ETS vs. AMS
LOL @ this conversation. Let me try:
When spooling up a stock turbo evo X, the flapper door is CLOSED. If you have an MBC set to 20 psi for example, once there is 20 psi of pressure in the charge pipes, the wastegate is going to OPEN, hence creating the large sound. So the wastegate door opens up at full boost. I'm not saying its open 100%, it prob isn't. Because I'm sure it could run at 10 psi where it would be flowing more exhaust gas (bypassing the turbine) to keep the boost down.
To say the flapper door is closed or almost closed at full boost is not correct. External gates work the same way, they are open at full boost (whatever the boost is set to). The gate is what is keeping the boost AT THAT LEVEL!!
Now what Martin said describes something different. Lets say you wanted to run 35 psi of boost on a stock evoX turbo. As the hrpm's got higher, the amount of exhaust gas being bottle necked into the turbine house will cause back pressure. Eventually that backpressure can exceed the spring pressure of the wastegate. It that happens, then it will literally push the flapper door open from the inside, instead of the pressurized air from the pressure source forcing the diaphragm open. The gate being forced open would cause the amount of exhaust gas driving the turbine to decrease, hence lowering shaft speed as well as the compressor wheel which in turn, lower boost. This is why companies like FP make the stiffer actuators. To "HOLD" boost at higher rpm's, or hold the flapper door closed from the increased exhaust volume.
When spooling up a stock turbo evo X, the flapper door is CLOSED. If you have an MBC set to 20 psi for example, once there is 20 psi of pressure in the charge pipes, the wastegate is going to OPEN, hence creating the large sound. So the wastegate door opens up at full boost. I'm not saying its open 100%, it prob isn't. Because I'm sure it could run at 10 psi where it would be flowing more exhaust gas (bypassing the turbine) to keep the boost down.
To say the flapper door is closed or almost closed at full boost is not correct. External gates work the same way, they are open at full boost (whatever the boost is set to). The gate is what is keeping the boost AT THAT LEVEL!!
Now what Martin said describes something different. Lets say you wanted to run 35 psi of boost on a stock evoX turbo. As the hrpm's got higher, the amount of exhaust gas being bottle necked into the turbine house will cause back pressure. Eventually that backpressure can exceed the spring pressure of the wastegate. It that happens, then it will literally push the flapper door open from the inside, instead of the pressurized air from the pressure source forcing the diaphragm open. The gate being forced open would cause the amount of exhaust gas driving the turbine to decrease, hence lowering shaft speed as well as the compressor wheel which in turn, lower boost. This is why companies like FP make the stiffer actuators. To "HOLD" boost at higher rpm's, or hold the flapper door closed from the increased exhaust volume.
I understand where he is coming from but in the real world situations at normal driving circumstances the wastegate will be open under WOT on the evolution x when you reach your desired boost. That should be without saying though.This is a funny conversation and it honestly shouldn't go much further. I'm sure we can both go back and fourth for days, but we may have to agree to disagree.
I would put our downpipe up against any downpipe on the market though and i'm sure they would do the same. I will just let the results speak for them selves.
Thanks,
Michael
I've read both those posts three times and it looks like you're saying the same thing 
there's really no arguing, just a mistunderstanding I think. When Michael said "WG is open at WOT", I think he meant at full boost (which happens at WOT after spool)
Martin even said the external dumps will make more power, he just doesn't prefer them on street driven cars
I don't really see an argument here other than preference. Martin just doesn't like the sound and loudness
there's really no arguing, just a mistunderstanding I think. When Michael said "WG is open at WOT", I think he meant at full boost (which happens at WOT after spool)
Martin even said the external dumps will make more power, he just doesn't prefer them on street driven cars
I don't really see an argument here other than preference. Martin just doesn't like the sound and loudness
I am running a ETS open dump downpipe on my X and Martin I remember you being in the dyno bay (mustang) while my car was being tuned. It was July 14th same day you guys were tuning the AMS GTR. Mitch did a pull and u plugged your ears and gave a "wtf" look at my car. I could tell from that look you were not a fan of the open dump lol. I can definitely agree with you on having a open dump on a DD car is probably not the smartest idea, but its different and i like that. Ill be back to ur shop on the 5th of Oct. maybe ill run into u then.
AMS and ETS are both great company's I own parts from both. AMS is the only place I will take my car for a tune tho. Hands down the most professional tuners.
Michael glad to see your shop is coming together. Looks nice and hope all is well.
Martin we have never met but I know who u are and like I said maybe ill see u on the 5th.
AMS and ETS are both great company's I own parts from both. AMS is the only place I will take my car for a tune tho. Hands down the most professional tuners.
Michael glad to see your shop is coming together. Looks nice and hope all is well.
Martin we have never met but I know who u are and like I said maybe ill see u on the 5th.
Cliff notes:
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Washington
I must agree with others when they mention ETS customer service. I have experienced fast, friendly, and knowledgeable support from Michael. He put up with my 20 questions, per call, and did not seem annoyed which is a definite plus when asked by someone that is new to this realm and trying to soak up the information. I guess my opinion is somewhat biased too as he would be a drive away whereas some 100 or so miles opposed to 2100 or so miles from AMS. The level of activity and how one carries themselves shows character.
When you stated lower quality, I know that (mild) steel is denser, less corrosive, stronger and more durable. I found this online to be very informative.
