charge piping size
 

what are the advantages/disadvantages of going with a larger or smaller charge piping size. i'd like to go 2.5" but was thinking with my 67mm tb it might be better to go 3". i'm thinking there might be more lag with a larger diameter because it would take the compressor longer to fill that extra volume. any thoughts are appreciated.

Re: charge piping size
 

My friend is using 3" charge piping from the turbo to the intercooler we'll see how that works out. I would've just stuck with 2.5" but i would like to know for sure as well

Re: charge piping size
 

I would stick with a 2.5..........a 3 imo will cause unneccesary pressure drop

Re: charge piping size
 

what is the 67mm closer to? i would go with which ever is closer to the size of your TB. i have always used 2.5" just because it connects to my TB pretty evenly

Re: charge piping size
 

i think the amount of pressure drop would be significant.

i have charge pipes that measure 2" going from the turbo to the IC and then from the IC to the turbo and is 2.5 and i felt the change when it was all 2" all the way through.

Re: charge piping size
 

3in piping is usually used on cars/engines putting out big numbers like
supras and stuff. I dont think hondas should go higher than 2.5.
2.75 with internal mods
stock 1.5/1.6 ---2.25 diameter. Less volume to fill and pressure will build up faster for boost. my $.02

Re: charge piping size
 

a local shop owner built an EG hatch with LS turbo running 28psi.... made 525whp

his charge piping is all 2.25"

Re: charge piping size
 

^^^
that was post 666 for you buddy :-X :P

Re: charge piping size
 

aaron,

slowmotion here (company im doing some things for) puts down 521whp on their integra, and it has 2.5" piping. all their other 400+whp cars are on 2.5" as well.

the only 3" piping ive seen around here in person are the big boys, supras/rx7, and theres one 2g DSM with 3" piping, but it is a 10second car.

Re: charge piping size
 

i think i may go with 2.75" that puts it at just under 70mm, so 3mm larger than the butterfly valve. otherwise i think it'd be a waste to use the 67mm tb without the flow to match it. it isn't easy to find aluminum mandrel bends. :P

thanks for the input guys.

Re: charge piping size
 

I would never go over 2.5 for charge piping. In most cases 2.5 is too big for most applications

Re: charge piping size
 

Mine is gonna be 2" ID

Re: charge piping size
 

werd. it's not going to benefit you to have larger pipes just to be closer to the actual t.b. size. you will still benefit from the larger bore t.b. simply for the fact that it will allow more air in and faster, so no need to try to match the size.

Re: charge piping size
 

http://www.burnsstainless.com/Alumin...minumtube.html
http://www.roadraceengineering.com/mandrelbends.htm

Re: charge piping size
 

To convert metric to english, divide it by 25.4 67mm is like 2-5/8"...

I didn't put much thought into my setups. My turbo was 2" and my side mount was 2", so I went with 2". My TB is 2-1/2" so I added a reducer after my IC and converted to 2-1/2"

But now my FMIC is 2-1/2" and my TB is 2-1/2" but my turbo is still 2", so I added a reducer right after the turbo and went 2-1/2" throughout. I have yet to really drive it, so I don't know how much better or worse it will be.

Re: charge piping size
 

The only reason to go bigger NA or boosted is to lessen the presure drop in the pipes. Pipe friction which causes pressure drop is related to the velocity in the pipe. The bigger the pipe the slower the charge has to move through it for the same volume flow.

This might get you thinking that bigger is always better...not true...The charge pipes have a bigger volume to fill when the pressure rises (LAG) and if you have to reduce for the TB then thats a big pressure drop in reducing neglecting what you got with the bigger pipes.

One sentence answer...Match the size of the charge pipes to the TB.