58 replies to this topic

[DelawareT5M]

So considering this deal, would it be safe to run this setup for a 18T without building the engine?

[Spanky]

Nothing is really safe. I am sure it would be safer and less of a PITA over running a 19T on a stock setup.

[Ipd]

We put an 18T on a 1998 T5M with stage 1 software and beat the $4it out of it.
Never let go, been two years now.... Car had good maintenance and 80K on it.

[washdup]

Ipd - Lucky, on 16 October 2009 - 10:28 PM, said:

We put an 18T on a 1998 T5M with stage 1 software and beat the $4it out of it.
Never let go, been two years now.... Car had good maintenance and 80K on it.

That's the money quote right there. Save one for me.

[Ipd]

Not saying I recommend it, just saying I've done it. At your own risk...

[NyteMusic]

So, an 18T could go on a LPT (C70 in my case) no prob?

Thinking a 19T would be a bit too much...

[Spanky]

NyteMusic, on 17 October 2009 - 01:32 AM, said:

So, an 18T could go on a LPT (C70 in my case) no prob?

Thinking a 19T would be a bit too much...

Ya a 18T will fit on a LPT engine . You would have to ask someone who knows more about LPT engines, and also if it would exceed the limits of ur injectors at higher RPM's.

[Royalty]

oh wow what a break

[L8 APEKS]

As far as output between 18T and 19T, you're looking at max 485cfm on the 18 vs 500cfm on the 19. The difference is minute...like the difference between 15G (428) and 16T (435). May as well get the 19.

[washdup]

L8 APEKS, on 31 October 2009 - 10:08 PM, said:

As far as output between 18T and 19T, you're looking at max 485cfm on the 18 vs 500cfm on the 19. The difference is minute...like the difference between 15G (428) and 16T (435). May as well get the 19.

That may be true, but the spool-up characteristics are different between the two, with the 19T known to be more "erratic" and with earlier boost onset than the 18T (a potential threat to stock internals). The 19t came stock managed by a more advanced ECU better able to address these factors. That ECU is not compatible with the '98 and earlier ECU cars.

I originally thought the upgrade might suit my needs, but on further reflection, I need to do the swap in a weekend and would want to have it balanced if I were doing an upgrade, which eliminates the weekend possibility. So Spanky, will you sell me an 18T?

[Spanky]

PM sent

[volvoluvin]

new PM sent...

[B Mac]

19t all the way. Why would you opt for a less efficient turbo at the same price??? All you need is a good boost controller and you're fine...very very tempting for the time being.

[washdup]

B Mac, on 05 November 2009 - 12:52 PM, said:

19t all the way. Why would you opt for a less efficient turbo at the same price??? All you need is a good boost controller and you're fine...very very tempting for the time being.

At first I thought you were Long Beach. Seriously, if I'm not mistaken, the 18T was OEM on pre-'99 cars with the older style ECU, while the 19T only came on cars with the newer, more dynamic ECUs better able to handle its more erratic boosting characteristics. Maybe a good EBC can make up for the ECU's shortcomings; I've certainly heard evidence from many that it can (at least for some period of time). At this point, I was planning on just using my existing RICA 16T tune and no EBC, with an 18T. At some point I'm sure I'll seriously consider the cost and hassle of installing and then tweaking around with an EBC. In fact, I had seriously considered keeping the 16T and going with an EBC. At least the ridiculous 8 psi boost limitation in first gear could be eliminated that way, which would probably be bad for tires but at least my car could keep up with a Camry 0-30 then.

[Spanky]

volvoluvin, on 05 November 2009 - 06:57 AM, said:

new PM sent...

Never got it

B Mac, on 05 November 2009 - 12:52 PM, said:

19t all the way. Why would you opt for a less efficient turbo at the same price??? All you need is a good boost controller and you're fine...very very tempting for the time being.

Not really a good point. The 18T is going to be more efficient through the middle of the rev range. But yes when you about to make the compressor out the very end of the map shows better efficiency. You really cant say for "the same price". I would run a 18T on a stock BCS but I would not run a 19T (on 98>)unless I had a top of the line EBC. It surprises me how many people (and no not you Bmac) do not see how odd the 19T compressor map is. Its practically a vertical line on the left side .

washdup, on 05 November 2009 - 02:03 PM, said:

At first I thought you were Long Beach. Seriously, if I'm not mistaken, the 18T was OEM on pre-'99 cars with the older style ECU, while the 19T only came on cars with the newer, more dynamic ECUs better able to handle its more erratic boosting characteristics. Maybe a good EBC can make up for the ECU's shortcomings; I've certainly heard evidence from many that it can (at least for some period of time). At this point, I was planning on just using my existing RICA 16T tune and no EBC, with an 18T. At some point I'm sure I'll seriously consider the cost and hassle of installing and then tweaking around with an EBC. In fact, I had seriously considered keeping the 16T and going with an EBC. At least the ridiculous 8 psi boost limitation in first gear could be eliminated that way, which would probably be bad for tires but at least my car could keep up with a Camry 0-30 then.

I don't think you want to raise boost to high in first gear from my limited knowledge of engines (and thats not saying much ). I believe most companies might regulate boost in first because of engine load and the torque already endured with the shorter gear.

[volvoluvin]

SPANKY, on 05 November 2009 - 02:53 PM, said:

Never got it.

booo - Just sent another one...I'm in again basically...hoping things are still available.

[washdup]

SPANKY, on 05 November 2009 - 02:53 PM, said:

I don't think you want to raise boost to high in first gear from my limited knowledge of engines (and thats not saying much ). I believe most companies might regulate boost in first because of engine load and the torque already endured with the shorter gear.

Good observations. Personally, I was thinking 10 psi or a bit more.

[faterotong]

PM Sent

[volvoluvin]

I'm running a rica stage II tune "set-up" for my 16T, or so I'm told. Basically it's set to 18psi with appropriate fuel maps and timing I would guess...I never ran the 16t above 16psi as it didn't do anything to hp, going higher.
Should I worry about a re-tune for the change in turbo's? Or should I just proceed as normal and monitor with the WB...(I'm looking to hit 18psi).

[Spanky]

volvoluvin, on 06 November 2009 - 05:02 AM, said:

I'm running a rica stage II tune "set-up" for my 16T, or so I'm told. Basically it's set to 18psi with appropriate fuel maps and timing I would guess...I never ran the 16t above 16psi as it didn't do anything to hp, going higher.
Should I worry about a re-tune for the change in turbo's? Or should I just proceed as normal and monitor with the WB...(I'm looking to hit 18psi).

I would stick with the tune you have and see how it runs. From what I have heard on here the two tunes are very compatible. You will have the turbo off and your planning on putting on a new CBV. I would take the time to test the WG actuator, make sure its sealing and note how much play is in the actuator arm until you feel tension. Many of these things will be more apparent when you have everything off.

I really don't know anything about tuning. If you find out you have problems you should get a hold of someone like Lucky