D-RobIMW
www.imwtuned.com
- First Name
- Derek
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2017
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 1,075
- Location
- Carlisle, PA
- Vehicle(s)
- 2017 Civic Si, 2019 Accord Sport 2.0T, 2001 Integra Type R, 2019 RDX A-Spec
My apologies for the delay in this post, but I was indeed giving the manufacturer the benefit of the doubt in regards to the rather lackluster performance the car exhibited on the dyno.
The turbocharger on Franco's car is a 6+6 compressor wheel unit that Comp is marketing as substantial flow upgrade over the stock unit. In testing on both 91oct and ethanol blended fuel, the turbocharger was slow to spool (peak torque was reached at 4,400rpm), but it consistently made less power at the same boost pressure as the Vit-developed 11-blade compressor wheel turbo that Dave here has.
At 28psi, the 6+6 unit made 285hp and just under 300tq on the ethanol blend. Dave's 11-blade unit made almost 20whp more at the same boost pressure, and responded much faster in testing. The peak power did carry better than most stock turbo cars I've worked with, but the trade off for the midrange/response loss essentially makes the gains up there a wash.
When confronted about the poor response and lower flow rate, Comp turbo insisted that the results @VitViper shared in December were from their 6+6 compressor wheel, and that's what they were basing all their "testing" on. The truth is that they have zero real world data regarding this turbocharger. It was reported to me via Vit that the 6+6 wheels not only underperformed in his initial testing, but they also led to broken shafts (broken shaft = game over for the turbo), hence the reason why the only turbo that ever worked and went on to live a life was the 11-blade compressor turbo that Dave now owns (and we saw very similar results with on the dyno).
Comp then responded to me, claiming that Vit was lying, and not them. If Vit was lying, why did the 11-blade compressor perform as expected?
I did not want to get to this point, but Comp is essentially unwilling to admit that they are selling an untested (by them) turbocharger that offers marginal benefits for the laziness of the turbo.
I expect the base model upgraded turbochargers to respond slightly quicker, but they will be crippled by exhaust pressure that's astronomical.
My professional recommendation currently is the 27Won turbo if you want a stock frame replacement that works well. There are a few other companies that I see have started bringing stock frame turbo's to the market, but I haven't had a chance to deal with them yet (Pure Turbos is one I'm interested in seeing in person on my dyno).
The turbocharger on Franco's car is a 6+6 compressor wheel unit that Comp is marketing as substantial flow upgrade over the stock unit. In testing on both 91oct and ethanol blended fuel, the turbocharger was slow to spool (peak torque was reached at 4,400rpm), but it consistently made less power at the same boost pressure as the Vit-developed 11-blade compressor wheel turbo that Dave here has.
At 28psi, the 6+6 unit made 285hp and just under 300tq on the ethanol blend. Dave's 11-blade unit made almost 20whp more at the same boost pressure, and responded much faster in testing. The peak power did carry better than most stock turbo cars I've worked with, but the trade off for the midrange/response loss essentially makes the gains up there a wash.
When confronted about the poor response and lower flow rate, Comp turbo insisted that the results @VitViper shared in December were from their 6+6 compressor wheel, and that's what they were basing all their "testing" on. The truth is that they have zero real world data regarding this turbocharger. It was reported to me via Vit that the 6+6 wheels not only underperformed in his initial testing, but they also led to broken shafts (broken shaft = game over for the turbo), hence the reason why the only turbo that ever worked and went on to live a life was the 11-blade compressor turbo that Dave now owns (and we saw very similar results with on the dyno).
Comp then responded to me, claiming that Vit was lying, and not them. If Vit was lying, why did the 11-blade compressor perform as expected?
I did not want to get to this point, but Comp is essentially unwilling to admit that they are selling an untested (by them) turbocharger that offers marginal benefits for the laziness of the turbo.
I expect the base model upgraded turbochargers to respond slightly quicker, but they will be crippled by exhaust pressure that's astronomical.
My professional recommendation currently is the 27Won turbo if you want a stock frame replacement that works well. There are a few other companies that I see have started bringing stock frame turbo's to the market, but I haven't had a chance to deal with them yet (Pure Turbos is one I'm interested in seeing in person on my dyno).
Sponsored
