2019 upgraded twins choice for 650whp
- Thread starter Bmxr152
- Start date
Well, MMP Stage 3s are no longer available because they are gone. You really can't put the RB GFs and the Pure Stage 2s in the same category because the Pures are still a true hybrid - stock turbo manifold/turbine housing with upgraded wheels while the RB GFs are a totally new ground up design.
I would vote for the RB GFs as far as lifespan, simply because they are a true TD04 CHRA. I thought Pure still used TD03s.
I think @Blaster3500 made 580whp on pump gas with RB GFs on a conservative tune, and 680 on ethanol. Doesn't get muh better than that on twins.
That would be directed at you Torgus.
You've posted a lot of really awesome information about turbos in regards to pressure ratio vs CAF. I was wondering if you perhaps had some information as to where a set of true TD04s would be happy working instead of being operated at the choke line.
I believe what your suggesting is that a pair of aftermarket twins could actually last a reasonable amount of miles if they didn't get abused so hard.
Curious as to where that line is for optimal use vs abuse and then based on it and fueling how much power someone can 'reliably' make on aftermark twins before its time to switch to a single.
i.e. if someone ran 93 plus meth or E40 and 23psi and made say 550 wheel would that be a setup that is within the turbos efficiency island. Or is 23psi too much for a set of true TD04s?
The problem with what you're asking is that there are no compressor maps for any of the hybrid turbos, only a stock TD03-10T, but even that may not be an N54 specific configuration.
Once you put different wheels in, the entire map would need to be redone. All the custom turbine housings out now changes it even more.
The stock turbos are in their efficiency island around 12.5psi - that is a 1.85PR, and at that PR they are flowing .09 m3/s or 118cfm, which x2 is 236cfm or 340hp, so that pretty much fits.
To determine if you will be in the efficiency island of a specific turbo, you typcially work backwards - you know the engine, and you should have a target boost in mind, let's use 20psi for fun. 20psi at 7000 rpm on an n54 should be around 61lb/min, or 824cfm. 824/2 = 412cfm - so you plot that point on the TD04-19T map - 412CFM at 2.36 PR. That's in the efficiency island for the turbo, so you'd be ok.
Keep in mind that's just for the compressor housing - the turbine housing can change that, especially when considering the small stock turbine housing, and you would have increasing backpressure as boost increases.
Also note that I'm not accounting for any pressure drop across a turbo. If you assume a 1psi drop, that moves you to a 2.42 PR, and now at that PR and CFM, you're pretty much at the limit of the 19T in "keeping it happy", or efficient. You could still push it much further. Lots of guys run 30psi on hybrids - I think the most I've seen is 33psi. 33 psi at 7000 rpm should be 87lb/min, or 43.5lb/min per turbo, which is 587CFM per turbo. Unfortunately the compressor map of a 19T doesn't even go to a 3.2PR and 587CFM, it stops just below a 3.0 PR and 55cfm, so the turbos are well out of their efficiency. Plus, 87lb/min would be around 870whp, which hybrids haven't done on any N54 that I've seen. I believe 745WHP might be the record (not counting VTTs or BMS shop cars with cams, ported head, etc), so they were blowing some hot air at that power level.
Rather than think too much on the theory of it, consider how much WHP you want, what kind of fuel you're willing to run to get there, and how much boost it takes, and then determine (unfortunately here's the hard part) what vendor you want to go with that you think can delivery on a reliable solution.
My money would be on RB GFs first, Hydra 800s next, other than that, just buy some china whirly birds and take your chances.
Once you put different wheels in, the entire map would need to be redone. All the custom turbine housings out now changes it even more.
The stock turbos are in their efficiency island around 12.5psi - that is a 1.85PR, and at that PR they are flowing .09 m3/s or 118cfm, which x2 is 236cfm or 340hp, so that pretty much fits.
To determine if you will be in the efficiency island of a specific turbo, you typcially work backwards - you know the engine, and you should have a target boost in mind, let's use 20psi for fun. 20psi at 7000 rpm on an n54 should be around 61lb/min, or 824cfm. 824/2 = 412cfm - so you plot that point on the TD04-19T map - 412CFM at 2.36 PR. That's in the efficiency island for the turbo, so you'd be ok.
Keep in mind that's just for the compressor housing - the turbine housing can change that, especially when considering the small stock turbine housing, and you would have increasing backpressure as boost increases.