When you stated lower quality, I know that (mild) steel is denser, less corrosive, stronger and more durable. I found this online to be very informative.
http://www.homemodelenginemachinist....p?topic=9651.0
6061-T6(trash) and most low carbon merchant steels (C1015-C1020) will have very comparable yield and ultimate tensile strengths. If that is all you need to worry about, then weight and cost will be your deciding factors. However, steel has (roughly) 3X the tensile, shear, and tangent modulus of AL 6061-T6(trash) aluminum. That means that, for any given cross-section of the part, steel with be 3X more rigid than aluminum. More importantly (at least from my knothole as a design and development engineer), steel will "fight deformation" 3X harder than aluminum when you cross over the yield point as it stretches towards ultimate failure.
Additionally, steel will have a significantly greater shear stress capability than aluminum. This means that you get nearly 5X as much carrying capacity in a given thread engagement in steel as you do aluminum. This is the difference between a body-centered cubic crystal structure (LC steel) and a close packed hexagonal structure (aluminum). Anodizing aluminum will bring their properties in this regard closer (about a 2.2:1 advantage to steel). Unscaled merchant steel will have (about) 4X the (resistance to penetration) surface hardness of (6061-T6(trash)) non-anodized aluminum.
Although most people consider this counter-intuitive, aluminum will wear out (unhardened) steel in sliding wear. Bare aluminum oxidizes quite thoroughly. Aluminum oxide is one of the very common abrasives used. Anodizing will reduce this somewhat, but only somewhat. In most instances, a sulfuric anodize is really as good as a "hard (chromic) anodize." The hard chomic anodize will flake off with impacts whereas the sulfuric anodize will deform.
Weight is the final factor. 6061-T6(trash) aluminum has a density of .098 lb/in³. Most low carbon steels have a density in the .282 to .285 lb/in³ range.
6061-T6(trash) and most low carbon merchant steels (C1015-C1020) will have very comparable yield and ultimate tensile strengths. If that is all you need to worry about, then weight and cost will be your deciding factors. However, steel has (roughly) 3X the tensile, shear, and tangent modulus of AL 6061-T6(trash) aluminum. That means that, for any given cross-section of the part, steel with be 3X more rigid than aluminum. More importantly (at least from my knothole as a design and development engineer), steel will "fight deformation" 3X harder than aluminum when you cross over the yield point as it stretches towards ultimate failure.
Additionally, steel will have a significantly greater shear stress capability than aluminum. This means that you get nearly 5X as much carrying capacity in a given thread engagement in steel as you do aluminum. This is the difference between a body-centered cubic crystal structure (LC steel) and a close packed hexagonal structure (aluminum). Anodizing aluminum will bring their properties in this regard closer (about a 2.2:1 advantage to steel). Unscaled merchant steel will have (about) 4X the (resistance to penetration) surface hardness of (6061-T6(trash)) non-anodized aluminum.
Although most people consider this counter-intuitive, aluminum will wear out (unhardened) steel in sliding wear. Bare aluminum oxidizes quite thoroughly. Aluminum oxide is one of the very common abrasives used. Anodizing will reduce this somewhat, but only somewhat. In most instances, a sulfuric anodize is really as good as a "hard (chromic) anodize." The hard chomic anodize will flake off with impacts whereas the sulfuric anodize will deform.
Weight is the final factor. 6061-T6(trash) aluminum has a density of .098 lb/in³. Most low carbon steels have a density in the .282 to .285 lb/in³ range.
Cliff notes:
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
Last edited by WarmMilk; Sep 28, 2011 at 01:10 PM.
You guys need to check our website. We use only stainless steel. No mild steel! Just stainless steel!
We use a higher quality material and it costs 3x as much as aluminum and our prices are lower.
We use a higher quality material and it costs 3x as much as aluminum and our prices are lower.
Cliff notes:
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
AMS is more expensive and uses higher quality materials for their parts. Their development for the EvoVIII-IX is probably done as they are moving towards different markets (like the GTR). AMS has in the past and continues to raise the bar in performance standards.
ETS uses lower quality material (mild steel intercooler pipes vs AMS' aluminum) and I believe their prices are a bit cheaper. They seem to still keep a close ear and continue to develop pieces in the Evo market.
Certain parts you don't want to cheap out on, and other parts you can. They both make good products.
Its been a while since I seen that video Justin. Thanks for the slight chub.
ETS Vs AMS
I dont think you can really go wrong with either. Like any company, they both have their ups and downs, as in ETS makes some products that exceed AMS as AMS makes products that exceed ETS.
I myself am A fan of AMS, their reputation holds true every time and they are great guys to talk to, from my experience a nice personal level and not some big corporation. I am sure ETS serves their customers just as well, I just dont have experience with ETS products.
I myself am A fan of AMS, their reputation holds true every time and they are great guys to talk to, from my experience a nice personal level and not some big corporation. I am sure ETS serves their customers just as well, I just dont have experience with ETS products.
reading this thread is retarded lol
5pages, and every page has the same thing
"you can't go wrong with either"
"both make great parts"
"you'll be happy no matter what"
lol, did everyone realy need to type the same thing? lol
sorry for going ot, just found it a little funny
5pages, and every page has the same thing
"you can't go wrong with either"
"both make great parts"
"you'll be happy no matter what"
lol, did everyone realy need to type the same thing? lol
sorry for going ot, just found it a little funny
