Turbos!!!

kcjones · Post by **kcjones** » 06 Apr 2011, 22:51

So.... I've been doing a lot of junkyard research recently

I have a few inquiries and haven't truly been able to find solid answers.

Basically, I'm interested in a list of different models/sub models and their turbo sizes.

I know that most? GLT's 94-97 have a mitsubishi 13....but thats about it.
Most R series have the 16, but who has the 15??? Is it the 855? The T-5?

Also, I have seen many variations in markings on different 850 series: 850, 850 TURBO, 850 GLT, 850 T-5, 850 T-5R, etc

I'm especially interested in the "850 TURBO" as I think it has the 15 straight flange I've been looking for....

Are all 855's manual??? And what in the world is an 854?!?!?!

I feel pretty dumb now....I'll go.....

Post by **jblackburn** » 06 Apr 2011, 22:58

All 850's use a 15. T5, R, etc. The "R's" have a different exhaust manifold and program the turbo to "overboost" for up to 30 seconds to achieve the full 240 hp.

16 was used on the -70 series T5's and R. The 2000R got a 19T.

13 was used on 1997-2000 XC and GLT models.

1994-1995 used a conical flange.
1996-1998 used a straight flange.
1999-2000 used an angled flange.

kcjones · Post by **kcjones** » 06 Apr 2011, 23:13

You rock.

Now, to the tricky part. Would my GLT accept a 15? Or would the compression ratios defeat me?

I'm looking into manual boost controller and possibly ECU upgrade. But I have a feeling the 13 won't give me as much boost as the ECU can allow. Manual boost controller would allow me to somewhat bypass the computer, up to fuel cut. Big question, worth my time?

Post by **jblackburn** » 06 Apr 2011, 23:22

Sure, it'd work. People put 15/16's on LPT motors all the time. Your compression ratio is only .5:1 higher than the 2.3 motor.

Start easy - the T5 cuts fuel somewhere around 12-13 psi with a stock tune (rather harshly, as I found out when a vacuum line broke).

You might want to look into a real Stage-I tune before/after rather than the MBC or turbo swap. With the 15G, even with a tune or turned up boost past 10 psi, you'll lose a bit of that zip off the line that you probably like so much

gilhuly · Post by **gilhuly** » 07 Apr 2011, 06:32

Jack,

Why would he lose the low end torque of the 2.4? I have an R, but I've always wanted to pick up a 98 GLT or similar cheap and slap a 15G on it so this is an interesting conversation.

Post by **jblackburn** » 07 Apr 2011, 06:59

It'd have more torque low-down than a 2.3 motor for sure because of the slightly increased compression ratio and displacement without air being forced into it (the 2.3 is just gutless under 2500 RPM), but the majority of the low-end torque on the LPT engines comes from that little, quick-to-spool turbo. The same is true for the majority of Saab and VW turbo engines - they use smaller turbos that spool up quicker, but yield less HP in the top end.

Cars like the T5 and Subaru WRX's have big turbos that yield a lot of power, but the turbo lag is just ridiculous the bigger you go. Between the two, the S70 T5 lags a little bit more than the 850 T5 (part of that was ECU remapping for drivability, and partly because it's got a 16T instead of a 15G), but once you get the revs up, it pulls even harder

Volvo realized this later on and increased the engine displacements a little bit to yield a bit more power from the get-go and less lag. The 2000 V70R actually used the 2.4 engine with a hugemous turbo on it. They later went the way the other manufacturers did with most of cars - a good percentage of the P2 V70's/S60's have the 2.5T light-pressure turbo engine, and T5's are a bit harder to find. They're just more driveable around town where you actually need the power, and supposedly that's what Americans want.

Either way, without actual displacement like a big V6, there is a compromise one way or the other by adding a turbocharger to a small engine. You can spool quickly, but have nothing to give over 3500-4000 RPM; or you can take off slowly and have loads of power at the top end of your rev range. Newer cars like the BMW 335i and Ford Taurus SHO have a scroll-type turbo design that actually has both a little turbo and a big turbo for a powerband that provides torque throughout the entire rev range.

kcjones · Post by **kcjones** » 07 Apr 2011, 13:33

Supra twin turbos have been doing this for a long time

But they're impossible to find and even more expensive when you do.

Ya I'm starting to think more and more that my 13 will suffice. However, if I go ahead with an ECU upgrade and quite possibly a 3" DP, along with maybe a tougher wastegate spring, could I achieve PSI similar to the 15 with a quicker spool time?

Post by **jblackburn** » 07 Apr 2011, 13:39

The 13 can pull off around 10 psi (which is what a stock T5 runs), but probably not much more. Don't do it with a manual boost controller though - get a tune. Too much boost at too low of an RPM (as this can achieve) will bend rods.

Call around and ask what some different tunes do with a stock setup.

lexluther · Post by **lexluther** » 09 Apr 2011, 01:03

I just got an email response from IPD and was advised this when inquiring for a higher grade of tune

Quote"
This package and all the tuning are for Euro market cars and grades of fuel not sold in North America. MTE will not install this tune in a North American car. Tunes could be made for our fuel and car but the numbers would be different and “someone” would need to pay for all the development work and dyno time. IPD will not do this since the costs are drastically out of line with potential profits on the kits. The GLT cars are notorious for melting pistons under heavy loads anyway.

Bolting on 15g turbos is becoming a pretty standard “poor man’s R” upgrade these days. I have seen multiple cars fragged from this upgrade though. Marco will certainly do custom tuning work for these cars but due to different fuel standards, it is not the tuning you see listed for that kit and the numbers will be lower. It is not safe to exceed 1.1 bar on these cars.

Please keep in mind that this is a risky game. The GLT cars have developed a reputation for failing under moderate loads even in stock tune. High speed distance cruising is potentially dangerous and trailer towing for distance is absolutely out of the question."

My response
quote"Thank you for replying to me. Would an 2000 V70XC fall under this same category of risk since you mentioned GLT in your mail below. My understanding by talking to your customer service dept is that my engine carried several configurations of compression ration and bottom end engine components.

IPD closing
quote"Yes that would apply to all XC models. The issue is the compression ratio. Stronger bottom end is nice, but that is not the failure point.

kcjones · Post by **kcjones** » 09 Apr 2011, 06:57

Poor Man's R

Oh well, a guy can dream...