Jul 22, 2004, 12:43 PM
#3
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Flemington, NJ
Posts: 2,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thats very interesting...i have had two turbo's on previous cars from FP and they are some of the finest i have ever seen...FP usually does not joke around with their products.
i'm hoping someone will purchase this shell out some good dyno numbers
i'm hoping someone will purchase this shell out some good dyno numbers
Jul 22, 2004, 01:20 PM
#6
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Agrestic
Posts: 1,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this the same unit slated for the 2005? It seems to fit the description.
"+5 hp increase / +13 lb-ft increase, due to larger diameter turbo nozzle (9.8 -->10.5) and new waste gate shape (oval --> circle) for improved boost response"
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/deta...54184&mime=ASC
"+5 hp increase / +13 lb-ft increase, due to larger diameter turbo nozzle (9.8 -->10.5) and new waste gate shape (oval --> circle) for improved boost response"
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/deta...54184&mime=ASC
Jul 22, 2004, 01:24 PM
#7
Originally Posted by propellerhead
Is this the same unit slated for the 2005? It seems to fit the description.
"+5 hp increase / +13 lb-ft increase, due to larger diameter turbo nozzle (9.8 -->10.5) and new waste gate shape (oval --> circle) for improved boost response"
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/deta...54184&mime=ASC
"+5 hp increase / +13 lb-ft increase, due to larger diameter turbo nozzle (9.8 -->10.5) and new waste gate shape (oval --> circle) for improved boost response"
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/deta...54184&mime=ASC
Vishnu I think has reported slower spool with this housing which is not surprising. The interesting question is how this housing would spool with the ti turbo that FP offers. Same as stock, slower or faster?
Trending Topics
Jul 22, 2004, 01:30 PM
#8
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Agrestic
Posts: 1,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by alleggerita
I believe it is. But on the MR cams, engine managment, wastegate, etc. are all adapted to it.
Vishnu I think has reported slower spool with this housing which is not surprising. The interesting question is how this housing would spool with the ti turbo that FP offers. Same as stock, slower or faster?
Vishnu I think has reported slower spool with this housing which is not surprising. The interesting question is how this housing would spool with the ti turbo that FP offers. Same as stock, slower or faster?
http://linux.forcedperformance.net/m...e=Lancer_Turbo
It looks like that turbo uses the same housing. Surely someone has bolted one of these onto an Evo8 and tuned it. Right?
Jul 22, 2004, 02:49 PM
#10
I ordered a 10.5 housing, I have a 9.8 titanium wheel turbo so I won't sacrifice the spool for the larger housing..
Basically you will increase turbo lag slightly on a stock evo8 turbo.. It has some benefits, but if you REALLY want to work with the stockish turb you need to focus on optimizing more than just a bigger turbo housing.. Reduce any restriction in the intake and exhaust that you can find..
Basically you will increase turbo lag slightly on a stock evo8 turbo.. It has some benefits, but if you REALLY want to work with the stockish turb you need to focus on optimizing more than just a bigger turbo housing.. Reduce any restriction in the intake and exhaust that you can find..
Jul 22, 2004, 03:14 PM
#11
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yuma AZ
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is still alot (relative) performance to be gained with the stock turbo. When I removed my turbo, exh manifold, I noticed alot of casting flash and metal boogers as well as some poor hot side housing casting. The O2 housing needs work too.
I did some porting on the hot side housing, specifically, there was ALOT of burs along the noozle opening, (which isn't a round or oval hole as you might think, It maintain the twin scroll through the housing and gradually blends into turbine).
The O2 housing is pretty poor too, lots of flash and it makes the exhaust turn some tight corners.
I also port matched everything.
DO NOT try to port match the exhaust manifold with the manifold gasket.
I did some porting on the hot side housing, specifically, there was ALOT of burs along the noozle opening, (which isn't a round or oval hole as you might think, It maintain the twin scroll through the housing and gradually blends into turbine).
The O2 housing is pretty poor too, lots of flash and it makes the exhaust turn some tight corners.
I also port matched everything.
DO NOT try to port match the exhaust manifold with the manifold gasket.
Jul 22, 2004, 03:40 PM
#12
Originally Posted by bishiboy
There is still alot (relative) performance to be gained with the stock turbo. When I removed my turbo, exh manifold, I noticed alot of casting flash and metal boogers as well as some poor hot side housing casting. The O2 housing needs work too.
I did some porting on the hot side housing, specifically, there was ALOT of burs along the noozle opening, (which isn't a round or oval hole as you might think, It maintain the twin scroll through the housing and gradually blends into turbine).
The O2 housing is pretty poor too, lots of flash and it makes the exhaust turn some tight corners.
I also port matched everything.
DO NOT try to port match the exhaust manifold with the manifold gasket.
I did some porting on the hot side housing, specifically, there was ALOT of burs along the noozle opening, (which isn't a round or oval hole as you might think, It maintain the twin scroll through the housing and gradually blends into turbine).
The O2 housing is pretty poor too, lots of flash and it makes the exhaust turn some tight corners.
I also port matched everything.
DO NOT try to port match the exhaust manifold with the manifold gasket.
Jul 22, 2004, 03:43 PM
#13
Its interesting you mention that.. I noticed the same thing.. One of my solutions was to get a Stainless header, Stainless O2 housing, JDM 9.8 Ti turbo, and the 10.5 hot side housing.. I'm sure even the 10.5 casting also needs to be cleaned up a bit.. but at least I'm not the only one who saw the crud..
Jul 22, 2004, 03:49 PM
#14
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah 
is sloppy in their castings.....I wonder what must be done to be able to port a twin scroll setup? Not a lot of room to work with....
is sloppy in their castings.....I wonder what must be done to be able to port a twin scroll setup? Not a lot of room to work with....
Last edited by lancerpartstrad; Jul 22, 2004 at 03:53 PM.
Jul 22, 2004, 04:52 PM
#15
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yuma AZ
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These guys do good work. They are old DSM guys. http://www.slowboyracing.com/Intro.html
As far as what I noticed, The car was pretty stock at the time. I didn't feel alot at the time.
I'm doing the same thing MalibuJack is doing.
I'm trying to make the stock set-up as efficient as possible.
When I got my car Dynoflashed a couple months ago, Al said my car was the quickest 91 octane car he's tuned, with the exception of Robi's car, which was tuned within an inch of it's life.
With race gas, my stock turbo pushed 25psi only dropping to 21-22psi at 7850rpms.
I can't wait to get my head done.
I'm still not convinced the MAF sensor is restricting enough to justify the UR blow-thru or even more expensive, stand alone ECU with MAP set-up.
I'm sure when I start pushing 425+, the MAF will be a factor.
I also think the stock intake manifold is good.
Anybody else have any input?
As far as what I noticed, The car was pretty stock at the time. I didn't feel alot at the time.
I'm doing the same thing MalibuJack is doing.
I'm trying to make the stock set-up as efficient as possible.
When I got my car Dynoflashed a couple months ago, Al said my car was the quickest 91 octane car he's tuned, with the exception of Robi's car, which was tuned within an inch of it's life.
With race gas, my stock turbo pushed 25psi only dropping to 21-22psi at 7850rpms.
I can't wait to get my head done.
I'm still not convinced the MAF sensor is restricting enough to justify the UR blow-thru or even more expensive, stand alone ECU with MAP set-up.
I'm sure when I start pushing 425+, the MAF will be a factor.
I also think the stock intake manifold is good.
Anybody else have any input?