Turbo Kits currently available?

[Claviger]

Doing some more turbo sizing work, I think the GT28R (GT2560R same thing) is going to be just right for a turbo that is basically always spooled up and flows enough air to be fun. Ball bearing, Internally gated, .60AR, 60mm compressor and flows enough for about 300hp. It’s also relatively inexpensive at $850 from ATPturbo.

Since the R3 is relatively mildly tuned as delivered it’ll probably get choked off by the stock cams and their tiny lift some. overlap is already small (a good thing for turbos), and duration is already fairly long. So the weak point I thinking is going to be the clutch trying to cope with 200-250 lbft.

The great thing about the R3 design is the very stout internals and dual plug pent-roof chambers. Translated, it means it should be highly detonation resistant.

Fueling wise, I’ll end up using a 7000RPM full power R3T map, something like Power Tripp’s map with less ignition as the base tune and do a MAP vs RPM table in PC-V. Thinking I’ll zero out the L-table and F-L switch. Have it tuned without turbo like that.

The result should be a true AlphaN TPS vs RPM map for the base ECU, and with the O2 disabled it won’t adapt, exactly what I want. Then tune PC-V to do all the compensation required for the extra air flow with MAP vs RPM as speed density.

GT2560 map. At 2 BAR absolute it’s capable of flowing more than 33lb/hr and, at the 1.5 BAR absolute I’ll start at, it’ll be in the 70% efficiency range rising to 74% at 1.75BAR, a good boost pressure of 11PSI, certainly possible as a daily boost level which should be 200-230 hp.

Now, going for a race bike or just big power, I think the R3 would match really well with a G550, the new garrett snail, but it’s like $2000 and way overkill for a daily bike, it would be possible to hit like 500+whp if anyone’s interested in setting some new records

 

[Tripps]

I didn't think an R3T map could be loaded on the other bikes, different ECUs?

 

[Joesmoe]

Soundin' kinda iffy for the "buy two, sell one to me" plan.

 

[Joesmoe]

ECU's are by year . . . not model.

Same ECU - different maps between Roadster and Touring.

 

[Claviger]

Yeah this is for touring, but the actual data in the map, the numbers in the table are universal as the motors are physically identical.

To clarify this is not going on my roadster.

Things left to look at:
Price of carpenter clutch springs.
Closely examine piston ring lands on the stock pistons.
Oil return, still haven’t gotten to it, but I really want to avoid making any new holes .

 

[Grumpy Ole Codger]

@Claviger , please keep this thread updated with your thoughts and progress It is proving to be exceptionally good reading plus the level of knowledge and technical know how is mind boggling to those of us who are more cranially challenged.

 

[Claviger]

So, looking at the stock pistons, the ringlands don’t inspire a ton of confidence, but I’m far from any sort of expert on the subject. I’ll wait on a decision but I’d rather not have to crack open the motor.

Looking into JE 327209, 10.5:1 piston kit, it’s $402. Thinking it may be money well spent, and if going that route might as well up the boost target to at least 14.7 PSI, or 2 BAR absolute. Suddenly 250-300 is a very real prospect.

I’ll wait on those who’ve personal turbo kit experience on an R3 to speak up. The stockers may hold up fine to 11PSI, I suspect they will as long as detonation is avoided.

EDIT: did find this which is an interesting read, it seems stockers are fine for moderate boost under 300hp.

 

[Tripps]

ECU's are by year . . . not model.

Same ECU - different maps between Roadster and Touring.

Hmmm, sure about that?

Edit: you may be right, they are both Keihin, I thought one was Keihin, the other Sagem. I must be confusing my Sprint and Daytona 955s, too many bikes I guess.

 

[Claviger]

Interesting reading below. I know it doesn’t always play this way, especially in fringe cases.

TLDR: I’ll be figuring out how to make very very short runners to spoil the turbo quickly, and equal length is meaningless

Log vs tubular vs equal length tubular on a 2.0 motor, relevant because the turbo is very similar to the GT28R on the hot side.
my spool results of log vs tubular manifolds logs spool was faster but make was less - Honda-Tech - Honda Forum Discussion

 

[Speedy]

That Rev Hard cast manifold is horrible: dead heading, sharp 90 degree bends, large plenum volume compared to individual runner area. Not at all what I would call a good log manifold.

Individual runner fabricated manifolds maximize the pulse energy of each cylinder's exhaust event. The task is to merge them as close to the turbo flange as possible so that the collector volume remains small as practical. Runner length is not as important unless they are radically different or long. The total volume of each runner affects the pressure at the turbo. Long large runners have big volumes (keep ratio of cylinder volume to runner volume low.)

If the turbo housing is near the height of the exhaust ports, you may be able to add a bung directly to the dry sump tank for oil return. Perhaps sandwich an adapter under the tank to route scavenged return oil through a cooler and then back to the tank. Good oil temp control will reduce piston heat loads.

Also, no need for three throttle bodies. One stock one will do just fine in the right place. Weld bungs to your plenum for the factory fuel injector locations but move the throttle blade elsewhere. No syncing needed, fewer leaks, and less complicated. This will give you more room for a good plenum and let you attach it directly to the stock boots.