NEW MaXpeedingRods BALL BEARING Turbo vs Journal Bearing - Is It LEGIT? - Turbocharger Disassembly

[@cmattdabrat]

Awesome break-down! You definitely went above and beyond with this video. Looking forward to when you start testing it. I'm getting closer to testing the one they send. Just waiting on a few more things, well, and the Houston heat to cool down. Wont be long!

[@802Garage]

Yeah I really wish I had or at least had access to a dyno to for some more fun. Either way I'm hoping to do some boost threshold and lag tests which should make it pretty obvious if there is a difference. Plus sound, of course. ;)

[@CarsSimplified]

Quite a thorough video! If I still had my Pontiac Grand Prix I would be very tempted to get that ball bearing turbo for it. If I ever turbo the GTO, I'd be going extra fancy with it.

[@802Garage]

Thorough was the goal! Would have enjoyed pressing the shaft fully out too, but I didn't wanna mess up the turbo before testing. I agree the GTO deserves a high buck turbo, but this woulda been perfect for a GP.

[@JeffismynameXD]

I came watching the eclipse playlist from years ago just today, now you're back to making videos! Subscribed

[@802Garage]

Thank you! I still have plans for the Eclipse and its green twin I got as well. I have a few more turbo videos coming and then still while series on the V10 Impreza and rotary BRZ. Appreciate the comment and sub!

[@81_rona]

Absolutely fantastic video! Super in-depth. Might have to see if I can get a few myself for my builds

[@802Garage]

Thanks much my dude! I think they'd be in good hands with you. Well, ya know, good proper turbo abusing hands. ;)

[@SuperNinjaFat]

He's back!!

[@802Garage]

Gonna try to post a lot more regularly!

[@mattm1841]

Have you installed and run the ball bearing one yet? I hate that i cant find many reviews from people who have used them for more than a few hundred miles

[@802Garage]

@@mattm1841 Unfortunately no. I had plans to get it done shortly after I made this video, but a bunch of other obligations came up and I had to table it. Was still planning to get to it before winter, but you know how life is. It is still on my short list to do. I know it doesn't help, but I don't see any reason this would be unreliable. It's genuinely just a Garrett copy internally with some better features otherwise and seems well made. If you want great performance and assured reliability for a bit more money, I'd highly recommend the Borg Warner SX-E turbos. I don't think this is a bad option though. Matthew Chevalier is running one right now and hasn't had issues. His car is actually making real power too, so check him out!

[@mattm1841]

Thanks for the deep dive video and reply. I think at this point I've watched every video on KZbin covering these turbos 😂 so yeah iv seen his videos. Mine should arrive this week. Can't wait!! Good luck with your builds, can't wait to see the Nissan build

[@802Garage]

@@mattm1841 Awesome! Definitely let me know how it goes for you if you remember to. Do you make any videos?

[@mattm1841]

@@802Garage nope I'm to ugly for video 😆

[@802Garage]

@@mattm1841 Hahaha can always film without showing your face. Gotcha though just wondering.

[@Troph2]

Is this the difference between the 'standard; and the 'street' versions?

[@802Garage]

Yes! Several differences. The Street turbos are essentially the Sport turbos with journal bearings instead of ball bearings. They have the forged billet compressor wheel, lightweight compressor housing, K419 turbine wheel, silicon molybdenum turbine housing, and better piston rings. So the only other major component different aside from the bearings is the exhaust housing which isn't stainless or V-band. Here are the Street turbos: www.maxpeedingrods.com/category/street-performance-universal-turbocharger.html?tracking=643228d8211ea

[@208Concepts]

The new anti-surge is reminiscent of a Holset. When I was looking into getting a KP38 compressor wheel, I learned that fewer blades flow more as shaft speed increases, but higher counts help low end torque. 6+6 and 7+7 are a solid compromise. For the KP38 I found a 5+5 🤣

[@802Garage]

Yeah! I can't believe I didn't think of that at the time.

[@dragonsupra1020]

If given the chance would you buy any of the larger GBC turbos from Garrett?

[@802Garage]

