Forced Induction Custom FI Setup Questions

.48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-19-2006, 01:22 AM
  #21  
0.0 BAR
 
MikeJ-2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

I'm telling you, I measured them, mic and all. I don't believe they are different, and I also don't believe that .156 smaller front of the blade is going to make a lick of difference.


I think we're debating a mute point. These aren't space shuttles.


MikeJ-2009 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 03:38 PM
  #22  
1.0 BAR
 
sixsick6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 378
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

Okay. I'm telling you that there is a difference between the 50 trim and 60 trim wheel. I work in a turbo shop and have been dealing with turbos for longer than HMT has been around. If you still need clarification on the difference in wheels, read the posts above. If you still don't get it, read them again. If you still don't understand, look at the compressor maps to see how little difference there is at low boost levels with either wheel. You won't notice anything drastically different (measurable, not butt dyno) unless you actually get on the dyno and crank up the boost on both to find a point where the 60 trim outperforms the 50 trim.

If you have both wheels in front of you, measure them again and put a new battery in your flashy digital mic while you're at it.

My measurements are correct, yours are not. Again, you're correct that it matters little but I've already said so.
sixsick6 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 06:49 PM
  #23  
0.0 BAR
 
MikeJ-2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

All hail the guy finally proclaimed himself as a turbo genious. I'm glad we're past that.
MikeJ-2009 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:37 PM
  #24  
1.0 BAR
 
sixsick6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 378
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

I figured you'd say something like that. You've got nothing else considering that I'm right and you're not. My problem wasn't with the difference in the wheels, only that there is one. Semantics aside, I've already said there is little difference performance wise bestween the 50 trim and 60 trim wheel. You won't notice much difference at all until you get into the higher boost levels. You said the wheels are the same, I'm telling you that they're not.
sixsick6 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 10:23 PM
  #25  
0.0 BAR
 
MikeJ-2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

If I did it, and put it on a DA integra running 10 psi, your ramblings wouldn't make a damn difference if it doesn't make a difference until high boost levels. I measured them, and came to the conclusion that they are the same. You didn't measure them, but claim to be a turbo god. Either way, it doesn't make a difference to me.


Originally Posted by Stealthmode
I came to the conclusion that they are the same. JD said they are different, but he never said why he thinks that.
If you notice, I don't speak "in fact". That's why I gave the information as far as JD saying they were different but I hadn't heard why he thinks they are different. I guess that was enough for you to grace us with your holy knowledge of turbo's. With 10psi, your own argument doesn't mean anything anyway.
MikeJ-2009 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 11:09 PM
  #26  
1.0 BAR
 
sixsick6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 378
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
If I did it, and put it on a DA integra running 10 psi, your ramblings wouldn't make a damn difference if it doesn't make a difference until high boost levels.
Exactly. Notice I said "there can be a point where the 60 trim outperforms the 50 trim".

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
I measured them, and came to the conclusion that they are the same.
Exactly why I said "your measurements and you coclusions are wrong" because they are. A 60 trim wheel is a 60 trim wheel just the same as a 50 trim wheel is a 50 trim wheel. I don't care that you don't care that there is a difference, except for the fact that you're saying they're the same, they're not.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
You didn't measure them
Why would I tell you the measurements if I hadn't measured them? I've worked with Garretts for years. This is not the first time I have measured them.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
but claim to be a turbo god.
Don't put words on my keyboard. I said I was correct, and that your conclusion and your measurements were wrong. I'm sorry that you can't handle being wrong, but you are.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
Either way, it doesn't make a difference to me.
Close enough isn't good enough for everyone. Maybe good enough is good enough for you, but it isn't for me. Your calculations and your conclusion are wrong, end of thread~


Originally Posted by Stealthmode
If you notice, I don't speak "in fact". That's why I gave the information as far as JD saying they were different but I hadn't heard why he thinks they are different.
Oh okay. I told you why they're different.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
I guess that was enough for you to grace us with your holy knowledge of turbo's.
I don't know everything but I know more than most. I also know when I'm correct.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
With 10psi, your own argument doesn't mean anything anyway.
I said in the very beginning that there isn't much of a difference between the two wheels when you're running low boost. Did you miss that?
sixsick6 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 11:14 PM
  #27  
0.0 BAR
 
MikeJ-2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

A difference of .156 would definately be noticable without a mic. I'll go ahead and say you have your turbo's mixed up. There wasn't a .156 difference. Someone in the area has the turbo's in question. It just may be worth having them remeasured. I'm sure this argument will come up in the future as more people do the housing swap.
MikeJ-2009 is offline  
Old 01-20-2006, 12:08 AM
  #28  
1.0 BAR
 
sixsick6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 378
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
A difference of .156 would definately be noticable without a mic.
Exactly. Which is why I questioned your measurments in the first place.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
I'll go ahead and say you have your turbo's mixed up.
LMAO. I'll go ahead and say that you suck at measuring, or you need to change batteries in your mic, or that you suck at measuring AND need to change batteries in your mic. Or maybe my measurments are wrong just the same as these guys measurments are wrong? Or maybe Turbonetics is wrong too?

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
There wasn't a .156 difference.
Yes there is. You just didn't get it because apparently you suck at measuring. Or the 60 trim wheel that you measured had rubbed the housing?

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
Someone in the area has the turbo's in question.
Hopefully their measurments don't suck.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
It just may be worth having them remeasured.
For what? I told you what they measure, so did Turbonetics.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode
I'm sure this argument will come up in the future as more people do the housing swap.
Nobody ever said anything about not being able to do the housing swap. You said the 5o trim wheel and the 60 trim wheel were the same. They're not. You may not think that a difference of 4mm overall inner diameter is alot but it works out to be roughly 10% difference (increase) and close to 30% surface area.
sixsick6 is offline  
Old 01-20-2006, 01:03 AM
  #29  
0.0 BAR
 
MikeJ-2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

Yeah, you put a 50 trim wheel next to a 60 trim and it's not going to be the same. That's why I think you have the turbo's mixed up. Where does it specifically say that a 42/48 is a 50 trim and a 48/60 is a 60 trim? Turbonetics didn't make the GARRETT T3. Numbers found on a different manufacturers website doesn't seem to be as solid as me and my fucked up mic.

I'm not claiming one is a 50 trim, and one is a 60. I'm telling you that I measured them, and simply saying I don't know how to measure or my mic is fucked up still wouldn't let .156 past a retard. No really, I actually measured them. Shut your text book and maybe you'll see that they are the same size.


Originally Posted by sixsick6
Or the 60 trim wheel that you measured had rubbed the housing?
Wouldn't make much sense if your saying the wheel hit the housing and somehow .156 was cut off THE MINOR as you said it yourself. .156 of blade sure would look nice after it went through the turbo.

MikeJ-2009 is offline  
Old 01-20-2006, 03:30 AM
  #30  
1.0 BAR
 
sixsick6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 378
Default Re: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion

The minor is the outside fin and the one you measure. If the wheel rubbed the housing, it very well could take 4mm off. I could show you an RHC6 wheel right now that's rubbed the housing and doesn't show any clear signs of damage unless you look at it closely. The fins aren't sharp and there isn't any distortion beside the fact that it's missing material. Other than that it's clean cut and perfectly symetrical all the way around.

Newsflash- .60 A/R housings have 60 trim wheels and .42 A/R have 50 trim wheels. Call any turbo shop you want and they'll tell you the same thing.

You're just trying to save face for being wrong.
sixsick6 is offline  


Quick Reply: .48/.42 to .48/.60 conversion



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 AM.