Holset hx40 makes 685hp and 584tq

[Bansheenut420]

Bump... Any updates? Answers?

 

[badman21]

The bep housing I used is unported.

 

[e85_4g63]

Are you using the 7 or 8 blade compressor wheel? Which turbine wheel are you on? Is the car running straight e85? I assume the Wolf 3D system is SD? I didn't see a whole lot in your profile, I assume a pretty well built motor, I read it's a stroker, just looking for more specific's on your setup. I'm not trying to copy your setup or anything like that, if you don't want to share everything I understand and respect your decision.

 

[Bansheenut420]

Thanks for the info.

 

[badman21]

Yeah the holset is a 7 blade wheel. I run 2.3 stroker with weisco piston eagle rods stock head just hks 272 cams hx40 turbo dual bosch044 fuel pumps 4 1600cc injectors with e85, Magnus race intake manifold with q45 throttle body slowboy racing front mount intercooler, ptt twin disc, and magnus dogbox transmission. So far stock transfer case and stock axles. Tuned with e85 by Waynespeed with the Wolf3d v400 computer. I haven't been able to make it back to the track case of money issues.The tracks I normally go to is 1:30 away they was beefing about the et and mph and gave me a list of saftey equipment I need 10 point roll cage certified axle loops fire suite 9 sec liscence etc the next track is atleast 2 hours away and i also plan on trailering the car to the track next time cause I plan to go all out. But this sport is expensive not to mention I have a next child which is due any day now. If you have anymore question feel free to ask.

 

[JayRolla]

Can you post up a data log or at least give me how much lb/min your flowing and what rpms do you see 20psi and full boost? Thats if you actually have done a log from that low of rpm.

 

[Ricky Ingraham]

wow, good to see some good numbers coming from the hx40. now where did you run youre oil feed line for the turbo? and whats youre oil pressure to the turbo at idle, and throughout youre rpms untill redline? The reason i ask is because i always hear of people having too much oil pressure and causing the seals in the turbo to go bad quicker. and again, props big time!I love youre setup!

oh, and another question. how many miles do you currently have on this setup?

 

[johnboy1065]

Badman,

What kind of clutch are you using to hold that power?

Reason why I'm asking is because I right now have a 20G on my car, But just bought a holset HX40 and I am needing a clutch that will be able to handle the additional power.

thanks,
John


Edit: oh ok I just noticed it says PTT twin disc, sorry

 

[blackrosenova40]

I have a question....

What base fuel pressure do you run and what was the max duty cycle you hit on the dyno with those 1600's?

 

[Archer Fabrications]

okay because this has been jogged around a few times.. Can badman please CONFIRM that this was ON the MITSUBISHI flanged .55AR BEP housing? they used to make a T3 and that manifold doesnt look like any DSM flange one that i have ever seen. Justin also talked about an old T3.55AR BEP that the apparent "HX40 record" was held on. I'm curious if that is you. There has been a lot of debate and i didnt make anywhere close to 500 on my 7 blade billet HX40 on a 2.0 because the .55AR DSM flange housing was starting to see back pressure at 24psi and started to knock on pump. Then again, your on E85 but id still like to know if this is the legit BEP bolt on housing that we all buy today, or if this is the T3 variant that is no longer sold.

 

[ceedawg]

okay because this has been jogged around a few times.. Can badman please CONFIRM that this was ON the MITSUBISHI flanged .55AR BEP housing? they used to make a T3 and that manifold doesnt look like any DSM flange one that i have ever seen. Justin also talked about an old T3.55AR BEP that the apparent "HX40 record" was held on. I'm curious if that is you. There has been a lot of debate and i didnt make anywhere close to 500 on my 7 blade billet HX40 on a 2.0 because the .55AR DSM flange housing was starting to see back pressure at 24psi and started to knock on pump. Then again, your on E85 but id still like to know if this is the legit BEP bolt on housing that we all buy today, or if this is the T3 variant that is no longer sold.

Any pics of the one you have?

 

[Archer Fabrications]

Any pics of the one you have?