Good question! I have no experience with them and I have not seen one disassembled. They look like they are a pretty solid value on a brand new Garrett turbo. However, looking at what they offer, I think I would go with a Borg Warner instead. Let's compare a Garrett GBC37-900 (913840-5002S) to a Borg Warner 9180 66/73 (13009097049) for example. They are both journal bearing, similarly sized, and have pretty comparable max horsepower figures. When you overlay the compressor maps, they are also pretty similar, but the Borg Warner extends much further, is slightly higher efficiency, and has larger efficiency islands generally. Basically, it's a more efficient turbo with a higher maximum pressure ratio and a much broader max power band. It also sacrifices little to nothing down low, although the Garrett map extends lower, but the Borg Warner is actually more efficient even at the bottom of its map, so I doubt it is actually less capable at very low flow where it hardly matters anyways. The Borg Warner also has a broader efficiency curve at lower boost ratios with higher flow, so it would theoretically work better for larger engines. At the same time, the surge lines of both maps are nearly identical, so you aren't risking anything on a smaller engine. The other point to consider is which has a more robust bearing package. They are both journal bearing, but Garrett is using a single large journal bearing more akin to a ball bearing style package. I can't say how well it performs, but my concern would be that since it constrains radial motion closer to the center of the turbine shaft, it may offer slightly less stability or be less resistant to wear if anything is going wrong with balance or oiling. The Borg Warner thrust bearing and thrust washer package also looks to be slightly larger and beefier overall. They are both 360 degree, but the Borg Warner thrust bearing is thicker and has more material overall, also meaning more heat capacity. This is just from pictures, I would need exact measurements, but the Borg Warner journal and thrust bearing package is also very well proven, so I trust it. Lastly, the Borg Warner also has a speed sensor port, while the Garrett doesn't. I also think Borg Warner has slightly superior compressor wheel design overall, which they developed under their EFR program first. Perhaps the biggest point given somewhat comparable performance though, especially if Borg Warner leads a bit, is price. For the turbos I was just comparing, the Garrett is generally around $1,000 and the Borg Warner is generally $800. You can find both a bit higher or lower, but no matter what the price range gap is around $200. Plus, the Borg Warner compressor housing start at $99 while the Garrett start at $250. So that's $350 more for the Garrett on average, and the Borg Warner has a wider range of turbine housing options as well. Basically, I don't think the Garrett is a bad choice. Certainly a better option than a GT turbo or the old T70 style turbos, but I think Borg Warner has better offerings. I'm only going off of on paper numbers and the best answer is always going to be application specific and well tested. There are definitely a lot more dyno proven results for Borg Warner, but that doesn't mean the Garrett couldn't do well if there was more data. Hopefully that helps!

[@dragonsupra1020]

@@802Garage thank you for answering my question. Both Garrett and Borg Warner have solid products. Look at AMS Performance's drag Lamborghini Huracan. That car has had various G Series turbos on it and it went 6.98 @211 on G45-1600's back in November of last year becoming the first and currently the only Lamborghini V10 car in the world to do a 6 second pass and it hasn't blown any turbos on it.

[@802Garage]

@@dragonsupra1020 My issue with the G-Series is actually the same as with the GBC series. The Borg Warner EFR series is actually LESS money for what is, in my opinion and that of people I respect, a superior turbo. Don't get me wrong, the G-series is awesome and a huge step up from what Garrett was doing before, but the EFR series is the best on the consumer market. When a G-Series will typically run north of $3K, you can get into an EFR for $2-2.5K instead. The exception is if you need a turbo larger than what the EFR series offers. I will agree the G-Series is very reliable though. Garrett used a MUCH larger ball bearing package than was in their previous turbo series and it is very robust. The EFR series also uses a very beefy ball bearing package. Plus the EFR has more features included. The channel TurboDirect S.A has a couple awesome comparison videos. Part 1 - kzbin.info/www/bejne/l561pWOjlp2gY5Isi=vVp1PNJHOYXAKJrp Part 2 - kzbin.info/www/bejne/rIHFlmutnZ12fJosi=Q2j3VkHT-YP7cMu1 Again not knocking Garrett, but from everything I know, I'm convinced Borg Warner is generally a better value with superior performance given comparable turbo sizing and features.

[@dragonsupra1020]

@@802Garage it would be interesting to see a pair of EFR's on a TT Lamborghini/Audi R8. A majority of cars out there run either Garrett, Precision or Xona. Some cars are running HPT/Turbosmart but no cars with anything Borg Warner to my knowledge.

[@802Garage]

@@dragonsupra1020 Totally agree! The problem as I see it is that Borg Warner does not market to the aftermarket community nearly as much as those other brands. Garrett, Precision/Xona, and HPT/Turbosmart sponsor a lot of people, work with a lot of shops, make a lot of videos. So, people buy what they know. It's likely part of why Borg Warner is more affordable, because they spend less on marketing. That said, a lot of track racers and people doing real racing know well the EFR is an extremely high performing product. The Borg Warner SX/SX-E turbos are also much more popular with the diesel and drag racing crowd, as well as with rotary people. They even have newer SX-R versions of a few turbos with even more advancements. I know it may seem boring, but trust me and check out those two videos I linked, you'll be impressed. I just try to spread the word because I feel Borg Warner deserves more attention!

[@stefanozed868]

How different are the chra castings internally?

[@802Garage]

Overall very similar I believe. Obviously they are different to account for the bearing setups. Otherwise, the internal oil return on the ball bearing seems a bit larger and more well formed, and the casting is overall a bit smoother and cleaner. I probably cover it most at 21:43 Technology and Reliability. I just went out and compared the oil drain holes as well. The casting on the journal bearing turbo has a much longer metal tube portion, while the ball bearing is shorter, like maybe 1/4-1/3 the length. There is also a larger cavity inside of the ball bearing turbo, so it should hold more oil before the drain overflows. The casting also looks smoother internally. Overall, I think the ball bearing turbo will drain more quickly and is less likely to have smoking issues during sustained G-forces or long runs under full throttle. Just some guesses.

