Menu toggle

Electronic Boost Controllers

Bringing the subject back on topic........ ;-)
I can confirm the original turbine housing was once a K26/6, but now resembles something like (if there were such a thing) a K26/10!
The transformation of the turbo which included incorporating a ball-race core meant machining work was carried out to accomodate a larger turbine wheel and for the integration of the Garrett core (containing the ceramic ball-races), the compressor side is also Garrett.
I have been amazed at the spool-up response of this turbo, I am still a bit concerned as to whether the DME fuelling is able to live with the rapid acceleration of the turbo and still provide adequate fuel.
There is still a lot of work to be done on the engine as a package, it seems you get one bit close to being right and something else changes, just to keep you on your toes!
I am hoping to acheive a figure of around 360BHP with 370-380 ft/lbs torque on std. DME/KLR
At the moment I am beginning to wonder if the diaphram in the wastegate is leaking as Jon and I have tried various ways to keep the boost sustained without success.

One of the most anoying problems is the weather at the moment, wheelspin in 3rd and 4th in the wet is no joke, its preventing us getting to the solution as quickly as I'd like.

Simon
 
ORIGINAL: SimonP

Bringing the subject back on topic........ ;-)
I can confirm the original turbine housing was once a K26/6, but now resembles something like (if there were such a thing) a K26/10!
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be running out of puff then!
 
Hi Simon,

Nice to see you on the PCGB forum.

With a decent sized turbine housing (as Fen has suggested), I would have thought that you should be able to hold onto the boost for longer. When Porsche introduced the 250bhp model - it made more power by using the #8 turbine and holding the maximum boost of .75bar a further 750 rpm (or there abouts).

I'm also curious as to why you think a ball bearing design will spool quicker?

Have a good day!

Regards,
Andrew

 
ORIGINAL: ProMAX Motorsport.

I'm also curious as to why you think a ball bearing design will spool quicker?
Click to expand...

I've always wondered this myself, and my non-engineering mind has always thought it is because the bearings spin much freer. Anyway, this is becoming off topic so I am starting another thread so we can leave this one concentrating on Electronic Boost controllers [:)]
 
Andrew, don't you think a ball bearing turbo will spool faster than a conventional bearing (journal and thrust) turbo?
 
Massively better.

A Dawes or other MBC controls the signal pressure which is set, whereas an EBC varies the signal pressure to maintain a boost target.
 
Will one such as the link do what I need ? Cost wise it's within budget and I have a friend in USA who's coming over for Xmas so delivery is OK. I'm sure there may be better out there but I can't afford £3-400 right now with Xmas in the way.

Cheers Simon,

Mike
 
Yes, I think so. The Greddy EBCs are easier to set up than the A'PEXi products too, which are notoriously difficult.
 
I believe Tony Foote has that Greddy and found it very easy to setup and reliably maintain whatever boost you want.

I had the next version up which had the LCD screen and lots of other functions but it was a bit of a pig to setup initially. Worked perfect once done though. I like the sizing of the Greddy units, they are tiny cigarette sized boxes so can be hidden away discretely unlike some other EBCs which are huge with all sorts of flashing gizmos [:'(]
 
Thanks guys.

Yes that's my thinking aswell Paul, I don't want some huge box covered in flashing lights and sirens - a simple neat item that does the job will do me fine.

Off a shopping I go then.................cheers boys

Mike
[:D]
 
MBC's, low tech, easy to fit, easy to set up and much better than a Boost Improver or cycling valve and standard wastegate.

EBC's, not seriously hard to install as long as you are ok with electricals, can be a bit fiddly to set up with gains and damping figures to play with, which can be hard to get your head around. GReddy is easier to set up, Apexi is wonderful if you are a bit of a nerdy gadget freak like me who likes to have control of millions of settings. I am also convinced the Apexi eventually provides the best boost control, but has a noisier solenoid.

 
Seriously, if you read up on pneumatic regulators from Norgren or a company like SMC Pneumatics, and study the product data for these regulators, they are bullet-proof repeatable, simple and reliable.

Or, alternatively, pls tell me how much will my 0-100 time reduce if I fit a bling box [:D][:D]
 
I absolutely agree that an MBC is bullet proof, we have customers with ones we fitted over 15 years ago which are still going strong and only known a couple to fail.

I think it was Collin Chapman who used to say "Lighten and then simplify" as the mantra for lotus, and there is a lot to be said for that, as with complexity there is always the introduction of reliability issues.. I even remember there are equations for this.

However, an EBC will tend to be able to hold boost further than a MBC, as it can be dynamic rather than static, but also can be tuned using damping to stop any boost ripple as can be seen on lots of MBC dyno charts as well as boost overshoot.

But then again, boost overshoot is another thing altogether and can be quite desirable if tuned right, as any engine is detonation tolerant to overboost in short durations, which can give a short and useful boost in torque at the moment of overshoot. But that is possibly better tuned using some other devices plumbed into the same circuit.

Rather than an MBC, we did some experiments with using a variable pressure blow off (almost the opposite to a regulator) and a regulator as an MBC, which had some interesting results, especially in theory, but we did not pursue them far enough to reap decent results. Although we did manage to test some outrageously complicated plumbing with various valves!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Porsche
Lockton
Pirelli
Officially approved
Oracle Finance
WEX Esso
Collecting Cars
Archant Dialogue
Back
Top