The 2H/12H-T/1HZ/1HD-T/1HD-FT Gturbo Alternative Tech Thread (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

I think a slightly sub-optimal tune will have less impact on torque curve and power levels than a mismatched turbo.

If you guys are close with your tune, you should see a decent increase in power, even with stock pump and stock aneroid pin.
No amount of tuning will change the physical limitations of the turbo.

Stock pump is capable of supporting a pretty substantial increase in power.
If the turbo characteristics are close, and your tune is close, you should be amped, not under-whelmed.

With stock turbo, and stock pump, I had my 1HD-T running at 15psi, then upped it to 18psi and upped the fuel (had it boosting to 22psi for a while).
The difference between 15psi and 18psi would have been about 1/2 turn on the main fuel screw, and a long way of maxing it out.
The difference in performance was significant, definitely very noticeable.
I ground my aneroid pin to stop it cutting fuel when boosting above 15psi, apart from that, the pump was stock, and I was simply trying to maximise fuel setting and boost while staying within "safe" EGTs.

This was 10yrs ago (Graeme was still tinkering with stock ct26, and hadn't looked at IPs) with a stock turbo, therefore larger turbine than what is currently being used, so less responsive, and with smaller compressor than current upgrades, so less air volume, and well outside it's efficient range by a long way, so excessively heating the intake air.

Far from optimal turbo parameters, but it still ran like a scalded cat.

My supra setup is maxing out at 15 with the fuel screw wound flat bikkie on my 1hz.(unsafe) It makes more than enough power realistically for a 400k km old motor. I could spend way more time and money tuning it, however it is now going to live on a farm and be nothing more than a paddock basher for my stepdaughter until I reclaim it and rebuild it for a third time.

The supra turbo is definitely a cheap and viable solution for 1hz owners on a budget. It gives you enough punch to enjoy the 1hz on the highway while using easy to obtain factory components. (Just don't bend the compressor fins like I did while clocking the comp housing!

Keeping it in the family.:hillbilly:
 
Dougal I make mention of high emp as I read mmp customers were cranking up preload in an effort to build boost .

The turbo is often blamed for lack of boost but it's not always the problem . It can only do as it's told .

I suspect fueling as I've had better than reported results with larger/ less suited turbos . I could be wrong though, It could be something intenally causing resistance . Also the .42 a/r turbine housing will see higher emp at high power levels .

You need to pump numbers to this "higher emp" statement. Otherwise it's meaningless.

For my numbers, a turbo that delivers EMP lower than boost (at 1800rpm) with a hot turbine can deliver EMP of double boost while accelerating to higher rpm with a cold turbine (40psi EMP, 20psi boost).

The 40psi EMP is not a problem that needs solved. It is the only way turbine can extract power from cold exhaust gas. Anything you do to reduce that 40psi (i.e. weaker wastegate spring) will reduce the performance of that turbo in that condition. Reducing boost and richening AFR.

Turbines are driven by temperature, pressure and flow. Reduce any of those and you reduce their power.

You said you hadn't measured shaft speed, only assumed it based on boost . You also said emp kills power . But then disagree with what I say

Hang on a minute. I did not say "assumed", I said "approximated". Approximation in this case is by calculation. But there's no point doing that unless you are worried about over-speed.

Excessive EMP does kill power. But EMP is also what drives your turbo. Try to kill EMP and you've killed all boost.

Doing things to drop EMP (like using weaker wastegates) have consequences for turbine power and boost. The only single thing you can do to improve EMP while not hurting turbo performance is to find a more efficient turbine for those operating points.


Wastegates do not change a turbine map or characteristics. All they do is bypass exhuast to control boost.


That's it.

I have a good example here of a particularly badly suited turbine that I built to a turbo and fitted anyway. At 3000rpm with 15psi boost it was taking 60psi EMP. The engine produced no power and that was all the boost it could produce.
Same turbo compressor with a better suited turbine and it was around 25psi EMP for 20psi boost.
I've fitted a larger turbine housing to the same (better) turbine wheel and compressor for another test but unfortunately mislaid my EMP gauge at the time so I have no EMP numbers but they were lower.
Top end power was great, low end sucked. Turbine could not choke the exhaust enough to generate enough EMP to produce enough shaft power.

The bigger turbine housing also bought lower fuel economy. Mainly because I had to go down a gear more often.

Shaft speed can change independent to boost when emp is excessive .

No it can't. Follow shaft speed lines on a compressor map. To change compressor speed you're moving between these lines which changes PR (boost).
 
I really like the tech on this stuff, but it's sad this conversation happened after a group buy on an unproven turbo.
I don't think it was unproven. I saw dyno charts before the group buy went ahead. I'm sure there's more to come performance wise. Anyway, bloke in WA has got the Procharge 18g roller bearing turbo on the rollers. 20 psi at 23:1 and returning very impressive numbers :cool:
received_1679660275385809.webp
 
Rob if it's proven then why so much complaining? Am I missing something?

I'm not ready to give up. Like I said a few posts ago as far as we know everyone is still on their stock fuel pin and my bearing was bad. Once someone posts AFRs and dyno numbers I don't think we can condemn the turbo yet.

Do I wish I had spent the extra money on a GTurbo, yes. Then I would know my tuning or the engine was the problem. The new Procharge ball bearing turbo costs the same as a Bad Boy.
 
I really like the tech on this stuff, but it's sad this conversation happened after a group buy on an unproven turbo.
Rob if it's proven then why so much complaining? Am I missing something?
I did post the dyno print I was supplied for this turbo as part of the group buy.
It made 240whp @22psi @22:1 AFR on a 1HD-FTE on 33" tyres.
14psi by 1650rpm and 22psi by 1800rpm from memory.
This is a slightly different turbo to what @vwluv10338 and myself have but could be the same as @MonsterCruiser turbo.

The issue we are having is that we are struggling to replicate the numbers advertised.
With my crude tune and shimmed wastegate I am still spooling at roughly the same rate as my stock CT26 did, but now the boost continues to rise instead of stopping at 15psi.
I have a slightly larger (73mm vs 71mm) and different (7+7 vs 11+0) compressor wheel to what was advertised so that could explain some of the differences I am seeing.
 
I'm not ready to give up. Like I said a few posts ago as far as we know everyone is still on their stock fuel pin and my bearing was bad. Once someone posts AFRs and dyno numbers I don't think we can condemn the turbo yet.

Do I wish I had spent the extra money on a GTurbo, yes. Then I would know my tuning or the engine was the problem. The new Procharge ball bearing turbo costs the same as a Bad Boy.
I'm not ready to give up yet either. It's a work in progress at this stage.
I still don't know if I want a Gturbo yet. This was not a $3000 turbo. I'll see where it takes me for now.

@Dougal How do you explain the lack of power produced by a setup with high EMP?
 
How did the turbo company tell you to tune it? If you want to reproduce their results, do what they did. It sort of sounds like the boost anaroid catch 22. No boost so it won't give you fuel....no fuel so you can produce enough energy to spool the turbo. To bad you couldn't do an android delete. Eventually I'll have to make a turbo for this engine, although it is a bit of a princess.
 
How did the turbo company tell you to tune it? If you want to reproduce their results, do what they did. It sort of sounds like the boost anaroid catch 22. No boost so it won't give you fuel....no fuel so you can produce enough energy to spool the turbo. To bad you couldn't do an android delete. Eventually I'll have to make a turbo for this engine, although it is a bit of a princess.

It should be possible to pull the aneroid pin, replace the cap and diaphragm sans pin and run it without.
Set fueling with the main fuel screw and adjust idle speed, set max fuel for a safe EGT at WOT, high load pull.
it'll likely be smokey down low, but your right foot plays a part there.
It might be a worthwhile experiment, easy to tweak with only main fuel screw and idle speed to play with.
 