[@wideband]

Damn that ball bearing one looks nice. Maybe I need one or 2....

[@802Garage]

It honestly seems like a very nice turbo. Provided the bearings hold up, I see no reason it shouldn't perform very well. Especially for under $600. I have two of the GT3582 journal bearing turbos for the V10 Impreza. I'd get a pair of the GT3076 ball bearing instead, but then they would light up so fast I'd bend rods right away, hahaha.

[@BulliKid]

Awesome video! Good details!!

[@802Garage]

Thank you I really appreciate it!

[@BulliKid]

@@802Garage what is a good turbo size you recommend for a 300-350 hp build for a 4 cylinder 1.8 turbo? I’m looking for something like this turbo but also internally gated to save on plumbing.

[@802Garage]

@@BulliKid MaXpeedingRods actually has a perfect turbo for that! The GT2871. It should max out right around 375hp, possibly a bit more, especially depending on which engine you're starting with. They just released the ball bearing version. Here's the link: www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/t25-gt2871-gt2860-ball-bearing-billet-universal-turbo-turbocharger-ar-06406.html?tracking=643228d8211ea They also have a more affordable Street version with some of the nice features of the Sport turbo, but with journal bearings: www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/street-turbo-charger-t25-t28-gt25-gt28-gt2871-journal-bearing-14psi-16l-20l.html?tracking=643228d8211ea Lastly, they have a Standard version with all the basic features, but it's also obviously the cheapest: www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/gt28-gt25-gt2871-gt2860-t25-t28-sr20-ca18det-upgrade-400hp-turbo-turbocharger.html?tracking=643228d8211ea Personally I would encourage going for the Street or Sport versions. If you would like a suggestion that isn't an MXR turbo, I'd look at the Borg Warner S200 SX-E. It definitely maxes out higher than you need, but you could go with the smallest turbine housing, which you have to purchase separately, and upgrade later as needed. You would also need to go external wastegate as far as I can tell. Otherwise you could check out Pulsar. Hope this helps!

[@BulliKid]

@@802Garage I was looking at something with bigger turbine to slowly bring the boost in. But not sure if a 3076r will leave me with a very small powerband…

[@802Garage]

@@BulliKid Which engine are you working with?

[@anthonyacevedo8366]

Your back!!!!!

[@802Garage]

Doing my best. I have a lot planned.

[@anthonyacevedo8366]

Hey u have any good 08 Outback sohc motor for sale just bent valve in mine

[@802Garage]

@@anthonyacevedo8366 Unfortunately, no, sorry!

[@revmatchtv]

Nice T-Shirt!

[@802Garage]

One of my favs! Made sense for the topic. I still have yours too. ;)

[@SomeOne_86]

Hey I clicked on your channel since I always see you in comments of other creators, didn't know you made videos! Your videos are great. How could I calculate which turbo size would I need for my power goals? I never turbo'd a naturally aspirated engine before, it's a '90s Mazda 4 cylinder, similar engine to Mazda Protege, DOHC 2.0L. I want to make around 300hp on pump gas, my internals can handle it but I'm wondering if I would have good response at that power level with any modern turbo? It goes only to 7500RPM, it's not like a Honda haha.

[@802Garage]