Yeah, but why bother. The one i have is the same exact one that anyone can buy today. DSM flange inlet. DSM flange o2 housing outlet. What are you getting at here? Badman never said it was the BOLT ON BEP he just said it was the BEP .55AR and since there was previously a T3 variant of that, it is the reason for my question.

http://www.extremepsi.com/store/product.php?productid=23482&cat=1758&page=1

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

okay because this has been jogged around a few times.. Can badman please CONFIRM that this was ON the MITSUBISHI flanged .55AR BEP housing? they used to make a T3 and that manifold doesnt look like any DSM flange one that i have ever seen. Justin also talked about an old T3.55AR BEP that the apparent "HX40 record" was held on. I'm curious if that is you. There has been a lot of debate and i didnt make anywhere close to 500 on my 7 blade billet HX40 on a 2.0 because the .55AR DSM flange housing was starting to see back pressure at 24psi and started to knock on pump. Then again, your on E85 but id still like to know if this is the legit BEP bolt on housing that we all buy today, or if this is the T3 variant that is no longer sold.

There are a lot of things holding you back, your base timing issues being a big one. Another is that you are on a stock manifold.

If he did this on the T3 .55 housing, are you going to suggest that there is a more than 180awhp difference between the two?

That is still a "small housing" but the HX40 turbine is quite large which is what allows for this sort of flow. I don't think you fully understand that the difference between the two is going to be nearly negligible.

I was able to push 67lbs/min @ 38psi through the BEP bolt-on DSM housing with a 59mm Borg Warner, and over 50lbs/min on pump gas at 28-29psi. Which is damn near identical to the HX40 in performance and dimensions.

What does seeing "backpressure" mean? Do you log backpressure? You fail to realize that most everyone one here is seeing as much or more than 2:1 drive to boost ratios, even on the "big" turbos. You can bet that at 44psi boost, Badman had considerable drive pressure in any .55 housing that would fit on that wheel.

I had multiple housings on my S259.. DSM flanged, Open T3 and divided T4. The physical size was not so different between them that going from the .55 DSM to the .70 T3 made only a minor change in top end performance at the expense of a few hundred rpm spool at the same boost.

This is how A/R is measured:

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

I read your posts here and on the Link forums, you seem like you are looking for something to blame for what you perceive as something "falling short" or not living up to "hype"

Get the rest of your setup sorted out before you start trying to point the finger at the bolt on housing. In 2010, moved 670whp worth of air and maxed out the compressor... through the same bolt-on housing that you are using on a turbine with near identical aero and dimension. I also had logged drive pressure with a 5 bar MAP on the exhaust side EGR port, and while it was "high" I was still able to register that airflow.

The numbers were not inflated, I had calibrated my SD table with both a 1G MAS and then an Evo 8 MAS as a sanity check.

In fact the HX40 has a slightly bigger major diameter.

HX40 has a 76/64 turbine wheel

S200sx-59 has 74/64 turbine wheel

The inefficiencies are in the rest of your setup, which is why your tune is off and you were "only" able to pull ~392awhp @ 24psi.. which is pretty damn good no matter how you slice it.

 

[bastarddsm]

The t3 part would have little affect. BEP had a run of the .55a/r housings that had a mitsu outlet, and were machined to have a t3 inlet. The volute was still the same. And the volute is what determines the flow. NOT THE INLET FLANGE.

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

The t3 part would have little affect. BEP had a run of the .55a/r housings that had a mitsu outlet, and were machined to have a t3 inlet. The volute was still the same. And the volute is what determines the flow. NOT THE INLET FLANGE.

That's pretty much my message in a more compact, concise package. Amazing how often we end up on the same page.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

The back pressure thing is what aaron said, I didn't do that tune. And looking at logs I'm only on 22 psi spiked to 24 on the dyno thats why it shows 24psi. Not looking for anything to blame or point the finger, my setup restrictions are very clear. that said, I was disappointed cause I had my sights higher for 92 octane. I'm sure anyone would feel the same; and honestly there were a lot of things not calibrated like I thought was going to. AFR and boost didn't get adjusted to match and neither did airflow. He just changed the DA to match what he wanted. Which spikes to 12:1 which is too lean for me. Basically I shouldn't have to retune something I just paid for someone else to do. At least the things I need to do were pointed out, and I got a dyno number. The boost controller was not touched from the 22 psi i arrived on either. That said, it could very well be because of the crank pulley that made them not want to try farther on pump... I didn't have the funds for race gas so I was limited by that too

 

[gofer]

I can't add anything useful here other than the fact that if you EVER go into a dyno expecting XXXawhp / XXX ft-lbs tq then you should plan on leaving disappointed. A dyno is a tuning tool, plain and simple, if any numbers should matter it's the ones that light up at the end of the track.

