Non-seq has more stable power output, no dip, and smooth mid-range.

What's to debate about that? I really do not understand why one would think that because a car is non-seq that one also cruises around at 5000 rpm all day. I've got a 5th gear, just as you do. You want to floor it for whatever reason? Sure, go ahead; but i'll be downshifting seq or non-seq.

 

If you do highway driving all the time, sure.

I had my Charge Control solenoid fall on me, basically venting most of my primary boost until the secondary kicked in. So, for a while I had a semi-nonseq mod going on (built about 5-6 PSI on primary) and I'll tell you, it sucked. Hated it.

Non-seq is not for everyone....

 

I have a DP resonated MP and the RB duals...Honestly, I didn't notice much of a differnce when the MP went on....However, I did notice that when the secondary kicks in it screams and has a nice deep tone...I recently went single and it doesn't sound as loud as I want it so i am going to stick on a straight MP before tuning...The folks in my compled are going to hate me.

 

That ain't semi non-seq. That's just crap.

A failed CCV without a fully open TCA would completely suck.

Anyways, it's not about "highway" vs "non-highway." I don't floor the accelerator I'm driving around town, even when it was seq. Drive a non-seq car converted correctly.

In the meantime I'll enjoy my extremely predictable, simple, and reliable configuration. Have fun with the transition dip.

 

Actually, it's about the same. I had full boost at 4500rpms and I built boost before that, similar to non-seq. I basically built boost 5-6 PSI until around 3800 or so which was about 8 PSI and then full when the secondary came online.

Grant, a full non-seq would build sooner, but I've been in a fully modded non-seq car and it doesn't build boost as fast as some of the "guess RPM quotes" around the forum.

Been there, done that. Hated it.

Actually, in my car at least, you don't even feel the transition. A friend of mine who runs the BNR's Stage 3's non-seq even noted that (so it's not just me being "used" to it).

The "transition dip" problem is overrated just like people saying too much lag with single turbos.

 

Good point.

 

Jeff, I'm not going to argue the merits (or lack thereof) of non-sequential with you, because I just don't care any more. But I will say that if you don't want to downshift and don't want to wait for your power, you've got the wrong engine under the hood.

 

Same here. My transition is pretty smooth, and I don't have a problem with a power spike kicking the rear end out accelerating out of low or medium speed corners under various throttle settings at the track, even full throttle in many circumstances (after being told horror stories of such before I bought the car). Granted, my FD is stock port with stock flywheel, and my seq system appears to be in good working order (furiously knocks on any wood in the vicinity).

 

I think many ppl that note the dip (I surely do) have a slight problem in seq system. It's either TC solenoid or the one controlling the secondary prespool.

Sometimes ppl just drive around and think its normal and that nothing is wrong. Like me until recently

 

Yep, I've driven a V8 FD Jim, I guess you've probably driven someone's also.

The difference is I drove them back to back, no the same auto-x course, I know exactly what the difference is and it is dramatic. I know you haven't done that, so really your just speaking from your dyno sheet of a 396 or your Z06 experience...

I heard someone say this too "if my first turbo pulled as hard as yours does, I might not have done the conversion". You can take that quote to the bank...

With non-seq vs seq setup, don't argue because you can't, do a comparison with similarly modded cars running the same boost on a dyno graph (your good at that right?), same power, less powerband.

Sure, most people would like to drive a car with the SAME hp and a narrower powerband...

 

RB is not loud.

It's perfect for the masses (little too quiet for me).

Rynberg is right.

Anything quieter would me reverting back to the stock CB.

 

I have a non-sequential setup and Race ported motor.... with HKS ddownpipe, stock cat, and the RB duel. I do get same boost pronblems such as getting boost at 4000 rpms..... but if I put a midpipe ... I will not get boost lag that much???? is that true?????
Plus....What about noise levels??? will it be loud as hell????

 

????????????

 

I get this feeling that his ar might not be tuned correctly or is running rich.

This may have clogged his main cat, thus killing the boost.

 

Yea..... it is running rich...... hmmmm...and you are probably right... I just might have clogged the main cat..... but how do you know if you did???

 

Huh?

 

HA!

 

Jim, I think it was sarcasm. You should recognize it

 

Of course he does.

Hence the

 

Just like people saying non-seq isn't suitable for the street or anything other than highway driving.

 

You make it sound like seq is just free torque curve across the board, hey 1 turbo here, 1 turbo after, right; and as if non-seq is somehow robbing the driver, since I'm building peak boost later, then I must not be getting all the torque of seq, right?

There's no free lunch.

IT TAKES FLOW TO PRE-SPOOL THE SECOND TURBO, PERIOD

Non-seq, I'm taking the hit early and having a linear mid-range -> hi.

The freakin' dyno graphs speak for themselves. This topic has been argued so relentlessly and every damn time it's someone with the stock seq system plain talking **** on non-seq configurations.

CFM is CFM. Whether you want to spool the turbos in serial and take the torque dip later, or spool them in parallel and take the lack of torque immediately, but gain a strong mid-range, it ends up being the same in the end (except for non-seq having 20 less things capable of going wrong, a rats nest blanketing the engine, and the absence of any various flapper doors, etc. robbing flow).

I tend to drive in a commited fashion. If I'm going to drive fast, I prepare to downshift. What's so hard about that?

 

Well, I never said "it isn't suitable", I said "I hated it".

 

Seq vs. non-seq, same boost same mods. Seq has a broader powerband. Simple.

 

Excuse me?? Non-sequential has more area under the curve, therefore non-sequential has the broader powerband. Jesus Jeff, you're really starting to worry me.

See if you can spot the broader powerband...

 

Jim, Brooks dyno is seriously fucked up. I made a lot more torque below transition than that with just a downpipe and cat-back at 10 psi.

The FACT is that a non-sequential car will only make more torque from about 3800 to 4500 rpm. Below 3800 rpm, a sequential car will make more. After 4500 rpm, they will make the same. Jesus Jim, you're really starting to worry me....

Here's my original dyno followed by a non-sequential forum member running more boost and tuned by Steve Kan. Look at the torque.