GTC1444VZ in an ALH

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Thanks Rub87 - We've tried moving the timing around at low RPM, but I was not able to tell much of a difference between the tunes since there was such a difference in the turbos. Not saying that it's not there, but I wasn't able to see the difference on such a different setup than I'm used to.

I'd like to dyno it, however that will be a while. I wanted to work on it over christmas and get the actuator fixed and work on the tuning a bit, but it's not looking like that will happen with family plans and such. It's perfectly driveable now so should only get better once I get everything dialed in.

After driving it for a few weeks now, I can tell that it will definitely be hard on tires . The limited slip is working more than it used to, particularly with my snow tires. It feels a bit like driving a semi with a 15 speed - accelerate, shift, accelerate, shift, accelerate shift, accelerate shift and now you're doing 40 MPH . Handy thing is that it does not really matter if you're in 3rd, 4th or 5th gear - if you want to accelerate, just lean on the throttle and away you go.

 

[m1ketdi]

Andy, I think he's asking why you would need to keep it below 1300 deg F. EGT limits on these turbos are probably at least 1650, maybe even as high as 2000F

For something durable you don't want egt's more than 1550f steady state full load. Something that most tuners won't be able to check though...

Don't know any manufacturer rating their diesel turbo above that for steady state..

 

[Rub87]

Not sure, running my bv43 for over 200k km with egt over 900 deg in 3rd gear, sensor died soon but turbo keeps on going, I drive every day in germany over 200kph

 

[m1ketdi]

you see peaks of 900 deg,

did you see 900 deg constant when cruising at 200+kph?

 

[Rub87]

Much more, I used fo reach 900 deg at end of 3dd wot, so 4 th, 5th and sixt are formsure higher, sensor was only good till 900 deg. Its running lambda 1.1 at 4000 rpm, grey haze

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

See post 4 for a video of boost, EMP, Actuator Vacuum, AFR, IAT, RPM and MPH

 

[TDIMeister]

Love the gauge/EMP gauge and AFR :thumbup:!

 

[Rub87]

Put 20psi on the dial at 1400 rpm, nice!

That boost emp gauge is damn nice, also love the way it reacts, not to slow, not too fast

 

[Alcaid]

Looking good! Now add the LP stage

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Thanks for the kind words - the gauge is a no brainier, I should have done that years ago.

Alcaid - here's a teaser...

 

[Alcaid]

Looks familiar where's the compressor bypass valve in this family photo?

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Still in it's box - hoping I can run straight compound and keep the 1444 out of choke at high RPM's. The math says it should be ok until ~4000RPM where I can taper it back a little and I don't typically run high RPM's anyway. It simplifies a lot of things - of course that assumes I've done the math right

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

I've had my only minor issue in the last ~10k miles with this turbo...I recently replaced my brake pads & rotors since they were "done" to say the least.

Before changing them, I had some misc squealing that sounds like the wear indicators rubbing on the calipers. Replaced the pads and rotors and the squealing got worse? Turn to the right and the squealing goes away, turn to the right and it gets worse - drive down the road and it comes and goes, sometimes squealing continuously. ***?

So, this weekend I get the car up on ramps looking for a dust shield rubbing on the new rotor or something, nope, plenty of clearance. So I'm sitting there rather perplexed at what is making this noise and happen to shine my light up at my right axle and notice that it's nice and polished bare steel... Hmmmm. Seems that my compressor outlet hose was rubbing on the axle causing the squealing. The little stud welded to the frame that holds the pancake pipe up broke off years ago so it's just the hose holding it in place which allowed it to get "under" the axle when I went over a bump or something one time.

No holes worn in it yet, but it's getting thin. No problem, It's an OEM VNT15 outlet hose and I have a spare. Well, long story short, the 1444 compressor outlet is the same diameter as a 17/22 which is bigger than the VNT15 and there was no way that I was going to wrestle the new hose on the turbo outlet while it's on the car. So after all this, I ended up putting the worn hose above back on the car and rigging up a way to hold the pancake pipe up close to the frame so it can't get pulled down under the axle again and start rubbing.

I've got an expander plug in the "good" VNT15 hose stretching it out so that hopefully I can get it over the turbo outlet without pulling the turbo out of the car. For now, no long high boost runs and if it does blow, I should be able to limp home

Otherwise, the turbo has been flawless - still don't have the actuator set properly, but all in all it continues to work well.

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

I had an extra hour last weekend so I modified the Turbo Inlet Pipe so I could put my MAF sensor back in as I'm looking to go back to a MAF based tune instead of MAP only. Just for grins, since the MAF sensor is back in the car I put my RC6 ECU in (setup for the 17/22 turbo instead of the GTC1444VZ) just to see what happened...

Oh
My
Torque!

It's hard to describe, but it puts new meaning into point and shoot - almost instant response, minimal smoke and then only on 100% throttle or tip in below 1500 RPM. Now, it's got a few bugs and what not at higher RPM's, but below 3000 it's an absolute riot to drive.