Fix the issues that reared their ugly heads on the dyno, which is usually where everything that can go wrong will, and take the car to the track.

 

[JusMX141]

Can badman please CONFIRM that this was ON the MITSUBISHI flanged .55AR BEP housing? they used to make a T3 and that manifold doesnt look like any DSM flange one that i have ever seen.

His was the T3 .55 housing....but it doesn't matter because the housings are literally identical in size and cross section; one just happens to have a T3 flange on it. The design of our flange is almost like a T3 flange stood on it's side...the dimension at the inlet may be a little different, but the critical area around the wheel radius is the same. Think of the turbine housing as a funnel- doesn't matter if the top of the funnel is 2" or 10" around if the nozzle area is the same size....only "x" amount of fluid will pass through. If anything the T3 housing may have less velocity.

Left, obviously.

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

Hell there's even a T4 .55 housing in existence.

The back pressure thing is what aaron said, I didn't do that tune. And looking at logs I'm only on 22 psi spiked to 24 on the dyno thats why it shows 24psi. Not looking for anything to blame or point the finger, my setup restrictions are very clear. that said, I was disappointed cause I had my sights higher for 92 octane.

You made 400whp on 92 octane and only 22psi? That's rather impressive given a turbo that doesn't really begin to make serious airflow until 30+psi.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

Fair enough so a T3, T4, 7CM, 8CM DSM flanges make not a single bit of difference if they are all a .55AR housing on the same turbo eh? That's what i am understanding by your post. If that's the case, why do they even make a T4 flange? or a T6 flange? Just because different applications use different things? Or because the bigger inlet makes a better transition for higher A/R housings. Isn't that like saying the FP30 style housing will flow the exact same amount of flow as the BEP T3 .70? (Lets pretend the FP style housing is .70 and not .68) Woulden't that would make the "DSM flange is a restriction" comments invalid in that case. Assuming you could machine any housing you wanted to fit the HX on a DSM flange. Is the reason people say the DSM flange is a restriction because there just aren't any large A/R options unless custom made? That would make sense to me.

I've got the DNP Tubular manifold and its DSM flange and the only thing keeping me from switching T3 is replacing that piece of art. If a .70AR dsm flange will net me the exact same thing as a T3, it's a no brainier what i will choose. However, there is a difference in 02 housing that could probably make some impact. :hum: I know this isn't really comparing apples to apples cause they are made by different companies with different designs, but for the sake of wrapping my head around this concept, bare with me.

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

Fair enough so a T3, T4, 7CM, 8CM DSM flanges make not a single bit of difference if they are all a .55AR housing on the same turbo eh? That's what i am understanding by your post.

Then you are misunderstanding. In this particular case, the BEP casting has the same throat for this particular turbine wheel. Look at the diagram for how A/R is determined.

T3 and T4 are the inlet flange, they do not dictate critical area, throat, scroll, nozzle etc. "7cm" and "8cm" refer to nozzle area specifically.

".55A/R" specifically refers to nozzle area divided by the radius from the axis of rotation of the wheel to the centroid of where the nozzle area was measured.

If that's the case, why do they even make a T4 flange? or a T6 flange? Just because different applications use different things? Or because the bigger inlet makes a better transition for higher A/R housings. Isn't that like saying the FP30 style housing will flow the exact same amount of flow as the BEP T3 .70? (Lets pretend the FP style housing is .70 and not .68) Woulden't that would make the "DSM flange is a restriction" comments invalid in that case. Assuming you could machine any housing you wanted to fit the HX on a DSM flange. Is the reason people say the DSM flange is a restriction because there just aren't any large A/R options unless custom made? That would make sense to me.

Mostly people say the DSM flange is a restriction.. because either they don't understand what they are discussing, or they are being compared to the stock housings that come on these Holsets and Borg Warners.

In that contrast the DSM housing is restrictive to the extent you will see faster spool and elevated backpressure. But all housings will have backpressure, its a function of how turbines work.

How much is too much depends on your application, or if you are truly choking the motor on the turbine housing.. which when you see 67lbs/min out of a 59mm wheel like I have, or badman dyno-ing out at 685awhp @ 44psi makes it obvious that this housing is not restrictive to the point it inhibits us from maxing out the compressor side. Drive-pressure will be high, sure and you could potentially make a bit more power per pound of boost with a bigger housing, if you want response and power the bolt-on housing is great.

