When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yeah , I prefer the T3 as it enable closer fitting to the engine with less drama.
For testing the first one ..... I'll fit my older gtx3582 turbo with the T3 flange and maybe look at swapping back to a G30-660 T3 sometime in the future if someone takes my Vband setup.
How much to have another mold and casting made? Any discount for 10 or more because I'm pretty sure many people following this thread would be interested in pricing and delivery.
How much to have another mold and casting made? Any discount for 10 or more because I'm pretty sure many people following this thread would be interested in pricing and delivery.
I really want to prove it on my own car before making lots of them. My plan was to make 10 initially funnily enough. Maybe that will be all ..... depends on how it goes. I have already had to do a bit of a redesign to accommodate the larger 44mm wastegate.
You already know I agree which one will perform better, but at the risk of annoying you again, see *potential* for improvement. As you noted before, I could prove to be wrong about it though.
Is that work being done overseas or there in country? Might have an interest myself.
.
it doesn’t in theory due to the “unique to the Renesis” siamese center port being configured to flow in either direction (though it likely only flows to the turbo), but more importantly also serving as a potential relief path for backpressure imbalance on the rear rotor.
The advantage is the EWG relieves flow prior to the turbo inlet rather than having it exit after the traffic jam into it is already created with an IWG configuration. That’d be further compounded by IWG with the smaller entrance area v-band inlet. A larger T4 inlet with IWG might not have that issue, but would likely be dependent on power level and rpm limit, i.e. the resulting flow level it has to contend with.
.
Yeah, I definitely understand the benefit over IWG. Obviously packaging concerns are a big issue on the RX-8 platform, especially for RHD, so it makes sense. I guess the only way to "know" would be pressure sensors from each outlet port to study it.
Yeah, I definitely understand the benefit over IWG. Obviously packaging concerns are a big issue on the RX-8 platform, especially for RHD, so it makes sense. I guess the only way to "know" would be pressure sensors from each outlet port to study it.
Thanks!
Team explained it well. The unique nature of the Siamese port does allow some unconventional designs to actually work well.
You could put sensors on each outlet ..................... , or you could just try it out for long enough to be confident there were no detrimental effects. Which is what i'm doing
There is definitely not enough flow from just the end port though, with my latest fabricated manifold I cannot hold boost below 13psi at high rpm. This is in part due to the very efficient G30 turbo which doesn't need as much flow to power it up.
Hence the need for some design changes to favor more flow from the Siamese to the WG and the fitting of a larger wastegate.
It will be printed in a PLA material for the lost PLA casting process. Then cast in stainless.
This is something I have always wanted to try for simple things like throttle body adapters, and such ( I was considering for a elbow for a REW and rx8 throttle body) with Aluminum. Can't imagine stainless though.
I see a solid area under the bottom-side of the manifold. Is this to add either an EGT or EMAP sensor in the center of the manifold? Are you considering adding material at either end of the manifold to monitor each rotor EGT as well? I am not sure on EGT placement preference on a rotary though (distance from exhaust port).
I added an EMAP sensor to the top to possibly reduce moisture buildup in the line. I am not sure how often moisture builds up in EMAP lines, I know a few people that have had moisture in theirs.
Yes that raised part is for an EMAP or EGT sensor . I run a canister after the steel line to dampen pulsations and this also helps to keep moisture away from the gauge. I chose that spot because it's pretty much the only place that is easy to get to. IMO you don't really need EMAP once you have your system dialed in. It's not something you you refer to after that. Was not looking at adding any other spots for sensors.
I'd mostly want for comparing setups to show people differences of EMAP and turbo choices. Staf's find of the Xora Rotor 6564S trubo is an interesting, and made me really question EMAP data, at least for the initial tuning. Or for your sake of swapping turbos and turbine housings showing the pressure drop result.
Staf's find of the Xora Rotor 6564S trubo is an interesting
It’s interesting that you consider it interesting considering that there’s little - no data on it otherwise.
perhaps more often interesting is how some people are more prone to blindly jumping over a wall without any consideration for what’s on the other side, if only because they saw somebody else consider blindly jumping over the wall first.
I seem to recall that Darwin even developed a thesis on such a practice. .
It’s interesting that you consider it interesting considering that there’s little - no data on it otherwise.
perhaps more often interesting is how some people are more prone to blindly jumping over a wall without any consideration for what’s on the other side, if only because they saw somebody else consider blindly jumping over the wall first.
I seem to recall that Darwin even developed a thesis on such a practice. .
Interesting enough I emailed them asking for any support of a compressor and turbine graph. probably won't find one but
Not a "I am buying right now because their marketing has me feeling all warm and bubbly inside", just interesting.
Also I got a response from Xona Rotor about my inquiry. Not much valuable information, but claim the 6564S is better compared to a GTX3576R or EFR7670, though he doesn't state anymore on that topic. Specifically they suggested looking at the XR6157S. I did not specify this is going on a rotary though which was probably a mistake. Food for thought.
We have not yet released graphical compressor maps, but they will be added to the website in the near future. If you have specific flow value questions, please let me know and I can provide you with whatever information you need.
The XR6564S and G30-660 are not a very good comparison, however, so I will take a moment to compare aerodynamics:
G30-660:
54/67mm compressor stage, rated at 60lb/min of peak flow at an undefined efficiency rating (the flow line is below the 60% flow line, though).
60/55mm turbine stage
Garrett rates this unit for a range of 350-660BHP, but does not clearly define this based on the compressor flow map. 60lb/min would typically result in a peak rating of 600BHP, based on their own recommendations, and by current industry standards.
This unit is essentially an update to the previous GTX3071R Gen 2 unit, for reference.
XR6564S:
58/79mm compressor stage, rated at 65lb/min of peak flow at 60% efficiency.
72.5/64mm turbine stage, UHF design, with proprietary 5/5-blade split-blade turbine..
We rate this unit for a range of 350-690BHP based on engine efficiency and fuel choice.
This unit is better compared to units such as the GTX3576R Gen 2 and EFR7670, as it has a larger rotor group overall than the G30 models.
If you are interested in the G30-660, I would suggest having a look at the model below:
XR6157S:
55/76mm compressor stage, rated at 61lb/min of peak flow at 60% efficiency.
64/57mm turbine stage, UHF design, with proprietary 5/5-blade split-blade turbine.
We rate this unit for a range of 320-640BHP based on engine efficiency and fuel choice.
The XR6157S has several distinct advantages over the G30-660:
Larger rotor group for reduced rotor speed at higher flow rates
UHF turbine, which provides increased mechanical efficiency, to improve response, but with reduced exducer blade profile to reduce exhaust backpressure. Both features provide decreased pumping losses.
Multiple compressor cover options, including the X2CF90, which features a forward-facing, 90-degree outlet and the ultra-compact X1C housing.
Reverse-rotation versions will be available in 2022, but the alternative XR6155 is already available if that feature is necessary.
Multiple TiALSport investment-cast SS turbine housings, including 4 available A/R in the "F3V" (T3 inlet, v-band outlet) design, 3 available A/R in the "V3V" (v-band inlet/outlet, EWG) and 2 available A/R in the IWG designs.
Higher material quality, with our exclusive billet 17-7PH stainless-steel bearing housing and billet 6061AL seal plate, along with the investment-cast SS TiALSport turbine housings.
Exclusive, variable-preload, dual-row ceramic ball-bearing structure, which reduces efficiency losses based on rotor speed. It's also fully rebuildable by any TiALSport Master Distributor.
Significantly lighter weight and a more compact fitment
100% U.S.-manufactured product.
Again, as soon as we've completed graphical compressor and turbine flow maps, we will publish them to the website, but if there are specific flow/pressure/efficiency plot points that you need to have clarified, please let me know. I have all of the raw test data available for the 76HT compressor
used in the XR6157S.
Let me know if this is helpful to you.
Best Regards,
I think (based on the compressor trim) that the 6157 compressor would not work as well as the G30-660 as its best efficiency will be at a higher Pr , which wont suit a 13b. That's why you are probably better with the 6564 ..... But again , till you see the actual maps it's just a guess.
04-12-2021 | 11:53 AM