 

[Rub87]

I once saw a RC6 tune, no smokelim or torquelim at all so not really neccesary to use a HFM

 

[jsrmonster]

Matt what injectors r u running? Rc6 is for r520s and 11/12mm. Anything less will be starving for fuel after 4k Rpms.
Easy fix or run stage 5 for smaller fueling mods.
Jeff

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

R520's and 11mm is what I've got in it now. To be clear, this was just an experiment to see what happened. I know it's not optimized and some of the issues in higher RPM's are NOT tune related - EMP's get pretty high because the turbo is small and my VNT actuator is still all cobbled together, etc.

Jeff - I'll shoot you an e-mail or give you a call to discuss further.

Rub87 - what is an HFM?

 

[Rub87]

Hfm is airflow meter =)

 

[K.I.T.T.]

Plan on fixing the actuator any time soon?

When you do, I'd really appreciate it if you could post some boost logs from VCDS.

Ash

 

[Rub87]

+1!!!

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Unfortunately, probably not - it works so well as it is. Not that it couldn't be better, but it's a fair amount of work and I'd rather put my time toward other things like cylinder pressure measurement, on car dyno, compound turbos, family stuff, etc

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Thanks for the kind words - the gauge is a no brainier, I should have done that years ago.

Alcaid - here's a teaser...

So, I'm putting together the exhaust manifold for compounding the 1444. I've got a layout that locates both turbos behind the engine and keeps the downpipe in relatively the same location as stock. The HP bypass wastegate will be fed from one end of the manifold and the 1444 will be fed from the middle. The below pictures are just for 1-1/4" vs 1-1/2" comparison, this is not how it will be laid out.

My question is: is there and advantage to going to a 1.5" header vs a 1.25" one? Or maybe better stated, is there a disadvantage to the 1.25"? There's a 36% area difference between the two (both schedule 10 Stainless). The ports in the head/plate are just a touch (5% maybe) smaller than the 1.25" once it's squeezed into an oval shape. Near as I can see this is still larger than the OEM cast manifold

No one area of the manifold will see the full mass flow of the engine since the HP turbo and 38mm External wastegate are in parallel. I remember on the intake side of things there being an insignificant difference in theoretical boost response with larger intercooler/plumbing. I'm guessing that this would be the same on the exhaust side?

I can make either size work, but space is at a premium with this layout so If I can save 3/4" it'll make a couple other things easier. My gut tells me to make the 1-1/2" work...

 

[Alcaid]

Smaller volume in manifold = quicker spool ( faster to get up to the needed EMP to drive the turbine(s) and 1.25" is big enough in my opinion

 

[TDIMeister]

^^ +1.

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Smaller volume in manifold = quicker spool ( faster to get up to the needed EMP to drive the turbine(s) and 1.25" is big enough in my opinion

I think I'm re-stating the obvious here, but I'd rather ask to be sure...

The "Faster to build the needed EMP" is due to the lower volume in the manifold, not the the restriction of the manifold itself, right?

The only thing about going with 1-1/4" that makes me take pause is that each individual exhaust port is just a little smaller than the ID of the 1-1/4 tubes. Will combining cylinders into a marginally larger area create a restriction or will it be a potential benefit by making the exhaust port effectively longer?

This manifold design won't be optimized for much of anything except space and fitment and I think in concept the restrictions should be the turbines, not the tubing which is leaning me to 1-1/2".

Tell me again that 1-1/4 will be ok at 200-250 HP

 

[[486]]

If you're concerned, cut both the Ts in half (cut vertically right through the middle of the #2&3 ports, as they are in the pic), frankenstein them together and have the small side toward the outboard cylinders. Larger diameter after the inner cylinders' ports.

Assuming the turbo flange is going dead center in the middle of the mani.

 

[JFettig]

1-1/4 is bigger than the AFN manifold I am using!

 

[Alcaid]

Faster spool due to smaller volume, yes

You run out of turbo way before 1-1/4" manifold will be a limit. It's good for 400hp++

 

[TDIMeister]

I wasn't asked for my expertise but I'll give my 2c anyway. I echo what Alcaid said. The manifold cross-sections being already larger than the exhaust ports will not be the bottleneck. And since the exhaust pulses are occurring at 180° CA intervals, with stock or near-stock exhaust valve opening timings (189° CA @ 1mm) there will be minimal cross talk between cylinders and the secondaries don't need to be any multiple larger in cross section than the primaries; matching the turbine inlet cross section will be more than adequate.

Nevertheless, I prefer to pair 1-4 and 2-3 primaries before they dump into the turbine to mimic the benefits of a dual-entry inlet and keeping lengths as close to equal as possible. While I have sketched out on paper how this could be realized in 14 gauge or Schedule 40, I haven't studied the manufacturability in detail because of the fairly tight bend radii that would be neeed.

 

[Fix_Until_Broke]

Thanks for all the responses and explanations - I appreciate it. I ordered the rest of the material to finish in 1-1/4 sch10 which should be here this week.

This manifold will not be all that pretty or optimum from a flow standpoint - HP turbo will be in the center-ish, but no paired primaries, no equal lengths, wastegate will be off one end etc so there will probably be some wierd stuff happening there.

It's all about function at this point as this car is still my daily driver so I'm trying to build as much outside of the car as I can so when the time comes, I can minimize my downtime.