Also note that I'm not accounting for any pressure drop across a turbo. If you assume a 1psi drop, that moves you to a 2.42 PR, and now at that PR and CFM, you're pretty much at the limit of the 19T in "keeping it happy", or efficient. You could still push it much further. Lots of guys run 30psi on hybrids - I think the most I've seen is 33psi. 33 psi at 7000 rpm should be 87lb/min, or 43.5lb/min per turbo, which is 587CFM per turbo. Unfortunately the compressor map of a 19T doesn't even go to a 3.2PR and 587CFM, it stops just below a 3.0 PR and 55cfm, so the turbos are well out of their efficiency. Plus, 87lb/min would be around 870whp, which hybrids haven't done on any N54 that I've seen. I believe 745WHP might be the record (not counting VTTs or BMS shop cars with cams, ported head, etc), so they were blowing some hot air at that power level.
Rather than think too much on the theory of it, consider how much WHP you want, what kind of fuel you're willing to run to get there, and how much boost it takes, and then determine (unfortunately here's the hard part) what vendor you want to go with that you think can delivery on a reliable solution.
My money would be on RB GFs first, Hydra 800s next, other than that, just buy some china whirly birds and take your chances.
705whp/670wtq RB GameFInishers here. Holding 600+wtq from 4k-6k rpm and just about 680whp from 5500-7k rpm
bmw.spoolstreet.com
RB GameFinishers/WedgePerformance Review - 705whp/670tq!
Hey Guys, Well here it is! 705.36 - WHP 670.58 - WTQ 30psi tapering to 26.5psi at redline E40 w/ ProMeth PI Been a long time coming but here is my build and review. Will make it as short as possible for easy and quick reading, right to the point. Tuner: WedgePerformance - Tuning process is...
bmw.spoolstreet.com
This is a good question, and I'm sure @Torgus will respond.
Heat is, in my book, an issue, exacerbated by inefficiency. The N54 head was designed for small frame twins, ultra responsive, emissions friendly. The car's cooling system is designed for the same. These turbos pushing all this PSI to make power is a result, in significant part, of the N54 head's inability to flow. So unless going down the head port path, PSI generally means more heat in my book.
Next ... traction and handling. At a certain point these cars start to have issues handling power. Most people treat the suspension as a bastard stepchild, not willing to invest in improving that for the power at hand. Note the amount of "slap on this product" that goes on in the rear of the cars, in broad hopes that life gets better. So that's another constraint to consider.
A couple years ago I asked about what it took for twins to last 100k miles. I was laughed at. Ok point isn't 100k miles: it's what does it mean to build a car that is reliable? Target MTBF (Meantime Between Failure) and design and develop. 40k miles. 50k miles. Take one's pick. This subject is generally not discussed. Anyone can pull a few dyno runs and get 6-8k miles out of a setup. Find someone running 700whp for the last 30-40k miles - precious few.
Longevity-wise, the lower the PSI the better. Ethanol helps things run cooler - flex fuel is a bargain, but then you'll spend money on the fuel system to get there. Or methanol. EGT's drop, etc. The average person goes - "Great - more timing more dyno numbers!" ... instead of, more longevity and reliability by not dialing the last 10% of WHP out of the car.
I'm rambling because turbocharger wheel size is one factor to your question. It's the rest of the car that also tries to kill the turbos, its engine, and anything else in the way of the torque tsunami.
.In my book, to get reliability and longevity, one has to build the whole car for the target performance level. That can get expensive. IMHO above 600whp everything starts to matter too much when it comes to longevity and constant use. I agree with @b4llistic with a few augments - we don't know enough about the Chinesium 19Ts to speak to longevity. If it was me, I'd drop the single's max-side numbers 50+WHP (if his numbers are WHP not HP as listed). RB GF/Hydra 600whp is a good ceiling for longevity target, if I was doing those (note Hydra has both 650 and 800 turbos). And I agree on the single, though I'll add one can consider something like a speedtech setup even running 550-600whp, as an alternative to a good set of twins.
IMHO the problem is everything other than the turbo center section will kill the car - heat and everything else that needs to be addressed for reliability/longevity.
Filippo
This is a good question, and I'm sure @Torgus will respond.
Heat is, in my book, an issue, exacerbated by inefficiency. The N54 head was designed for small frame twins, ultra responsive, emissions friendly. The car's cooling system is designed for the same. These turbos pushing all this PSI to make power is a result, in significant part, of the N54 head's inability to flow. So unless going down the head port path, PSI generally means more heat in my book.
Next ... traction and handling. At a certain point these cars start to have issues handling power. Most people treat the suspension as a bastard stepchild, not willing to invest in improving that for the power at hand. Note the amount of "slap on this product" that goes on in the rear of the cars, in broad hopes that life gets better. So that's another constraint to consider.
A couple years ago I asked about what it took for twins to last 100k miles. I was laughed at. Ok point isn't 100k miles: it's what does it mean to build a car that is reliable? Target MTBF (Meantime Between Failure) and design and develop. 40k miles. 50k miles. Take one's pick. This subject is generally not discussed. Anyone can pull a few dyno runs and get 6-8k miles out of a setup. Find someone running 700whp for the last 30-40k miles - precious few.
Longevity-wise, the lower the PSI the better. Ethanol helps things run cooler - flex fuel is a bargain, but then you'll spend money on the fuel system to get there. Or methanol. EGT's drop, etc. The average person goes - "Great - more timing more dyno numbers!" ... instead of, more longevity and reliability by not dialing the last 10% of WHP out of the car.
I'm rambling because turbocharger wheel size is one factor to your question. It's the rest of the car that also tries to kill the turbos, its engine, and anything else in the way of the torque tsunami.
In my book, to get reliability and longevity, one has to build the whole car for the target performance level. That can get expensive. IMHO above 600whp everything starts to matter too much when it comes to longevity and constant use. I agree with @b4llistic with a few augments - we don't know enough about the Chinesium 19Ts to speak to longevity. If it was me, I'd drop the single's max-side numbers 50+WHP (if his numbers are WHP not HP as listed). RB GF/Hydra 600whp is a good ceiling for longevity target, if I was doing those (note Hydra has both 650 and 800 turbos). And I agree on the single, though I'll add one can consider something like a speedtech setup even running 550-600whp, as an alternative to a good set of twins.
IMHO the problem is everything other than the turbo center section will kill the car - heat and everything else that needs to be addressed for reliability/longevity.
Filippo
Long winded but true. Suspension is #1, or you'll kill yourself. Head flow is #2 or the car will kill itself.
Maybe a ST if you don't want to build the head.
On initial tunes with my Hydra N53 head and HP800s. Pulls like an animal to 7500rpm but no traction issues in the low end. We're going conservatively with this setup with a goal of around 600 on pump and I'm pretty confident it'll last me the next decade.
Good comments about the longevity and capabillity to 'use' the power ,which by the way is the whole point. Dyno sheets are expensive emergency covid19 toilet paper if your car doesnt deliver. I know there are people who worship dyno power runs for some reason but, Ive never understood it. I'd rather race. Dynos are a tuning tool ,not a comparison tool. A point lost on those who usually arent competitive or dont understand it. 650rwhp? If you want, just stay stock turbos ,make one in photoshop, take it to races to show people and make excuses why you lost. You sound the same even if you have upgraded turbos and a real dyno with 650rwhp on it.
My car has eye watering $$ spent on it around the whole package (turbos/pures stg2s are just a component) and I am yet to touch the engine build ,save for a baffled sump. The pure st2s are enough power to keep you busy spending to realise thier potential. Which by the way isnt shabby, with the car built properly around them.
Car runs 10s the way i drive it eveyday(daily), no drag radials or shocks, full interior so its gapping cars in luxury. Further that's with a track oriented package , AST shocks and big ass brakes and suspension. So it stops and goes around corners ,so I can step out on a circuit for track days.
Now as for china turbos, Im not a fan of shit quality control to save money. At least based on the people posting balancing info and failures. Good on the chinaturbos for letting all the other brands do R&D over the years ,with failures and design iterations , to then go try and copy them.
Another consideration is that Ive not 'yet' seen a china turbo car thats actually fast , at least in the league of those running the other brands in mere stage 2s . Thats no 10s (or 9s for so called stg3/4), no decent 1/2miles or draggy results that make you think they are equivalent.
That leaves those running chinas with my friendly call out, to encourage them to sort out their cars properly and put up some inspiring times.
My car has eye watering $$ spent on it around the whole package (turbos/pures stg2s are just a component) and I am yet to touch the engine build ,save for a baffled sump. The pure st2s are enough power to keep you busy spending to realise thier potential. Which by the way isnt shabby, with the car built properly around them.
Car runs 10s the way i drive it eveyday(daily), no drag radials or shocks, full interior so its gapping cars in luxury. Further that's with a track oriented package , AST shocks and big ass brakes and suspension. So it stops and goes around corners ,so I can step out on a circuit for track days.
Now as for china turbos, Im not a fan of shit quality control to save money. At least based on the people posting balancing info and failures. Good on the chinaturbos for letting all the other brands do R&D over the years ,with failures and design iterations , to then go try and copy them.
