2.5 2012

[bad12jr]

My thing with the workstock turbo rules are that newer trucks have a huge advantage. A stock turbo 7.3 cannot and will not be competitive with a stock charger. They wont hold up on the street with a stage 2 injector let alone pulling. A s364 or 366 on the other hand will hold up much better and flow air equivalent of some newer stock chargers. That would greatly even the playing field. These chargers can be had cheap and will still be comparable flow wise to a stock appearing stock charger. A t4 mount and box s366 could be on my truck for less then 1500. A stock rebuild is 800 to 900. A d66 is 1100 as is a 38r. So why even consider not going with a more durable setup.
But on the occasion I decide to pull a few times a year ill have to run with 2.6. And have no chance. With a 2.5 rule a stock charger truck would still run well. Hell a make the weight different for a 2.5 charger. 7400 for 2.5 and 8200 with a stock charger.

 

[carpenca]

A 2.5" bore. In which you could house a much larger exducer, and also having a MWE groove which air can be pulled through. Now if you would have said a 2.5" bore with no MWE groove, then yes, that could be compared to a restrictor. Like you said, it's not rocket science.

Exducer size only determines pressure... NOT FLOW! Plus there is no such thing as a 2.5 cover with no MWE groove, which allows custom charger shops to make money! A 2.5 Bore limits the amount of air to the amount of air that will pass thru a 2.5" opening. The MWE serves its purpose to broaden the compressor map, however overall flow is determined by the inducer.

My thing with the workstock turbo rules are that newer trucks have a huge advantage. A stock turbo 7.3 cannot and will not be competitive with a stock charger. They wont hold up on the street with a stage 2 injector let alone pulling. A s364 or 366 on the other hand will hold up much better and flow air equivalent of some newer stock chargers. That would greatly even the playing field. These chargers can be had cheap and will still be comparable flow wise to a stock appearing stock charger. A t4 mount and box s366 could be on my truck for less then 1500. A stock rebuild is 800 to 900. A d66 is 1100 as is a 38r. So why even consider not going with a more durable setup.
But on the occasion I decide to pull a few times a year ill have to run with 2.6. And have no chance. With a 2.5 rule a stock charger truck would still run well. Hell a make the weight different for a 2.5 charger. 7400 for 2.5 and 8200 with a stock charger.

This is exactly why the 2.5" WS class is a good idea! It levels the playing field, and like I said before it doesnt play the advantage to the guys that can hide the baddest "Stock Appering" turbos and get away with it.

The Advantage goes to the guys that can set there trucks up and drive. This season has proved HP doesnt always win.

Caleb

 

[Smokem]

Exducer size only determines pressure... NOT FLOW! Plus there is no such thing as a 2.5 cover with no MWE groove, which allows custom charger shops to make money! A 2.5 Bore limits the amount of air to the amount of air that will pass thru a 2.5" opening. The MWE serves its purpose to broaden the compressor map, however overall flow is determined by the inducer.

Are you implying that a 2.5" charger with a larger exducer and MWE would not allow the use of a larger turbine wheel, and in effect produce more power capable than a box unit? If people were honest, a box turbo class could be possible, but that isn't going to happen in a competitive sport.

Since the possibility of everyone using the same charger is not an option, the only true way to limit flow/pressure by a bore limit is to eliminate the MWE, whether done on the compressor housing or by a restrictor. It is well known that MWE placement and size can alter hp drastically in the 2.6" class, do you not believe this will parlay over into the 2.5" class?

 

[revolutiondsl]

I love the restrictor tube idea so I dont have to buy another turbo. I havent been able to pull at hardly any 2.6 around here due to protrusion and with everything else I have going on I cant spend over 2k on a custom turbo. The restrictor allows anybody to pull as long as they have a tube.

 

[SmokeShow]

There will be no radical chargers no steped covers or clipped wheels....

Paul

Are you sure about that? If so, I guess there better not be any modified stock chargers in this class from fleece or Danville & whoever else stuffs bigger aftermarket wheels into stock charger housings by machining the housing and/or wheels to fit, right? . Yet it's already been posted that is exactly the what the current points leader is running. Even a video of him I believe - white ec lb duramax. So which is it, clipped/trimmed down bigger wheels or machined out housings are allowed or not? Because if it's allowed in a stock charger, it can be done to an aftermarket charger.

 

[x MadMAX DIESEL]

Subscribed

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[carpenca]

Are you implying that a 2.5" charger with a larger exducer and MWE would not allow the use of a larger turbine wheel, and in effect produce more power capable than a box unit? If people were honest, a box turbo class could be possible, but that isn't going to happen in a competitive sport.

Since the possibility of everyone using the same charger is not an option, the only true way to limit flow/pressure by a bore limit is to eliminate the MWE, whether done on the compressor housing or by a restrictor. It is well known that MWE placement and size can alter hp drastically in the 2.6" class, do you not believe this will parlay over into the 2.5" class?

Thats why most of the rules you see say no more than a .200 MWE groove IE: regulation. You cant have a "Street Class" which is what WS is suppose to be without a streetable charger, which is what you will have with a charger without a MWE, a surging, barking, pile of trash... Not to mention the fact you will have to buy a complete heavily machined cover to even make it happen, because there are few if any covers available on the market.

A no MWE groove charger class will kill the class, and the restrictor plate idea is just as bad. You are already limiting the bore with the 2.5" Straight bore rules! This is not NASCAR!

A bigger turbine wheel will gain you nothing, if you dont have the compressor to flow the air! The compressor wheel and compressor inducer IS YOUR RESTRICTOR

Caleb

 

[Smokem]

This is not NASCAR!

Again, when did Nascar start using turbochargers? Also, care to explain why almost every other organization of turbo motorsports uses a restrictor?

ThA bigger turbine wheel will gain you nothing, if you dont have the compressor to flow the air! The compressor wheel and compressor inducer IS YOUR RESTRICTOR

Heard the same arguement last year for the 2.6" class, how did that work out?

 

[carpenca]

Are you sure about that? If so, I guess there better not be any modified stock chargers in this class from fleece or Danville & whoever else stuffs bigger aftermarket wheels into stock charger housings by machining the housing and/or wheels to fit, right? . Yet it's already been posted that is exactly the what the current points leader is running. Even a video of him I believe - white ec lb duramax. So which is it, clipped/trimmed down bigger wheels or machined out housings are allowed or not? Because if it's allowed in a stock charger, it can be done to an aftermarket charger.

We have 10 customers that switched from our VNT's and Danville has several that stepped down to smaller turbos and they're still very competitive.

Look at Will Dahlenberg, and Tim Tuttle, Josh Dellinger that are pulling 2.5 in the midwest. They are true 2.5 bore turbo's. No steps, bushings, clips, or any other bull. It's straight bore that's how we're keeping it from ending up like 2.6.

Restrictor tube is a bad idea, from a packaging standpoint, and it pulls a vacuum on the front piston ring (shaft seal in the backplate of the turbo).

The guys that are running cheetah's from me or danville 68 turbo's get kicked, even if they have tapered covers. It's just that easy. Make an intelligent rule, and enforce it.

Brayden

 

[Smokem]

Restrictor tube is a bad idea, from a packaging standpoint, and it pulls a vacuum on the front piston ring (shaft seal in the backplate of the turbo).

A restrictor won't pull a vacuum if you're not trying to run a larger compressor behind it than what it will allow.

If the turbine makes no difference in power, why are people using 50cc's more fuel and winning with an HX60 over the S400's in the 2.6" class?

 

[oldestof11]

This is not NASCAR!

Ok, lets change it up a bit to something that allows diesels and restricts the incoming air for an EVEN playing field.

24 Hours of LeMans:

Engine equivalences 2009 2010 Variation (air restrictor surface, or supercharger pressure) 2009/2010
Diesel
(5.2 to 5.5l)
Restrictor
(for 2 restrictors) 37.9 mm 37.5 mm - 2.1%
Supercharger pressure 2750 mbar 2590 mbar -5.8%
Restrictor advantage
for closed cars 0.4 mm 0.3 mm
Racing
petrol
engine
(5.5 to 6l )
Restrictor
(for 2 restrictors) 32.5 mm 33.3 mm + 5%
Restrictor advantage
for closed cars 0.3 mm 0.3 mm

Hmmm.... Diesels getting a RESTRICTOR to limit total POWER output...

Linky:

ACO reveals 2010 Le Mans rules, diesels get more weight, less air Autoblog Green

 

[BluegrassDiesel]

There will be no radical chargers no steped covers or clipped wheels, all the tricky turbos happen in the "stock" "unmodified" classes, because if you think all those trucks have a bone stock charger your all crazy... no stock dmax charger sounds like a jet ready for take off and a stock turbo on a cummins with a smarty pump and injectors would only last a few hooks...

Why do you think changing the rule to 2.5 will automatically cut out all cheating/rule bending? I promise, people will still do what ever they can get by with.

Actually the stock LBZ and LMM chargers sound pretty close to a jet, especially if you modify the vane position a little.

OEM Stock UNMODIFIED turbo is about as close as you're going to get to an entry level class. If the workstock class here (stock unmodified turbo) is dropped for 2.5, I promise it will get out of hand. People already complain about there not being an entry level class; a switch to 2.5 would just push it farther away. It already takes $7500-$10,000 to be competitive in the workstock class.

 

[FIRST GEN. JAKE]

Why do you think changing the rule to 2.5 will automatically cut out all cheating/rule bending? I promise, people will still do what ever they can get by with.

Actually the stock LBZ and LMM chargers sound pretty close to a jet, especially if you modify the vane position a little.

OEM Stock UNMODIFIED turbo is about as close as you're going to get to an entry level class. If the workstock class here (stock unmodified turbo) is dropped for 2.5, I promise it will get out of hand. People already complain about there not being an entry level class; a switch to 2.5 would just push it farther away. It already takes $7500-$10,000 to be competitive in the workstock class.

i agree with you sir. workstock is closiest thing to entry level your gunna get around here except for street run what ya brung type classes which are getting harder to come by. i dont think 2.5 is the answer to ws or 2.6 but a good middle ground for average diesel guys like me who are building a truck but dont really want to run a stock charger but cant afford to run 2.6. i like the idea of a 2.5 class with box stock s366 or s364 but you are correct people will always bend the rules and cheat no matter what i dont care if you have 15 different classes. in the end you have to a steady foundation of rules and enforce them by teching folks.

 

[carpenca]

A restrictor won't pull a vacuum if you're not trying to run a larger compressor behind it than what it will allow.

If the turbine makes no difference in power, why are people using 50cc's more fuel and winning with an HX60 over the S400's in the 2.6" class?

You already answered that question yourself a couple of posts above. In 2.6 you can have a 3.4" Compressor wheel hiding behind a floating 2.6" bore. Which means the compressor will pull air thru the MWE. So... The turbine is not making the HP, they determine when the charger lites and the shape of the power curve.

Again... If you have a straight 2.5" bore, with a .200 MWE groove, it will make only so much power. This rule is RESTRICTING the power on the trucks, same as a restrictor tube, plate...

This class will not go down the same path as 2.6, the rules are set with no grey areas. There will be no 3.4" compressor hiding behind a 2.5" bore because... NO CLIPS, NO TAPERED COVERS, NO BUSHINGS are allowed.

This is not a hard concept to grasp... This class has worked exceptionally well, even on a national level IE: INDY NHRDA. Truck counts are up, and the competition is tight.

Everybody is welcome to come out to North Salem, IN on Sept 3rd and see what this class is all about. It gives every Joe a equal oppurtunity to move the same amount of air, and GIVES THE ADVANTAGE TO THE DRIVERS AND THERE ABILITY TO SET THE TRUCKS UP!

The results from the hooks this year have proven that the HP is limited, and that the High HP trucks dont always win.

Caleb

 

[Smokem]

This class will not go down the same path as 2.6, the rules are set with no grey areas. There will be no 3.4" compressor hiding behind a 2.5" bore because... NO CLIPS, NO TAPERED COVERS, NO BUSHINGS are allowed.

