I do tend to agree that low boost will be a good idea. Also, a blow off valve (bov) before the throttle body to ensure that you do not overboost...that is, if I understand correctly a nice belt and suspender addition. A weaker spring in the wastegate should allow much more pressure to escape. I am leaning towards the "Precision" 46mm wastegate. It seems it is derived/copied/cloned from the Tial but is a couple hundred buck cheaper at just over $300. The car forums are all over the place on the two...lots of loyalty to the Tial, but they do not knock the Precision, just wonder if the intellectual property may have been...uh, borrowed from Tial. That being said, Tial apparently "borrowed" design ideas from Garret and/or Turbonetics about ten years ago. Who knows????

Mr. Slade,

I do have a couple of questions for you. I want to pull the trigger on the Turbonetics trubo pretty soon. My welder returned my manifold today all welded up except for the wastegate flange. I gotta wait until I get the wastegate for that flange. BTW, the manifold looks pretty nice. I hope I laid it out well.

I am likely going to purchase from AGP. Questions???? IIRC, your turbo is the "wet housing". I assume this means that is has some sort of ports that allow coolant to flow through the turbo. Am I correct in this assumption? How difficult was this to plumb in? I again assume that this is to provide additional cooling. Correct?

Second, I believe your compression trim is the Super 50 (2.122/3.200), but what is your "Turbine Wheel"....F1-62 or 65 or 68?

Here is the link to the order page and these are the drop down questions from the site, thus my curiosities. http://www.agpturbo.com/product.php?productid=16140&cat=252&page=1

Thanks John.....and all others who choose to chime in. THIS IS the time to chime in guys and help prevent me from being my own worse enemy....the butt you save may be MINE!!!!!!!

All the best,

Chris Barber

Houston, GSOT

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net] on behalf of George Lendich [lendich@aanet.com.au]
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 2:03 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Fw: [FlyRotary]

Al/ Chris,

I'm certainly no expert on Turbo, nor are some who purport to be experts. There are those who are genuinely very knowledgeable in car turbo, but for aircraft use it's another matter entirely.

From discussions on here and other sites, it would appear to me that Turbos fail because of the high heat at high rpm over extended periods and the overspinning in thin air at altitudes. All that sounds fair and reasonable to me.

Some builders have overcome these problems by trimming internal blades and making the waste gate as big as possible - in other words making the internals so that the exhaust has more room to escape, placing less stress on the turbo.

I notice that some car applications have remote turbo allowing the exhaust gasses to slow and cool before entering the turbo. For our application we don't need all the energy from the exhaust, so we don't need all that heat and exhaust pulses hammering the turbo, as it does continuously if it's in close proximity to the engine.

For my application, if I need turbo, I will place the turbo remotely and only bypass enough exhaust energy, by way of a 'Y' section in the exhaust pipe, to the turbo. The bypass should be cockpit adjustable for different applications requiring different energy requirements - as in the wategate..

Hope you see some merit in my thinking.

George ( down under)

I know you're fairly entrenched in the 13B approach, but for the sake of

discussion, I'm not sure that's a valid reason.

How high do you want to go? I think Tracy's been over 15k with an NA

13B. I'd be willing to bet that a Velocity with an NA 20B could get well

over 18k without a problem.

As I recall my analysis those many years ago; the cross over point on power for a turbo-normalized 13B and a NA 20B is at about 13,500’ msl. Above that altitude the torbo 13B will do better. Of course you can boost the 13B to more than 30” and get more power.