Another consideration is that Ive not 'yet' seen a china turbo car thats actually fast , at least in the league of those running the other brands in mere stage 2s . Thats no 10s (or 9s for so called stg3/4), no decent 1/2miles or draggy results that make you think they are equivalent.
That leaves those running chinas with my friendly call out, to encourage them to sort out their cars properly and put up some inspiring times.
EDIT: Thanks your finding and reading my post. Unfortunately, Spoolstreet is no longer a neutral platform where we can have honest discussions on subjects and products freely.
For this reason I have deleted all information I posted on the forums.
For this reason I have deleted all information I posted on the forums.
Last edited:
I agree with most of your post. I have a different point of view on the above statement. "Anti-China climate" implies this has to do with another country or its people. From my observation, that is a lazy mis-generalization.
Step back and look at the main US vendors that got crapped on for years over a bad run of turbos, warranty issues, silent NDA's to get warranty coverage, etc. At least on this platform, people have a looooooong memory of when stuff goes wrong, a very critical eye on how it gets handled, and pretty brazenly vocal about it on forums and social media. Whether right or wrong of the community to do so, what I just observed is clearly evident on multiple forums and Facebook groups. China has produced a lot of junk quality parts. As often is, over time, some of those products evolve to acceptable and even good quality. It is no surprise that the reaction on American-centric forums toward such producers (in China) is the same as when American companies had greater problems in the early days with their turbos. To this day, any number of American turbo companies announce a new turbo and people will invariably crap all over their threads, pointing out turbo failures from several models and years prior. Some of those reference go back a half-dozen years!
There are other factors that contribute to such a sentiment on cheap: realize that in the past 4-5 years these cars have gotten cheap, which has brought in a lot of people (at least in the USA) that can barely afford the cars, buy them, know little about them, try to dial in the most amount of power they can afford with little attention to the maintenance their 100,000+ mile worn out BMW's can take, maintenance not even a consideration. A general ignorance about the cars (or lack of willingness to learn or care about any of this), and then complain, etc about the cars. This market of people intersects with the cheaper parts. So even if the cheaper parts are good, as the parts go from poor to acceptable or good, they are mixed in with people with the above approach. National origin of product has little to do with this.
Hence the "bad rap" on American-centric forums.
Filippo
p.s. BTW I was the guy that started the thread on better quality China turbos that actually seem to be holding up well. I knew there were some China turbos that were starting to demonstrate quality through use. They were being discussed by a mostly European group in WhatsApp. I started that thread last October because ... well ... it's not an anti-China issue ... it's a shit product issue. Why did I start that thread - because products that works are just as important to know about and discuss as products that aren't.
Personally I'd like to see the stuff that is working well to be discussed. But people show up and say, "I bought this thing, I put it on my car 10 days ago, and these things are the best!" ... it's a tough environment when ignorance and naivety is combined with exuberance and questionable product quality history. That has little to do with countries.
Last edited:
Another consideration is that Ive not 'yet' seen a china turbo car thats actually fast , at least in the league of those running the other brands in mere stage 2s . Thats no 10s (or 9s for so called stg3/4), no decent 1/2miles or draggy results that make you think they are equivalent.
That leaves those running chinas with my friendly call out, to encourage them to sort out their cars properly and put up some inspiring times.
fuck dyno runs, go to the track, line up with someone, get a dragy, vbox, anything and run your car. agree with that.
heres one for the cheap turbo guys...
6.1 100-200 on $800 china 17T is no slouch and its got more in it
I love these guys. There build is almost identical to mine too.
Was the double entendre intentional? Lol
Dickass brakes are a Chinese bbk company. They basically make copies of brembo and apracing. Think prodigywerks, same stuff just not private label.
People can hate on cheap posts all they want but mine have been great. It was close to the same price to buy the bbk as it was to buy new rotors and pads.
8.73s 100-200 on my 17t's with 3 people in the car and a huge hole in my garbage MMP outlets. No log taken, sorry.
So far, I daily drove them @ 26 psi (until my outlet popped). I want to eventually tap 30 psi but I know for a fact that the Helix wont provide enough fueling on full E85 (already getting close to 1500psi rail pressure). I don't want to blend either.
I wanted to give these turbos a shot because 1, turbos are pretty easy to install and I don't care much for labor and 2, I'd like to give out my full untouched (no outsourced balancing) review on potentially hitting 600+ hp, and generally what I think of the hardest part. Reliability.
I average around 20k miles a year. And while I'd very much like to track these turbos, 550+ hp is just unnecessary for it.
These turbos will be on the track (twisty turns not drag) at low boost, 13-15 psi.