No grey area? There is no exducer limit. And your about 10mm too big on your 2.6" compressor assumption.

Do you honestly think that if the class continues to grow that people won't bend this rule like they have in every other class?

Why does Superfarm limit the turbine if a larger turbine doesn't make more power?

You can always cheat flow/pressure when an MWE groove is present, why do you think many tractor classes use a slick cover?

To say this class won't go down the same path as the 2.6" class if you only enforce a plug rule is foolish.

 

[oldestof11]

Carpenca, I have shown real world results on the tube. Why can't you accept that it may be a good idea?

You can only suck so much through a 2.6" smooth bore...

 

[Got Smoke?]

Yea times like thats what made me want to get into it, now iv finally got a dedicated truck to build but it seems kind of pointless now...

Heres Scottsville 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-8b8CFaY1I

and heres Scottsville this year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWVgIGsWmiw

Not talking bad about any of them, im good friends with most of them, just crazy how much stuff has changed.

Hey I'm in that first video @ 5:20. LOL

I'm right there with you James Lee.....I go back and forth in my head on a daily basis on do I keep buildling it as a 2.6 truck or do I put it back to a hot street truck to something I can actually enjoy. :bang My biggest oke: is that I just regeared to 4.88's front and rear and locked the axles right before my last pull last year that did my motor in, and then I sold my OEM gears to pay for motor parts....again :bang if it still had 3.55's in the axles the choice would be easy right now.

"Money has ruined this sport" as one of my buddies said as we were exchanging text message's tonight. The Dillard's are nice guys I can't say a bad thing about them...hell I don't even know them that well just via Facebook........but I can't afford to keep up with them and now that they are running 2.6 in KTPA & KOTTPA it makes me think about giving it up that much more.

 

[Shep]

Why do you think changing the rule to 2.5 will automatically cut out all cheating/rule bending? :umno:I promise, people will still do what ever they can get by with. Agreed 100%
Actually the stock LBZ and LMM chargers sound pretty close to a jet, especially if you modify the vane position a little.

Hey, LLY's do too!oke:

i agree with you sir. workstock is closiest thing to entry level your gunna get around here except for street run what ya brung type classes which are getting harder to come by. i dont think 2.5 is the answer to ws or 2.6 but a good middle ground for average diesel guys like me who are building a truck but dont really want to run a stock charger but cant afford to run 2.6. i like the idea of a 2.5 class with box stock s366 or s364 but you are correct people will always bend the rules and cheat no matter what i dont care if you have 15 different classes. in the end you have to a steady foundation of rules and enforce them by teching folks.

Yep...rules don't mean a damn thing if they aren't enforced. I love the "Aww, come on man...it's "just" (insert rule needing to be broken here)" guy.:kick:

 

[MegaCabRam]

Hey I'm in that first video @ 5:20. LOL

I'm right there with you James Lee.....I go back and forth in my head on a daily basis on do I keep buildling it as a 2.6 truck or do I put it back to a hot street truck to something I can actually enjoy. :bang My biggest oke: is that I just regeared to 4.88's front and rear and locked the axles right before my last pull last year that did my motor in, and then I sold my OEM gears to pay for motor parts....again :bang if it still had 3.55's in the axles the choice would be easy right now.

"Money has ruined this sport" as one of my buddies said as we were exchanging text message's tonight. The Dillard's are nice guys I can't say a bad thing about them...hell I don't even know them that well just via Facebook........but I can't afford to keep up with them and now that they are running 2.6 in KTPA & KOTTPA it makes me think about giving it up that much more.

If you decide to put it back on the road holler at me, the truck im building has 3.55's so we could do some trading we could do the swap here at our shop and id throw in a little cash of course. Iv about decided to finish it then decide wether or not im going to sell it, id have a hard time getting much for it like it sets now

 

[Got Smoke?]

If you decide to put it back on the road holler at me, the truck im building has 3.55's so we could do some trading we could do the swap here at our shop and id throw in a little cash of course.

I will keep that in mind buddy.