I liked both the bolt-on housing, and the divided T4 Airwerks housing, they both have their place. The top-end on the T4 felt endless on the cam/manifold combo I had, and on the street the mid-range torque of the DSM housing was immense.

I've got the DNP Tubular manifold and its DSM flange and the only thing keeping me from switching T3 is replacing that piece of art. If a .70AR dsm flange will net me the exact same thing as a T3, it's a no brainier what i will choose. However, there is a difference in 02 housing that could probably make some impact. :hum: I know this isn't really comparing apples to apples cause they are made by different companies with different designs, but for the sake of wrapping my head around this concept, bare with me.

The difference in feel when I made the jump from the DSM flange housing to the .70 T3 was minimal compared to the jump from the Open T3 .70 to the .91 Divided T4.

I had logged a drop in drive:boost on each change-up, and no doubt that the .70 T3 was more efficient and made incrementally more power per psi boost. The lag penalty was not severe either.

It's all about what you are looking to do. If you are trying to max out the compressor or make the most power on pump gas.. your best odds are always going to be with the 'bigger' housing. In this case, the DSM housing was big enough for me to move more than 80% of the compressors capacity on pump and meth with a relatively safe tune, and enough that I could max the wheel at high boost with a quality large intercooler, a lot of water/meth (10GPH nozzle) complimentary manifolds, head, exhaust, etc.

The T4 allowed me to get even more aggressive before I sold that setup and moved on to my current project.

 

[JusMX141]

Fair enough so a T3, T4, 7CM, 8CM DSM flanges make not a single bit of difference if they are all a .55AR housing on the same turbo eh? That's what i am understanding by your post. If that's the case, why do they even make a T4 flange? or a T6 flange? Just because different applications use different things?

This is referring the Bullseye .55 housing only. A Garrett T2 .54 housing is not even close to being the same as a Garrett .58 T4. You're giving this far too much thought.

 

[bastarddsm]

oh man dude. read this until it sinks in. BEP made 3 .55a/r housings. THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME VOLUTE. That mean they will all perform the same. The only difference is one was machined for a dsm flange, another for a t3 flange, and another for a t4 flange.

It's like taking a stock 7cm mitsu housing, and putting a t4 adapter on it, does that change it's flow? no.

Further more, not all A/R's are equal. Meaning you can't compare them directly. compare them like this:

BEP: .55a/r < .7 A/r for any flange, this is probably the only brand that uses the same volute for all of it's housings of same a/r

Garret: you need to compare them by A/R within the same flange size, and probably the same turbine. Meaning you can't compare a t3 .82 a/r to a t4 .69a/r and think the .69 is smaller or a t3 .82 for a t31 to a t3 .49 for a ptrim. Then you need to watch for open or divided, tangental or centered.

PTE: who f'in know with that junk.

Genuine Holset housings are the same deal too. You need to watch turbine size and nozzle area.

If you are looking at 2 garret housings of similar a/r and for the same turbine, one t3 one t4 you can assume the T4 should be laggier, and flow better.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

oh man dude. read this until it sinks in. BEP made 3 .55a/r housings. THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME VOLUTE. That mean they will all perform the same. The only difference is one was machined for a dsm flange, another for a t3 flange, and another for a t4 flange.

It's like taking a stock 7cm mitsu housing, and putting a t4 adapter on it, does that change it's flow? no.

Further more, not all A/R's are equal. Meaning you can't compare them directly. compare them like this:

BEP: .55a/r < .7 A/r for any flange, this is probably the only brand that uses the same volute for all of it's housings of same a/r

^ obviously the .55 is going to be smaller then a .70 in any flange. That's not what i was getting at. My only point was to compare a dsm flange FP hot side (circular all the way down the volute) to a T3 flange BEP (rectangle all the way down the volute) IF they were both the exact same A/R. i would assume the T3 would have flowed more due to it's taper being wider not just the flange itself I'm more talking about the geometry of the design rather then the flange itself. I know they are made by two different companies, that's why i stated that it was hypethetical. Also why i stated "lets pretend the FP one has .70 for comparison sake." When it infact has a .68.