If you were successful in doing that it would allow you to get the most power out of this engine. By itself It might the single greatest advancement for the 1hdt. It's always been held back by all this busness of trying to have your cake and eat it too.
 
Yep, and block the boost reference to the diaphragm.
I will give it a go at some stage, hopefully soon. I am struggling with time to spend playing also.
 
I did post the dyno print I was supplied for this turbo as part of the group buy.
It made 240whp @22psi @22:1 AFR on a 1HD-FTE on 33" tyres.
14psi by 1650rpm and 22psi by 1800rpm from memory.
This is a slightly different turbo to what @vwluv10338 and myself have but could be the same as @MonsterCruiser turbo.

The issue we are having is that we are struggling to replicate the numbers advertised.
With my crude tune and shimmed wastegate I am still spooling at roughly the same rate as my stock CT26 did, but now the boost continues to rise instead of stopping at 15psi.
I have a slightly larger (73mm vs 71mm) and different (7+7 vs 11+0) compressor wheel to what was advertised so that could explain some of the differences I am seeing.

Did they show A/F at the 1650 and 1800rpm points? Do you have the other compressor measurements?

There are many ways to get fantastic spool numbers from a turbo. Retarding injection timing is one. Matching a turbo is juggling compromises and it all depends which compromises you're willing to make. Retarding timing for faster spool (with worse fuel economy) isn't one I'll make.

For me if a turbo won't do better than a factory turbo with a factory tune, then it's too big. Having to richen and/or retard to get it to boost means it's too big.

I'm not ready to give up yet either. It's a work in progress at this stage.
I still don't know if I want a Gturbo yet. This was not a $3000 turbo. I'll see where it takes me for now.

@Dougal How do you explain the lack of power produced by a setup with high EMP?

Excessive EMP (like my 60psi example) is literally an exhaust brake. It takes a huge amount of power to pump exhaust out against that pressure and that pressure also traps more exhaust in the cylinders (internal EGR) which reduces volumetric efficiency and also lowers A/F ratio.
 
If you were successful in doing that it would allow you to get the most power out of this engine. By itself It might the single greatest advancement for the 1hdt. It's always been held back by all this busness of trying to have your cake and eat it too.

I think it's been demonstrated that the boost compensator does not hold back what is possible with the 1HD-T series. people's understanding of it possibly does.
 
Yep, and block the boost reference to the diaphragm.
I will give it a go at some stage, hopefully soon. I am struggling with time to spend playing also.

It would not take long to do. It would give you an opportunity to do a rough and dirty tune, and take the question mark over tuning out of the equation.
 
Did they show A/F at the 1650 and 1800rpm points? Do you have the other compressor measurements?
No I do not have the spool AFR numbers.
The advertised compressor wheel is 53.5mm inducer, 70.5mm exducer with a 0.6 AR housing.
I didn't measure my inducer. @vwluv10338 got a smaller compressor wheel. 68mm was it?

There are many ways to get fantastic spool numbers from a turbo. Retarding injection timing is one. Matching a turbo is juggling compromises and it all depends which compromises you're willing to make. Retarding timing for faster spool (with worse fuel economy) isn't one I'll make.

For me if a turbo won't do better than a factory turbo with a factory tune, then it's too big. Having to richen and/or retard to get it to boost means it's too big.
Fair call. You have much more experience than I do.

Excessive EMP (like my 60psi example) is literally an exhaust brake. It takes a huge amount of power to pump exhaust out against that pressure and that pressure also traps more exhaust in the cylinders (internal EGR) which reduces volumetric efficiency and also lowers A/F ratio.
So it kind of works the way I was describing on the previous page yeah?
 
Last edited:
I don't think the mmp turbo should be condemned as poor design until the conditions from the posted dyno are replicated for another run on a different car. If the turbo performs close to those results it would be ok. Maybe there hasn't been enough R&D by the manufacturer, but I'm not going to judge it until it's been set up properly
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom