Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #10
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
I cannot speak to theories in regards to turbochargers as my knowledge is weak. What I can tell you is my real world experience which of course could be flawed data.

My 08 Prostar runs a dedicated crude oil haul in Alberta hauling super b. 140,000lbs/63,500kg. There are over 40 trucks on this exact same run who for years have done the exact same thing every single day, no variations besides weather and driving habits. There is a group of us who all have the 871 and mine and a friends have drawn some attention because everyone wants to know why/how we get such great fuel mileage. My friend is running Bridgestone 775 and i still have my bdr-w on yet we get better mileage then guys running great rolling resistance tires and aero trucks as well.... Why?

We both have the small 2733 cpl engine's with the small turbos. The other guys have the 525+ big cpl engine, a couple have turbo deletes and a couple don't, one guy has a small cpl and a turbo delete.

Now I will mention that we are 50% empty so maybe that comes into play, maybe not but all I know is I spend 450 to 500 a day in fuel while every single other guy in this group spend 600.

Last year when I had good rolling tires on, it was even better. Whatever the reason, I have yet to see a turbo deleted truck do better then mine, fuel mileage or pulling wise, my jakes are better also so I just cannot justify getting rid of my vgt. For me, my fuel mileage doesn't really change if I run 500hp or 625. I've done both for extended times, I really.like the higher horsepower with these weights, especially with the hills in winter but mpg wise it doesn't seem to make much of A difference.


User's Signature: I'm no mechanic, I'm just a guy that breaks down enough to know a bit.
replyreply
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #11
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
Anyone know a better turbo for a cm570 better than the hX60?. It's setting right at 700rwhp now. It does ok but the egt's start to creep up. No issue changing to another manifold with a T6 flange.
replyreply
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #12
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
(09-19-2017 )Rig Wrench Wrote:  Anyone know a better turbo for a cm570 better than the hX60?. It's setting right at 700rwhp now. It does ok but the egt's start to creep up. No issue changing to another manifold with a T6 flange.

a HT4B or HT4C work well in those higher HP applications, they are good to about 1000 crank hp and for about 60 psi if your rig can hold it. if you go for the billet wheels and the 11 blade compressor wheel they spool better than the stocker but have more boost at similar fueling levels. They are a T6 BTW

they are also fairly cheap i believe they are 84mm/128mm ish on the wheel size.


User's Signature: 52 41 57 5a 45 20 53 4d 45 4c 4c 53
replyreply
 Thanks given by: Rig Wrench
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #13
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
I'm not sure what it will take psi wise. It's got 16:1 pistons in it. .014 liner protrusion. All new factory hardware. It's right around 40-42psi now maxed out.
replyreply
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #14
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
16:1's are handy and new hardware is good and 14 though protrusion is good but honestly the stock stuff doesn't stand up for long past about 45-50 psi. it will do it for awhile but will fail in the end prematurely due to combustion pressures - the head bolts just fatigue and stretch and you lose your gasket crush.

my advice is if you want to go more and have it live be prepared to put some better bolts and maybe fire rings in it when it pops. but i have 2 trucks running around with the 4b on one and 4c on the other at high hp levels and have good results.

just a suggestion

...Puts on flame suit to protect from rawze......im sorry dont kill me rawze........


User's Signature: 52 41 57 5a 45 20 53 4d 45 4c 4c 53
replyreply
 Thanks given by: Rig Wrench , Brock , Running rough
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #15
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
The power level is fine where it is. Was just scouting for a better replacement. The 60 feels like its running out. Not looking for more power at this point. Wast thinking of any Borg or Garrett pieces. I'm always confused on how they are listed by hp. If its 700 whp. Not sure what it is at the crank.
replyreply
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #16
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
careful with the ball bearing garrets, they are dam finicky on turbo surge and chuff


User's Signature: 52 41 57 5a 45 20 53 4d 45 4c 4c 53
replyreply
 Thanks given by: Running rough
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #17
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
(09-19-2017 )Unilevers Wrote:  careful with the ball bearing garrets, they are dam finicky on turbo surge and chuff

You find that a cummins gets away with a smaller turbo than a cat at the same level. I have a w/g 175963 I believe on the shelf. Was thinkin about tryin it. See what happens
replyreply
 Thanks given by: Unilevers
09-19-2017, (Subject: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers... ) 
Post: #18
RE: Fixed Vane vs Variable Geometry Turbochargers...
(09-19-2017 )Rig Wrench Wrote:  
(09-19-2017 )Unilevers Wrote:  careful with the ball bearing garrets, they are dam finicky on turbo surge and chuff

You find that a cummins gets away with a smaller turbo than a cat at the same level. I have a w/g 175963 I believe on the shelf. Was thinkin about tryin it. See what happens

they do have alot less exhaust energy in my experience aswell. 171702 BW on a cat or detroit - 550 hp maybe 585, on a cummins its good for 650 all day.


User's Signature: 52 41 57 5a 45 20 53 4d 45 4c 4c 53
replyreply





  
  
Theme by MyBB Addict
Contact Us | Rawze.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication