what is the neck area of a Turbo?

what is the "neck" area of a Turbo

  • red

    Votes: 44 69.8%

  • green

    Votes: 19 30.2%
  • Total voters
    63
J

jones95runner

Active member
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
1,432
Pretty simple, read this sentence, vote on your answer. No need to plead your case.


MWE groove must be inside neck area where intake cover is measured 3.0"
84mm_zps39d78cd5.jpg


Sorry Weston for stealing your picture.
It's easy vote red or green.
 
If the Harts cover is still legal, then it's green.

The structure surrounding the front part of the wheel is technically called the "shroud," and when you cut a MWE into it for the main purpose of surge control, it's called a "ported shroud."
 
nwpadmax said:
If the Harts cover is still legal, then it's green.

The structure surrounding the front part of the wheel is technically called the "shroud," and when you cut a MWE into it for the main purpose of surge control, it's called a "ported shroud."
Click to expand...

How can you measure the intake cover at 3.0 in the green area?... see my point?
 
Say the majority believe the neck area is the red arrow, will it matter? I mean a lot of guys have disagreed with many of the rules, or the wording of the rules on here in many threads, but I'm not sure it has ever created an actual result in the ruling organization.
 
I have never seen so much b.s. over a turbo rule before. They need to clarify a little better so we can do what we gotta do for season.
 
Its in the eye of the beholder? LOL. At first glance, if where its measured, it would be red but green is where all the trick **** is done.
 
Where is the intake cover measured 3.0"? Is it in the green area or in the red area?

I'm thinking it's in the red area. As such, that's where the groove can be cut. It can't be cut farther down in the same area where the diameter is larger than 3.0", only in the section that's 3.0" in diameter.
 
There was one alternate definition posed in the other thread that makes some sense now that I've thought about it.

The wheel protrudes into the red area and that's where the bore measurement is taken.

The MWE is obviously going to be in the green area and I think what they're attempting to say is that the MWE must be behind ("inside") that - (as in, heading toward the center bearing section).

This would keep current PPL chargers legal, and would outlaw the MWE from being located in front of the wheel as was also mentioned as "illegal" in the other thread.

Or in other words the MWE can lay however you want but it must be behind the plane of protrusion.

Clear as mud!
 
From the way that sentence reads the groove must be in front of the face of the wheel. You don't measure the 3.0" bore behind the face of the wheel do you? At least not when the charger is assembled.
 
So this is what is considered "illegal" currently, but the rule wording may change again...

BDTurbo_zps6a900d6f.jpg
 
Why not just make it a 3.5 or 3.6 smooth bore class. That's essentially what it is now anyways. Power would be the same and chargers would be much easier to tech.
 
nwpadmax said:
There was one alternate definition posed in the other thread that makes some sense now that I've thought about it.

The wheel protrudes into the red area and that's where the bore measurement is taken.

The MWE is obviously going to be in the green area and I think what they're attempting to say is that the MWE must be behind ("inside") that - (as in, heading toward the center bearing section).

This would keep current PPL chargers legal, and would outlaw the MWE from being located in front of the wheel as was also mentioned as "illegal" in the other thread.

Or in other words the MWE can lay however you want but it must be behind the plane of protrusion.

Clear as mud!
Click to expand...

Took ya a few days but I think ya got it now......
 
Smokem said:
So this is what is considered "illegal" currently, but the rule wording may change again...

BDTurbo_zps6a900d6f.jpg
Click to expand...

I have seen a few different makes of turbos done this way and is what I believe they are trying to make illegal, the .200 grove on a 5" radius will flow a lot more air than I .200 grove at 3" or 3.2" radius. they are making the gove larger back at the wheel where it cant be teched with out pulling the cover but it is .200 out front.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    32.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
On the bd charger they are measuring the .200 at the face near the velocity stack. down by the wheel its and inch so you have a lot more wheel exposed to utilize the larger .200 ring. Now had they made the groove at the wheel .200 then that charger would be legal. You can do most anything to the cover as long as its .200 at the wheel and closer to the center section then the compressor nut.
 
Last edited:
Pretty simple math, surface area for 0.200" groove on the following;

82mm wheel ~ 4in²
92mm wheel ~ 4.5in²
4.8" area of the cover ~ 6in²
 
No mwe, no room for interpretation, pretty simple concept..... Pick a wheel size that gets the job done for the classes power goals and be done with it. Im still scratching head about these hacked up comp covers passing tech.
 
CurtisEmery said:
No mwe, no room for interpretation, pretty simple concept..... Pick a wheel size that gets the job done for the classes power goals and be done with it. Im still scratching head about these hacked up comp covers passing tech.
Click to expand...

It would irritate those who sell the trickery covers....

....and it would put whoever makes the best wheel out front....

....ponder on that for a minute.....
 
I was told the smooth bore was brought up and no one wanted to design new chargers to replace all the time spent making these current models
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top