Thanks! I appreciate you checking out the channel and commenting. One easy way to pick a turbo is just to copy a car that is turbocharged from the factory. In your case, an easy go to is the SR20DET. It was a 2.0L engine making around 201-247hp from factory. The lower hp engines were using a GT2554 and the highest horsepower engine used a GT2860R. Ignoring numbers and details for now, we can safely assume both of those turbos were run in a reasonable efficiency range from factory, but were not maxed out. So you likely can reach 300hp with a GT2860R for example, but it might be pushing the turbo. So one size up might be a good bet. That would give you a GT2871 or perhaps a GT3071, but most likely the former, which MaXpeedingRods does offer, and they advertise it as around 350hp max, so it would be suitable for your goal. The quickest way to calculate a basic turbo size from scratch for me is to start with two things. How much horsepower does the engine make naturally aspirated and what is your power goal at peak boost? From there, I usually look at the compressor maps of turbos I think are in the general range and try to pick one that makes the most sense in terms of meeting the power goal, efficiency, avoiding surge/underspeed or choke/overspeed, and of course budget. Just to note, this only applies to gas piston engines. The basic calcuations change a bit for diesel and rotaries or even other fuels for piston engines, though you can still start basic calculations with petrol as a baseline. If you aren't familiar with compressor maps, there are a ton of good videos explaining them. Basically the Y axis is pressure ratio. Pressure ratio is not the same as boost, as a pressure ratio of 1.0 is 1 bar or atmospheric pressure, a pressure ratio of 2.0 is 2 bar or 1 bar of boost, which is 14.5psi. The X axis is air flow. This means total air flowing through the turbo and engine. It is usually in lbs/min, though there are other common metrics, but basic rule of thumb is 10lbs/min = 100hp. The map itself looks kind of like topography on a map of land, but each elevation is called an efficiency island. Basically the more efficiency, the less work is being turned into heat, the happier the turbo is to live there, and the more power you will get to the wheels for a given amount of air/fuel consumed. That's my understanding at least. There are also lines crossing the islands which are turbo RPM, usually numbered at the ends of the lines, and each turbo has a max recommended RPM as well which you should not exceed. I won't go too much more into the weeds, but hopefully that's fairly clear. So if we know an engine makes 150hp naturally aspirated, and we want to make 300hp, we know that generally we are going to need to double the air, which means double the pressure ratio. So we are shooting for a 2.0 pressure ratio or 2 bar, which is 1 bar of boost or 14.5psi. We also know our engine consumes about 15lbs/min of air flow NA and we want to double that to 30lbs/min of air flow to make 300hp. So, we know we want a turbo that is efficient at a 2.0 pressure ratio while flowing 30lbs/min of air flow. What's a good turbo for that? Again it's often easy to start with a factory turbo car that made similar numbers. Using my first example, let's check out a GT2871 compressor map. www.garrettmotion.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Comp-Map-GT-2871R.jpg Start at whichever axis you like and find where 2.0 pressure ratio and 30lbs/min of air flow cross. In this case we land right outside of the highest efficiency island of 77% and are just barely in the 75% island, but also note it's right in the middle of the compressor map. This is good! If we landed much higher and/or to the left on the map, near the left most defined line, we would know the turbo is probably too large. If we landed much lower and/or to the right, near the right edge of the map, we would know the turbo is probably too small. Now, we only found the point for peak boost and peak power in this given scenario, and the rest of what goes into it is plotting other points along the RPM range, the expected boost levels at each given RPM, and the expected output power as a result. You want all of those points to fall on a good efficiency curve as the turbo is coming into boost, not going off either side of the map. This is all a bit more complicated, but as a general rule this turbo would be well suited for a 2.0L engine trying to reach 300hp. If you want to learn more, there are guides by Borg Warner and Garrett about turbo sizing as well as calculators to find the best exact match. The calculators are actually quite complicated, but if you take it step by step and research each part, and leave default values alone if they are too complicated such as engine efficiency, you'll probably be able to work your way through them. www.borgwarner.com/aftermarket/boosting-technologies/performance-turbochargers/matchbot www.garrettmotion.com/racing-and-performance/boost-adviser-finding-the-correct-turbo-for-your-engine I also highly recommend this channel for learning more about turbochargers and compressor maps. It's one of few resources on KZbin I consider truly reputable, though there are many good general explanations out there. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3-miIGAYrONoJYsi=imiVIgp8vGdVlWi3 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWS3pp6dlMSYg9ksi=CE-blOTW0yegYVkE I also just rediscovered this video which is basically exactly what I just gave an explanation of, so maybe it will help! kzbin.info/www/bejne/g6vMkmupotNsqMUsi=zHg2053SX0dDJBlz I have to break my comment up into two parts. :)

[@802Garage]

I'm assuming the engine you have is an FS, which depending on the car and year made around 130hp, so we'll go with that number. Also keep in mind all of the numbers discussed above are generally considered to be crank horsepower, not wheel horsepower. So if you want a specific horsepower number to the ground, you'll need to add around 10-15% power to make up for drivetrain loss. Back to your engine, using what we learned above, we still want 30lbs/min of air flow, but we will need a 2.3 pressure ratio, 1.3 bar of boost, or just under 19psi. That is a fair bit for a stock engine, just to warn you. The internals will handle the power, but you mostly end up with ring land issues in some engines. Keeping the engine cool, using colder spark plugs, never going lean, having enough pump and injector, and overall having a good tune will be necessary. At any rate, looking back at the GT2871 compressor map, you'll now find our values cross almost dead center on the map, right at the 104K turbo RPM line. That's excellent! This turbo is a great match for your peak power goal. Now, there is of course more to it. Does that mean this is the fastest responding turbo for your engine? No. The fastest responding turbo would generally be the smallest turbo possible to reach your power goal. The peak power point would be high and to the right on the map. However, that generally means less efficiency, higher turbo speed, and higher chance of surge or choke. A lot of people size turbos this way and it can end up limiting their power and causing heat issues due to a restrictive exhaust housing or an overspeed issue due to the small compressor housing. The other problem is coming on boost too fast, especially with a converted NA engine, often means too much low down torque and bending or snapping rods or creating low speed pre-ignition. All very bad. If you go too big on the turbo, then it is super laggy and you have one of those dyno graphs that looks like an exponential curve. So, picking a turbo like this where you are in peak efficiency is generally a safe bet. You mentioned modern turbos. We have been looking at the GT series, which is not modern at all, but is a good reference point. Check out the compressor maps of a G25-550 and an S200 SX-E. www.garrettmotion.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/G25-550-Comp-Map-kg-sec-scaled.jpg cdn.borgwarner.com/docs/default-source/iam/boosting-technologies/s200sxe.pdf?sfvrsn=1d41b03c_15 You'll see that both of those turbos would also suit your needs, falling right in the peak efficiency island. However, look how much broader the maps are overall. They can accommodate a much wider range of speeds and boost levels while remaining efficient. They both have much higher peak power levels as well. Here's the crazy part, they are both smaller turbos than the GT2871. Not much smaller in overall physical size, but they both have smaller compressor wheels and similarly sized turbine wheels. They can flow much more air at a given size and remain more efficient. This is what modern turbo tech does. More advanced materials and wheel geometries along with optimized housings and other features. Both of these turbos would have better response than the GT2871 despite being capable of much more power and even though the Borg Warner is journal bearing. The only downside is the price, though the S200 is about 1/3 the price of the G25, hahaha. I didn't really go into house A/R, which is its own kinda deep topic. Basically, the larger the A/R of the turbine housing, the more maximum flow, but the slower response down low. The larger the A/R of the compressor housing, the more maximum flow, but the slower boost builds down low. It's basically a trade off between response and flow, which is true of most aspects of turbo sizing. I'd check out this video for more clarity. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hIbIpWCHhJt3ibMsi=QMAzjXc-8NGKg2d3 In conclusion, I'd recommend the GT2871, and MaXpeedingrods offers it in three flavors. Sport, Street, and Standard. Sport is like the turbo in this video, Street has most of the same features except it's journal bearing, and Standard is the basic no frills version. I'm not saying you should pick one of these, but they are good options depending on your budget. www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/t25-gt2871-gt2860-ball-bearing-billet-universal-turbo-turbocharger-ar-06406.html?tracking=643228d8211ea www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/street-turbo-charger-t25-t28-gt25-gt28-gt2871-journal-bearing-14psi-16l-20l.html?tracking=643228d8211ea www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/gt28-gt25-gt2871-gt2860-t25-t28-sr20-ca18det-upgrade-400hp-turbo-turbocharger.html?tracking=643228d8211ea If you don't want to go with MXR, the S200 SX-E is a great option given the price. You will have to pick an exhaust housing, I'd say go T25 given more info below, and some other options. You would need an external wastegate generally. You could also look into Mitsubishi turbos, akin those on the WRX and Evo or Eclipse. I'd say a TD05-16G would be a good match, though it may require flange adapting. Another good option might be a Pulsar turbo, though I haven't personally used one, but they have a good rep. If you absolutely want faster response, go with a GT2560 or GT2860 sized turbo. If you look at compressor maps you'll see you fall further to the right and a bit higher on the maps. Closer to max turbo speed. You'll spool faster though, of course. Also keep in mind we were talking ideal numbers, so you might need to make a little more boost to hit 300hp. Pulsar offers a GT2860 you can check out. They have a few options. I'd probably go with a small A/R for the exhaust housing if possible. The second link will have a stainless V-band housing and you would need an external wastegate. amzn.to/3VzOwoF ebay.us/FK4zcQ Keep in mind you should also pick based on which turbo manifolds are available for you engine and which flange they use, as well as exhaust outlet availability, and your fabrication abilities or budget. Selecting a turbo can be a lot, but it's also fun I think. It looks like the only off the shelf manifolds for your car are T25 flange. I would definitely recommend going with a cast manifold like the ones I'm about to leak as they have the least chance of cracking and they will perform well regardless of what anyone tells you. I did find a shiny tubular manifold for less money, but I would bet the quality is junk, and the flange was rotated weird. All three of the following links are the same manifold to my eye, just different vendors. amzn.to/4ezY63w ebay.us/UkRGon ebay.us/BwnXNR The MXR GT2871 uses a T25 flange, so it would bolt right onto that manifold. Also note that the MXR ball bearing Sport GT2871 is a slightly smaller wheel than the other two options from MXR, so it will also give you better response ideally. I think it would be a good overall match, but it is a bit pricey. Don't forget the coupon code if you consider it. Absolutely no pressure. Do your research. Hope this comment is what you were looking for! I partially write this out as practice for myself along with leaving it here so anyone can read and so I can reference later for others with similar questions. Let me know if it was helpful and/or if you have more questions.

[@SomeOne_86]

@@802Garage WOW THANK YOU SO MUCH! I saved your comment in a document and screenshot it too just in case! You helped me so much, I had no idea how any of this worked, again thank you! You are a real expert for this, being able to read the turbo maps really cleared up a lot for me. I think the mid-range MXR GT2871 will work well for me, and from your video I like that the journal bearing turbos are a bit more resilient. I thought I need a much bigger and more expensive turbo to make that power. The engine is 2.0L FS yes it will have individual coils and I will run it on a Haltech or FuelTech, haven't decided yet. Supertech valve springs, and forged Traum pistons and Pauter rods were recommended to me by people from the Mazda Protege community. My car is a 1993 Mazda 626 Hatchback, it's a european model only I think in the US they only sold the sedan version. I have to go with the 4 cylinder because in my country they're very strict on illegal engine swaps unfortunately. I will be running a cast exhaust manifold just like the ones you sent, although maybe later I will upgrade to a custom "header" style one, since I have lots of space in the engine bay. I asked you for response because in my country there's lots of hills, so when you are driving you often need to do hill starts and drive in low gears at slow speed for large amounts of time. So I was worried that if I had a big turbocharger, it would choke down the engine and it would have very little power down low and make it difficult to drive in these situations. Also I would like to run large diameter wheels that are probably a lot heavier than the ones I have currently. I know it's not ideal for performance, but my other car has factory 19in wheels and I really like how it looks. The extra weight of the wheels would also probably require a bit more lower end power? This is also why I'm hesitating to upgrade camshafts, even though the factory ones are very small I'm worried it might "move" the power too high up. If it's ok, can I ask you about intercoolers? I thought I should use just a decently big one for a factory turbo car, like a Golf GTI Mk7 for example, but I don't know based on what I should pick those. They seem simple to me, but there's probably more to them than meets the eye since I see a lot of aftermarket ones are quite expensive. Could I also ask you about exhaust diameter? Some people say that for a turbocharged car, you should use the biggest exhaust that you can fit, and also I've seen crazy Honda and other cars where people dump the exhaust right out the hood, just after the turbo(!). I thought about using maybe 2.5in or 3in, I think that would be efficient enough? To me bigger than that seems kinda huge.

[@802Garage]

​@@SomeOne_86 Truly glad the comment was appreciated! You definitely don't need a huge turbo to make that power. Despite being a bit of an oddball, it seems like a fairly solid engine, and the DOHC nature makes it ready to flow a bit more. Seems like it has relatively large exhaust ports as well, which is good for a turbo. A bit like a 4G63 in some ways. You have the non-DE version, so only 113hp according to Wikipedia. That means you'll need to make about 1.65 bar of boost or just under 24psi, which as noted above is a lot for a stock engine for sure. I did make a small correction above where I said 17.5psi for 1.3 bar and should have said 19psi. Keep in mind though, just going to an aftermarket modern ECU will unlock quite a bit of power compared to stock from the 90s. I'd think 130-140 would be easily attainable with the upgraded ignition and not being locked to factory ancient emissions. So really with a modern ECU and some upgrades, I think the 1.3 bar at most should still get you to 300 crank horsepower. I'm just guessing though, not an experienced tuner. Going to coil on plug while not necessary per se for your power goals will definitely help avoid any issues with spark blow out and will help make solid power. If you add pistons, rods, and springs like you mentioned, I see no issues with going for your power or likely a bit beyond. I also live in a very hilly area. Going to a big turbo would just mean that you'd have basically no added power when at low RPM, but a lot of added power at high RPM. A smaller turbo means more power at low RPM, but you would have to be more careful not to boost too much down low. Going up hill also adds load to the engine, which means faster spool, which means more low end torque. Low end torque and slow moving pistons with lots of fuel and air over them is what can break engines. So you definitely don't want to size the turbo too small, which is why I'd say 2871 sizing as a good baseline. You could go with a 3071 to add spool time and free up top end power, but I don't think that's necessary. Again don't take my word as law, just my thoughts. The main thing you will want to avoid once turbocharged is being at low RPM, like under 2,500 let's say, and flooring it while starting to go up a hill. If your turbo builds too much boost at RPM that low, you're most likely to encounter issues. Look into LSPI or Low Speed Pre-Ignition for more info. Basically, you'd rather downshift and be in boost at higher RPM than lug the engine and build boost too low. No matter what, it will still be much easier to go up those hills! Tuning can also largely mitigate all this, but can require a lot of time to perfect. Hill starts alone shouldn't be a big issue because in very low gears like 1st and 2nd the load should not be too high and by the time you shift you should be at suitable RPM to carry on. Just don't shift super early and prefer to sit at mid RPM with a little boost if you need to maintain speed. Wheel size and mostly weight will affect how the car feels, but it will not be a drastic difference. Especially once turbocharged, it will hardly be noticed in terms of difficulty getting going. Unless you go to insanely heavy wheels, I wouldn't worry too much. Braking may feel a bit worse though. Keep in mind brake upgrades are a good one to add to the list. In terms of cams, I would stick with stock. Richard Holdener has done awesome videos about cams. What you should know is the idea of a "turbo cam" is kind of a myth. Cams shift the power band, exactly as you were saying, but all a turbo does is amplify the entire power band based on boost. It doesn't respond better or worse to different cams per say, although of course shifting power lower for example could make a turbo spool faster, but you could lose top end flow, reducing ease of making top end power. The reverse is also true, as you mentioned. kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZqyg2arj5xrn8ksi=5-nwCD0uFt0XzIEE Looking at a stock power curve from the later FS-DE engine, I think it's perfectly acceptable for turbocharging. You will end up with a nice linear increase in power with a broad band from 4,500 to redline, though it may taper off a bit at the very end. That's pretty normal for most turbo cars and as you said, better to not shift the power too high and increase lag while decreasing total power under the curve. www.racingbeat.com/mazda/performance/protege-exhaust-dynotest.html Intercoolers are another big topic of course, but yes just picking any factory intercooler from a car making near your power goal would be a solid bet. A Golf GTI intercooler would likely be adequate and a Golf R intercooler would be fantastic. The main difference for you with intercooler sizing will be how much you can boost consistently before intake temps get too high. You also want a low baseline of course. In general, bigger is better because less pressure drop and more cooling. Different cores have different efficiency as well. OEM intercoolers tend to be pretty good and the cheapest aftermarket are not great. If you can fit a nice used intercooler from say a Golf R, which looks relatively easy to attach hoses too, though it's like a radiator size wise, that would be great. The GTI intercooler looks nearly identical and will likely be cheaper. Something like a Focus RS or Civic Type R would also be solid. Buy based on max space and hose connections. In terms of aftermarket, bigger is better and the bar and plate are generally better than tube and fin. If you want to deep dive on some intercooler testing, I love this article. www.enginebasics.com/Advanced%20Engine%20Tuning/Intercooler%20Efficency%20Test%20.html It is true as a general rule that bigger is better for turbo exhaust, but it definitely has diminishing returns. For 300hp, 2.5" would be fine, and 3.0" might be a bit better for your top end, but it's probably not totally necessary. That's just top of my head, but we have made 350hp on a rotary engine which needs way more exhaust flow and it was only a 3.0" exhaust all the way back under the car. It actually necked down to less at some points. Didn't kill the top end either. Still, going slightly larger could help keep all of your temperatures in check a bit better as well. There's no like perfect guide to exhaust sizing, but here's a couple good places to start. Especially the turbo section of the first link. The second link is Richard Holdener again and the first half is the most important to you. Keep in mind he is dealing with much higher numbers though and your results would be much smaller. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eqewc5Wln7-jf6ssi=E_hUjSI8ab0KFJiW kzbin.info/www/bejne/eqewc5Wln7-jf6ssi=E_hUjSI8ab0KFJiW www.lsxmag.com/tech-stories/baby-got-back-turbo-exhaust-size-comparison-test/ (Article form of last video.) Here is another interesting document that aligns with what I was saying. 2.5" is probably good enough for 300hp or a bit more, and 3.0" can go quite a bit beyond that. Again, not a hard and fast rule, but generally. It's all about minimum requirements and diminishing returns. Go to the second labeled "Formed Pipe" though the whole read is useful. cobbtuning.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/PRS/pages/425263237/Exhaust+Designs Woo another long comment!

[@SomeOne_86]

@@802Garage Thank you again for helping me! You explained to me the uphill thing very well, and now I'm not so worried about it! I thought with a relatively small engine like mine, a turbo would "choke" it a bit at lower RPM and I would lose power, now I feel a little bit silly haha. Thank you for also pointing out I shouldn't give a lot of gas from low RPM while driving uphill-One of my friends who is a mechanic for VAG cars actually told me almost the same thing, but he was talking about turbo diesel engines-A lot of people here when they buy one do that and cause damage to it over time, because they're impressed by the low end torque, so they lug it from low RPM. I want to use individual coils not only because of tuning limits, but also because from factory they placed the distributor right above the exhaust(!). So with a turbo there it would make a lot of heat, and it would probably not be good for the distributor. Also every tuner that I talked with recommended it, and it's not super expensive so I think it's probably a good idea. I think I could fit a Golf R intercooler, I don't know if you are familiar with the Mazda 626, but it is quite a large car, it's similar to Toyota Camry in terms of size so there is lots of space in the engine bay with the 4 cylinder. I will also look to find good quality pipes and hose clamps and connectors, because I've seen that often causes issues with a turbocharged car. I will look into some of the after market intercoolers as well, maybe just for window shopping haha. I will go with 2.5in exhaust probably, maybe I will later upgrade but I don't think I would need it. Do you think it would be very loud if I only used one muffler? The car currently naturally aspirated has one big factory resonator, and a sports muffler(mild) that I installed. It doesn't have catalytic converter from factory, in this configuration it's not too loud but has a nice sound. I know a turbo will act a bit like a muffler, so if I only used one muffler or resonator when I turbocharge it, will it be around the same volume probably? Sorry if this is a bit of a stupid question, it's because police officers here don't like loud cars very much. Again, thank you for providing all of these excellent resources, videos and recommendations! I will watch them all carefully to determine everything I should know.

[@Sedona_FD3S]

Wow.. this video missed nothing! Subscribing

[@802Garage]

Thanks very much! I think the only thing I noticed I wish I had covered more so far is the length of the internal oil drain and the volume of the oil cavity on the CHRA of each. The BB turbo has more overall capacity and a shorter path to the return. Should improve oil flow back to the sump.

[@eatinginternet8690]

Wow the ball bearing seems kinda nice. Old one on the other hand 😂. I prefer journal cartridge though since it's quieter and can take more of a beating. It'd be nice to see a journal option with the new housings and wheels

[@802Garage]

They do have a journal bearing option with the upgrades actually! They have the forged billet compressor wheel, lightweight compressor housing, K419 turbine wheel, silicon molybdenum turbine housing, and better piston rings. So the only parts missing are the stainless V-band housing and dual ball bearing center. Here are the main options: T04E T3/T4 0.57 Turbine Housing A/R - www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/t3t4-t04e-turbo-turbocharger-400hp-057-ar-for-dodge-oldsmobile-ford-97-98-99.html?tracking=643228d8211ea T04E T3/T4 0.63 Turbine Housing A/R -www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/universal-turbo-turbocharger-t3t4-t04e-t3-63-ar-turbine-for-400hp.html?tracking=643228d8211ea GT2871 48 Trim - www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/street-turbo-charger-t25-t28-gt25-gt28-gt2871-journal-bearing-14psi-16l-20l.html?tracking=643228d8211ea GT3037 (GT3076) - www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/upgrade-gt3037-gt30-500hp-t382-ar-74-trim-turbine-turbocharger-water-oil.html?tracking=643228d8211ea GT3582 (GT3540) - www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/t3-flange-gt35-gt3582-universal-cast-iron-turbine-housing-perfect-for-30l-60l.html?tracking=643228d8211ea Also, yes journal bearings are quieter, but it's not always totally true they can take more of a beating. I used to think the same, but I guess I'd say it's complicated. Like journal bearings are reliable no doubt and I think overall there is more surface area to contact if being starved of oil or overheating. Basically, ball bearing turbos are probably a bit more susceptible to damage if there is an oil supply issue. However, ball bearing turbos can actually maintain higher thrust loads than typical journal bearing setups. Obviously it depends on the size of the bearing and the turbo and wheels. Think of it this way, in a journal bearing turbo, a single thrust bearing with a few small contact pads has to handle the thrust load. So if it gets extreme or there is any oil supply issue, those thrust pads die fast. That's why you see that as one of the most common journal bearing turbo failures. With a dual ball bearing turbo, you have the full outer races of both bearings supporting the thrust load and with lower friction since they are rolling elements. So, you get better efficiency under high thrust loads as well. They can also handle heavy radial loads, but depends on the bearing package. Basically, that's why ball bearing turbos typically have higher maximum boost ratings, because that's when extreme thrust loads can be encountered. The ball bearing turbos can handle that load and overheat less internally from the lower friction and oil churning. I believe it's also why a lot of cheaper journal bearing turbos have a lowish boost ceiling, because they don't have an overbuilt journal and thrust design and the thrust is more susceptible to damage if operated poorly. Don't take my word as law, of course, but this is all my understand. Figured I'd share.

[@brandonadkins5223]

Like the video but I have had bad luck with these turbos

[@802Garage]

I'm assuming you mean the older standard style? They aren't going to have QC like much more expensive brands, but they are generally reliable. The most common issue I see is inadequate oil feed or return. A lot of people probably don't prime them either which can start a downward spiral. Sorry you haven't had good luck.

[@Sedona_FD3S]

I wish their BB turbos came with t4 flange

[@802Garage]

They do have a ball bearing GT3582 now which is sized the same as the Garrett GT382R and has a T3 flange. www.maxpeedingrods.com/product/billet-gt3582-turbo-600hp-t3-ar7063-anti-surge-ball-bearing-for-nissan-patrol.html?tracking=643228d8211ea I know it is at least easier to adapt T3 to T4 rather than V-band to T4 in terms of finding adapters. If there is a particular turbo you want with the V-Band though, I can see if I can find an adapter to T4. Here is the full range of ball bearing turbos currently. www.maxpeedingrods.com/category/sport-performance-universal-turbocharger.html?tracking=643228d8211ea

[@mokokawi]

I have the max gt3582 journal , on my Kawasaki zx1100 now,but maybe bb on later

[@802Garage]

@@mokokawi Wow that must be insane!!!

[@mitsubishikid1187]

Nice

[@802Garage]

You're nice! Haha. Thanks.

[@mitsubishikid1187]

@@802Garage I might try one of these on my old fp3052 housing, from what I recall the fp3052 was basically a gt3076r, or might have been a gt3071r, in any case I think maxspeeding offers both in the ball bearing designs so might be worth trying it.

[@802Garage]

@@mitsubishikid1187 Yep they have a 3071 and 3076 ball bearing. Links and discount code in the description. Both use the same turbine. The turbine wheel sizing is the same as a real GT30. From some research I believe the FP3052 used standard GT30 turbine wheel sizing as well at 55/60mm or 2.16/2.36". So theoretically all the turbines match. The issue I see is that fancy tapered heat shield MXR is using on the exhaust housing. I actually can't even find another turbo using that design, and I don't know if it would bolt into a normal cylindrical housing properly. It may work if the top diameter is the same, but really unsure. You could always just buy one and one of the inlet flanges I linked in the description and make your own adapter to whatever flange you currently use. I know the FP allegedly had a nice exhaust housing too though.