The Top DSM Community on the Web

For 1990-1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, Plymouth Laser, and Galant VR-4 Owners. Log in to remove most ads.

Please Support JNZ Tuning
Please Support ExtremePSI

Help me pick a turbo

This site may earn a commission from merchant
affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

You've built such a manifold for a HX35 user? If so, what RPM were they seeing 30psi?

The reason people choose a 2G head vs. a 1G head is for the improvement in velocity. Up to a certain point the ports in a 1G head are unnecessarily large for the power level the user is looking to make...and an exhaust manifold is no different. You don't need primaries that large on a 54mm turbo being fed by a T3 flange with an ID of roughly 2.35" x 1.85".

I've seen it happen first-hand with the FP Race manifold...folks forget that "race" exists in the title for a reason, it's not for a 14B/16G car. A friend bolted one on his 16G-powered 1G in place of a ported 2G manifold and the car suddenly no longer got on the converter at the line, lost almost a whole second on the ET and was 3mph slower at the end of a pass as a result. Went back to the ported 2G manifold and it was a 12.4x @ 112mph car again.

Small turbos don't need big manifolds- it hurts more than it helps. Now if you were trying to do the opposite with a big T3 turbo like a Super 99, I could definitely see where the smaller runners could pose a problem due to the sheer volume of the exhaust energy...no denying that. In this case, the OP specifically noted he wanted a quick-spooling setup and I posted the HY35 on a cast manifold which is proven. Anything else adds a degree of uncertainty depending on how the manifold is built and what turbine a/r will be used.


My response was not specifically aimed at stock flange turbos or necessairly at the op. or any specific power level for that matter, Just a response to the general statement you made that large runner manifolds “murder spool” sure they may not have as much a benefit for a small turbo, and with a small turbo they are low rpm efficiency and Low flowing) but a runner size smaller then the head port is going to be a restriction period. maybe you dont see the effects of that restriction until you have a turbo worthy of out flowing it, but as a rule of thumb less back pressure = better response and power gains. What bastard is saying about large long runners basically killing exhaust pulse due to the larger volume? maybe in a super extreme senario like runners the length of a car, but not when we are talking about primaries less then a foot long. And even less then 1/4” of interior volume difference between the two. There is a point to which going to the extreme side of the data spectrum are invalidating to the argument.

Also, Thin wall runners radiate heat into the engine bay which is lost heat energy that could be otherwise transferred to the turbine. Thicker wall, similar to a cast manifold. Keep the exhaust gases hotter inside the runner, with less of that heat energy lost through radiation. This theory has been proven by speed factory and their world record hondas where they gained 500rpm Spool going from an .065 wall tube manifold to a sch40 pipe manifold of similar design, runner length and primary Diamiter.

And even if the runners are longer, the exhaust never goes cold. But again, if we move to extremes. An exhaust may get cold and loose pulse velocity after say 10 feet? But we arent talking about 10ft long manifold runners. That is just my 2 cents.

Justin, I understand what you are getting at though about small turbos. But when trying to max out ANY turbo, I’d think the less restriction the better the flow. And for the record, I’m not suggesting by any means that everyone with a 16g needs an upgraded manifold at all, but the theme seems to be above 500whp you could get more out of your setup with a larger runner, @bastarddsm good luck with your goal of 8’s, I’m looking forward to it, but how much easier would you get there with less back pressure:idontknow: are you logging backpressure?

Anyway I’m done my rant LOL OP, hope you get the turbo you are looking for that beat suits your intended use of the car.
 
Last edited:
There are no Borg Warner turbos in this size range that are *intended* to be used in a T3 housing....even the S200 series came from Schwitzer with a T4 housing.

Tbe one i have came with a divided T3 (twin scroll) housing.
 
My response was not specifically aimed at stock flange turbos or necessairly at the op. or any specific power level for that matter, Just a response to the general statement you made that large runner manifolds “murder spool” sure they may not have as much a benefit for a small turbo, and with a small turbo they are low rpm efficiency and Low flowing) but a runner size smaller then the head port is going to be a restriction period. maybe you dont see the effects of that restriction until you have a turbo worthy of out flowing it, but as a rule of thumb less back pressure = better response and power gains. What bastard is saying about large long runners basically killing exhaust pulse due to the larger volume? maybe in a super extreme senario like runners the length of a car, but not when we are talking about primaries less then a foot long. And even less then 1/4” of interior volume difference between the two. There is a point to which going to the extreme side of the data spectrum are invalidating to the argument.
Do you know the volume difference on your manifold between a 1.5 and a 1.25 in either a sch 10 or a sch 40? Volume goes up as the square of the diameter, so while that .25" doesn't seem like much, it can be a lot of volume. Here's a good example, and not to drag anyone else into this, but way back when I made a quicky t/s header for a HX35, and mr peepers had one he mad too. His spooled like a cocksucker, and mine was kind of lazy. He had 1.25" sch 40, and mine was 1.75" 16ga tube. We were both header wrapped. Same 12cm housing, similar rest of the setup.

Also, Thin wall runners radiate heat into the engine bay which is lost heat energy that could be otherwise transferred to the turbine. Thicker wall, similar to a cast manifold. Keep the exhaust gases hotter inside the runner, with less of that heat energy lost through radiation. This theory has been proven by speed factory and their world record hondas where they gained 500rpm Spool going from an .065 wall tube manifold to a sch40 pipe manifold of similar design, runner length and primary Diamiter.
Do you have a link to this testing? I find that really hard to believe, that change in thickness is going to have almost 0 effect on radiation heat transfer, and even less on conductive and convective heat transfer. There is very little temp change from the inside of the pipe to the outside, the conductive heat transfer of the metal is WAYYYY higher than that of the convective heat transfer to the air in the engine bay.


Justin, I understand what you are getting at though about small turbos. But when trying to max out ANY turbo, I’d think the less restriction the better the flow. And for the record, I’m not suggesting by any means that everyone with a 16g needs an upgraded manifold at all, but the theme seems to be above 500whp you could get more out of your setup with a larger runner, @bastarddsm good luck with your goal of 8’s, I’m looking forward to it, but how much easier would you get there with less back pressure:idontknow: are you logging backpressure?

Anyway I’m done my rant LOL OP, hope you get the turbo you are looking for that beat suits your intended use of the car.
What makes you think the 1.25" runner is actually a restriction? Did you ever figure out what the average valve flow area is during an exhaust cycle? It's much less than the port area at the flange.

I'll give you a Franklin's worth of free advice, the typical stick a pressure sensor in the collector backpressure measurement is worth about dick. Especially if you are trying to determine if the runner is wrong. That would really require measuring cylinder pressure at about 500khz.
Anway, I do have a pressure sensor in the collector, and I pretty much only use it to help tune the turbo (vgt). The runners on my ancient SFP t4 manifold are 1.25 sch40, and it made over 700hp at 30psi with smallish cams and an unported EvoIII intake on a 6 bolt head. It made 500 at 19psi, it's picking up close to 20hp per psi, how restrictive is it?

As for easier, look at all the big time cars that go from a 67mm to a 76, and slow down. Spool up counts.
 
About the only thing a pressure sensor in the collector is good for is for measuring turbine restriction. (Both wheel and housing)
 
Holy thread derailment, haha.

Op, an hx35 should do fine with the treadstone style manifold if you can't find an hx35. Some spool may be sacrificed, but as said, it will probably be minimal considering the availability of the two turbos.
 
Holy thread derailment, haha.

Op, an hx35 should do fine with the treadstone style manifold if you can't find an hx35. Some spool may be sacrificed, but as said, it will probably be minimal considering the availability of the two turbos.

I don’t mind, I’ve been taking notes actually. This information is invaluable and can’t be found anywhere else on the net.

If anyone is curious my manifold won’t have super long runners. I realize it’s not ideal but I might have even bigger goals in the future. The boost bug is real.
 
Being on a TD06SL2 20g and ~10:1 static compression would you expect the 2G exhaust manifold to create too much back pressure to be sustainable? I am on a ported FP race manifold which works fine but if I am throwing away spool for no peak flow benefit I'd make the change back.
I highly doubt it being that a ported 2G manifold was the go-to for many years on 20G-sized turbos and even larger. The only way to know for sure is if you try one for testing purposes and note any changes in spool/airflow. You'll probably have to dent the water pipe a little as the FP manifold is aimed at better block clearance for larger turbos.

My response was not specifically aimed at stock flange turbos or necessairly at the op. or any specific power level for that matter, Just a response to the general statement you made that large runner manifolds “murder spool” sure they may not have as much a benefit for a small turbo, and with a small turbo they are low rpm efficiency and Low flowing) but a runner size smaller then the head port is going to be a restriction period.
I was speaking directly to the OP in terms of a large-runner manifold murdering spool on a 54mm-class turbo, hence the reason he was quoted...and I stand by what was said 100%. It wasn't a blanket statement in the least- although you seem to have latched onto that one statement like it's the opening sentence in the bible. :confused:

Justin, I understand what you are getting at though about small turbos. But when trying to max out ANY turbo, I’d think the less restriction the better the flow. And for the record, I’m not suggesting by any means that everyone with a 16g needs an upgraded manifold at all, but the theme seems to be above 500whp you could get more out of your setup with a larger runner
I've already pointed out that the FP manifold cost time and MPH when used back-to-back with a ported 2G manifold on a 16G car...so obviously less manifold restriction doesn't directly translate into better flow / more power on every application.

Tbe one i have came with a divided T3 (twin scroll) housing.
There is *one* series of the S200's units called the S200SX-2 that comes with a twin-scroll T3 housing of around .76 a/r and .85 a/r. It's not very common at all, only comes with a 56mm compressor option, and extremely difficult to replacement buy parts (like the turbine shaft) for.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.


There are also divided T3 housings for the S300 turbos but they're wastegated and a direct-fit for midsize Caterpillar or Cummins diesel engines.

Op, an hx35 should do fine with the treadstone style manifold if you can't find an hx35.
Won't fit without a spacer and longer studs at the head. The HY35 is the absolute limit on a cheapo cast T3 manifold space-wise; even the HY needs some modification to clear the balance shaft tube.
 
I’ve been talking with the shop that’s fabricating my manifold and they said they can make a log style manifold if I don’t want to lose spool from the longer runners.

Should I go this route instead? It’s actually more cost effective for them to make it and I know it’ll fit an Hx35 because I’ve seen photos of another guy’s build using the same combo. At what point will this manifold be a restriction?
 
Won't fit without a spacer and longer studs at the head. The HY35 is the absolute limit on a cheapo cast T3 manifold space-wise; even the HY needs some modification to clear the balance shaft tube.

Wow really? I figured some minimal grinding or water pipe denting for the HX, but I figured the HY would be pretty in-the-clear. At that point, I'd start looking at the HE351CW, mine only needed some minor grinding to the turbine housing "spine" and a tiny water pipe dent to fit with the treadstone on a 6 bolt, less so on the g4cs. I'll have to go get some pics when I have time to mock it all up again on the blocks.

My bad on the guessing, but I guess almost any of these turbos would take some mods without a fairly specific manifold?
 
I wouldn't buy a 'new' Holset, Browse the Cummins forums or Facebook groups. I've picked up three HY's there, one that was rebuilt & ready to bolt on for $150 and two that probably should be rebuilt (or at least thoroughly cleaned) for $75 a piece. I often see HX's for sale for $150-250 on those groups as well.
 
Okay so an update, after weighing my options and browsing other people’s setups I’ve decided to scrap the tubular manifold idea and just go with a cast T3 manifold.

I’m also thinking of not going with a Holset due to their physical size, weight, turbine housing options and due to how picky they are about oil.

I’ve been looking at a Borg Warner S257SX-E turbo, they sell it on AGP turbo with any turbine housing option and they have a .63 a/r T3 with V-band option for ~$850.

Just wondering what you guys think of this turbo, specifically if Jusmx has any qualms about spool, reliability etc. anything that might make me reconsider. Perhaps there are better options for the money?

To me it looks like the perfect turbo but I don’t have much experience with the bigger BW turbochargers.
 
Picky about oil?
They just need to drain...

On a cummins, they are fed with a -6, and make 65+psi oil pressure. But also drain with a 3/4 or 7/8" pipe.

A -4 with a decent sized drain should give zero oiling issues...


But a s257 should be plenty reliable as well. However, the compressor housing might be a touch bigger than any hx35
 
All turbos need to be properly fed and drained. Dont buy the -10 drain kits they are under 1/2 inch in the fittings plus the fittings make them a pain to work with. I usually just buy a 3/4 hose adapter off the turbo and use 3/4 hose to pipe adapters into the pan. Way cheaper and if you tap or use female threads into the pan there's no worries about messing up a male bung welded into the pan.
 
The S256 has been used a few times before with good results. The S257 FMW is essentially a billet wheel version of it.
 
Okay so an update, after weighing my options and browsing other people’s setups I’ve decided to scrap the tubular manifold idea and just go with a cast T3 manifold.
You're going to be very limited to what you can actually run while still clearing the block unless you use a spacer between the head and manifold along with 9 longer studs. Even the HY35 needs some turbine housing modification done to clear the balance shaft tube but it works.

I’m also thinking of not going with a Holset due to their physical size, weight, turbine housing options and due to how picky they are about oil.
I'm curious how everyone thinks Holsets are picky about oiling- it's the one brand that has concrete oiling information published and visible by anyone. For literally any other turbo it's a guess, or you can call somewhere like Precision and get three different answers from three different techs which is priceless info when trying to set your expensive new turbo up correctly. ANY midsize journal bearing turbo being pushed to the max or overworked should have the same oiling requirements as a Holset regarding feed, drain, and inlet pressure so if you think you're going to put a 10AN drain on a Borg Warner and have zero issues you're mistaken.

I’ve been looking at a Borg Warner S257SX-E turbo, they sell it on AGP turbo with any turbine housing option and they have a .63 a/r T3 with V-band option for ~$850.
A fine turbo at a good price assuming it comes with a 360* thrust system...the older S200's had a 270* plate only with no upgrade option. At high boost with lots of turbine backpressure the thrust plate may as well have been made out of toilet paper.

Find a HY35 in good shape for $300 or less, spend another $100 or so on oiling it correctly, snag the direct-fit o2 housing setup from Morrison for $300 or whatever, and for $800-$850 total including the manifold and a nice inexpensive two-bolt wastegate the turbo is on your car. The HY is considerably smaller overall than the HX series which is what makes all of this possible without the compressor housing hitting the block or water pipe.
 
an he341 or he351 are T3 single scroll with a vband exhaust. they are nearly bolt on easy. (do not get one that says VGT)

oiling the Holset is easy, it is the drain and the drain kits that are way undersized that everyone gets wrong. (and that people run a small feed line and a restrictor when upping the feed size is an easier way to reduce feed psi.)
 
Correct on the oiling issue. Run a OFH straight feed to the turbo (no restrictor) and drain the thing as large as you can. I use a 12an or 3/4" line with barbs on the pan and CHRA. It works great and no thrust wear issues at all.
I run a HX40 tho. :cool:
 
I run a special adaptor on the pan and the biggest drain flange I can at the turbo. Use AN line and fittings...or.... after I was tired of a 3" pc of AN hose dickin with me, I cut the fittings off as close as I could and still leave a flange. Then i put on big, oil resistant line with hose clamps, since it isn't a pressure line and did the same at the pan. Now I can take a turbo off without removing the "lower drain" :cool:, just the upper. Just what I do, not saying its right or wrong but works great for me and just check the line when you change oil.
 
Thanks @1990TSIAWDTALON, I only ask because I have a new pan I’m about to put on the car with future plans of a t3 upgrade over my current bolt on. But if there’s some sort of adapter flange available I’ll just put the new pan on now with the fp red and switch flanges later:thumb:
 
Support Vendors who Support the DSM Community
Boosted Fabrication ECM Tuning ExtremePSI Fuel Injector Clinic Innovation Products Jacks Transmissions JNZ Tuning Kiggly Racing Morrison Fabrications MyMitsubishiStore.com RixRacing RockAuto RTM Racing STM Tuned

Latest posts

Build Thread Updates

Vendor Updates

Latest Classifieds

Back
Top