New Borg Warner S300sxe Turbos

blackmega3500 said:
Lbs per min is the focus, pressure is a measure of restriction.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where this blanket statement originated, but it would be wise if people stopped using it.

I also find it interesting the claims being made considering how similar the SX-E frame is to the previous S300 frame. I agree they are a great value and perform very well, but it seems odd that it appears the S369 is the suggested solution for every instance.
 
Last edited:
blackmega3500 said:
Lbs per min is the focus, pressure is a measure of restriction.
Click to expand...
I get that but I don't know how to measure lbs per min. But am able to measure psi through a stock 24v head with afe intake horn and crazy Carl tunnel ram. So I ask about psi

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
The amount of pressure a turbo can safely operate at is a totally valid question. That's why pressure ratios exist. Just knowing the lbs per min something is capable of us virtually useless.
 
lenahan05 said:
We've been pushing them into the 70s on boost pressure. No issues so far. We've had great luck with them. Looks like the people that are having lag issues need to spend some serious time tuning their trucks. Lots of fuel on the low end does not help your lag issues. .91 T4 is perfect for 12v daily drivers. Weve been running 1.0 on the 6.7 CR with nothing but great results and not a single failure yet. Many are wondering the limit of this turbo. We haven't seen it yet. A good gated manifold and some good tuning, and these turbos cant be beat for the money invested. Our dyno results have shown theres not a better option out there for the money. If anyone has any questions about the sxe s3 and s4, give me a call before 5pm and Ill be more than happy to help with your questions with the results we have currently.
812698-1736
Click to expand...

You think the 369 is a better option than say a 467?
 
Smokem said:
I'm not sure where this blanket statement originated, but it would be wise if people stopped using it.

I also find it interesting the claims being made considering how similar the SX-E frame is to the previous S300 frame. I agree they are a great value and perform very well, but it seems odd that it appears the S369 is the suggested solution for every instance.
Click to expand...

I was specifically referring to usable pressure assuming the ratios are kept in the safe zone. The original question was asked regarding how much psi can they make...... well then that leaves a lot of probable answers and I think you'd agree. We could always have just said.... "it's billet!":hehe:

Also the thing people loose sight of and as you'd agree the harder the air is charged the hotter the charged air will be..... unless the trucks on drugs to help cool the air pre or post charge.

Also just curious, what application did you test the 69sxe on?

On a side note, now the ambient temp here in Texas was almost 90* (and I'm about 100ft above sea level) yesterday I've definitely noticed a tad bit more lag off the jump. Nothing crazy, but my egts are up about 50-100* aswell.

Just food for thought for anyone, that deals with hotter climates.
 
Kick Start said:
You think the 369 is a better option than say a 467?
Click to expand...
I am positive the 369 is a better option. We dyno back to back with no changes the 300 and 400 frame. The results and driveability on the street speak for themselves. Not to mention the cost difference.
 
lenahan05 said:
I am positive the 369 is a better option. We dyno back to back with no changes the 300 and 400 frame. The results and driveability on the street speak for themselves. Not to mention the cost difference.
Click to expand...

Thank you for doing real world test and giving input.
 
Sorry to clarify I meant how much psi can the 69 make efficiently.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
would anyone have the list a turbine hosuings and part number for the sxe models ?
 
ehines218 said:
Sorry to clarify I meant how much psi can the 69 make efficiently.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Let's give her hell and see what makes the most power. If someone has a compressor map we can find you an answer to your question
 
Chrisd91 said:
Let's give her hell and see what makes the most power. If someone has a compressor map we can find you an answer to your question
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, just because a charger can flow 100 lbs/min at blah blah blah pressure ratio, doesn't mean the engine can actually ingest that flow rate.

I've always wondered what mass flow rate these engines can actually consume at each fixed rpm/temp/pressure ratio. For example: stock engine 5.9 CR 3000 rpm, 150* IAT, 4.0 pressure ratio sea level what's the mass flow? Because if you keep the density fixed (pressure&temp) and rpm fixed, the engine can only ingest a finite amount of air. To get more air in you'd have to raise density (more pressure/less temperature) or change volumetric efficiency via rpm change or porting/valve train etc.
 
You know what..., using a speed sensor would be the easiest way as long as you stay in the map. Use the rotor speed and pressure ratio to plot the point on the map and read the corresponding mass flow. Suddenly I want to get one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top