Garret: you need to compare them by A/R within the same flange size, and probably the same turbine. Meaning you can't compare a t3 .82 a/r to a t4 .69a/r and think the .69 is smaller or a t3 .82 for a t31 to a t3 .49 for a ptrim. Then you need to watch for open or divided, tangental or centered.

PTE: who f'in know with that junk.

Genuine Holset housings are the same deal too. You need to watch turbine size and nozzle area.

If you are looking at 2 garret housings of similar a/r and for the same turbine, one t3 one t4 you can assume the T4 should be laggier, and flow better.

I also was unaware BEP used the same volute design for all their same AR Hotsides. So in that case, Wouldent that be poor design on BEP's part? If a DSM flanged Garrett hot side at .63AR has a different volute design then their .63AR T3 or T4 (which i would assume they would be different or else it would be the same as using an adapter), then my thought process was correct all along, and that BEP is just the odd one here.

This is referring the Bullseye .55 housing only.

^ That said, feel free to skip reading everything i just said

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

^ obviously the .55 is going to be smaller then a .70 in any flange.

This is not true at all. A .70A/R T25 inlet flange is going to be considerably "smaller" than a .55A/R T4

That's not what i was getting at. My only point was to compare a dsm flange FP hot side (circular all the way down the volute) to a T3 flange BEP (rectangle all the way down the volute) IF they were both the exact same A/R. i would assume the T3 would have flowed more due to it's taper being wider not just the flange itself I'm more talking about the geometry of the design rather then the flange itself.

If they have the same A/R for the same turbine wheel (again, look at the diagram I posted in post #63) they could still be different in several dimensions. If they have a bigger nozzle area divided by a radius change that was big enough that could still produce the same A/R ratio and have vastly different flow and spool characteristics.

But these are things that you cannot assume when you run into situations like this where the only difference is the inlet flange dimensions

I know they are made by two different companies, that's why i stated that it was hypethetical. Also why i stated "lets pretend the FP one has .70 for comparison sake." When it infact has a .68.

If you are looking at 2 garret housings of similar a/r and for the same turbine, one t3 one t4 you can assume the T4 should be laggier, and flow better.

In most cases this statement would be true, in this particular case it is not. Which is why you shouldn't assume these things, and it is why Garrett posts up the physical footprint and dimension schematics of many of their turbos.

Your thought process is not correct here because it relies too much on guess work. BEP's design isn't flawed just because they are using comparable nozzle area/radius on these castings. It's just the route they've chosen, and as it happens .. they work well as evidenced by the results Badman has shared here, my own results and those of others.

You are getting ahead of yourself in asking these questions, sort out the elementary stuff first before forming speculations and statements.

 

[bastarddsm]

In most cases this statement would be true, in this particular case it is not. Which is why you shouldn't assume these things, and it is why Garrett posts up the physical footprint and dimension schematics of many of their turbos.

So you your saying garret housings don't have bigger volutes on a t4 vs t3, all else being equal. I really don't know for sure, just going off what I have seen of them. But then again, I guess I doubt you could even get a t4 and t3 in the same a/r and same turbine.

I also was unaware BEP used the same volute design for all their same AR Hotsides. So in that case, Wouldent that be poor design on BEP's part? If a DSM flanged Garrett hot side at .63AR has a different volute design then their .63AR T3 or T4 (which i would assume they would be different or else it would be the same as using an adapter), then my thought process was correct all along, and that BEP is just the odd one here.

1. there is no dsm flanged garret housing besides the t25. PTE and others made dsm flanged housings that a garret turbo could go it, but they most likly did not have a garret volute, rather they had one of there own design. ( and in PTE's case a rather poor one at that.)

I think were getting way off base, what were we even trying to accomplish here?

I think what you need to take away from this is "for bep housings t3 .55ar = t4.55ar = dsm .55ar < t3 .7ar = t4.7ar (if they had one)" This only works on the bep housings. you cannot make this comparison for anything else really. This is because the BEP .55/.7 housings were engineered for compatibility first, and performance second. They didn't have the money to design a different casting for each combination, so they designed a casting that could be machined to work with anything, and then optimized that as best as they could. That being said, they do work just fine.

Now for garret housing, they have the money and resources to engineer and "optimal" housing for each turbo, so they generally do reuse a volute. so there fore as I said above .82 t3 for a gt30 is not equal to a .82 t3 for a GT35, which is also not equal to a .82t4 for a gt35.

Got it?