bw S362 FMW
#1
bw S362 FMW
It looks like an insanely good turbo. Anyone tried it yet on a 13B or any other rotaries? Obviously it looks like a great fit for a 2 rotor with S362 size / S366 flow on the compressor side, really good ex/ind ratio on the turbine side with a new type of turbine design:
http://www.theboostlab.com/store/products/S362-FMW.html
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2268889
http://www.theboostlab.com/store/products/S362-FMW.html
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2268889
#2
I have been looking at this turbo extensively (mostly for my NSX, but was interested for the FD as well). I need to see more people's results though before ditching my perfectly good T04Z. However, if I were building a new setup I would be inclined to give it a try.
#4
I know a couple guys who run them. Great turbo that responds like the S360 but makes power closer to the S363, about 5 lb/min shy of an S366.
It will run circles around the T04Z. Not to say it will make a huge amount of power more, but it will do it more efficiently and spool better.
It will run circles around the T04Z. Not to say it will make a huge amount of power more, but it will do it more efficiently and spool better.
#6
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,136
Likes: 564
From: Florence, Alabama
comp is 62/83 56 trim
turbine is 68/76
the BW turbo i am currently attempting to evaluate is:
63/88
68/76
average compressor area
6.53 V my turbo at 7.06
turbine
6.31 V 6.35
looks good on paper.
my BW S300/63 has a nice hot size (v comp) the turbo really likes RPM. i have no doubt it will pull happily to 9000. my low EGTs (1500 at 8500) indicate this.
i will add it into my stickied turbo comparison thread...
howard
turbine is 68/76
the BW turbo i am currently attempting to evaluate is:
63/88
68/76
average compressor area
6.53 V my turbo at 7.06
turbine
6.31 V 6.35
looks good on paper.
my BW S300/63 has a nice hot size (v comp) the turbo really likes RPM. i have no doubt it will pull happily to 9000. my low EGTs (1500 at 8500) indicate this.
i will add it into my stickied turbo comparison thread...
howard
#7
That's awesome, Howard!
The dimensions aside, both the compressor and the turbine are very different in design with this FMW turbo. It'll be interesting to see!
The dimensions aside, both the compressor and the turbine are very different in design with this FMW turbo. It'll be interesting to see!
comp is 62/83 56 trim
turbine is 68/76
the BW turbo i am currently attempting to evaluate is:
63/88
68/76
average compressor area
6.53 V my turbo at 7.06
turbine
6.31 V 6.35
looks good on paper.
my BW S300/63 has a nice hot size (v comp) the turbo really likes RPM. i have no doubt it will pull happily to 9000. my low EGTs (1500 at 8500) indicate this.
i will add it into my stickied turbo comparison thread...
howard
turbine is 68/76
the BW turbo i am currently attempting to evaluate is:
63/88
68/76
average compressor area
6.53 V my turbo at 7.06
turbine
6.31 V 6.35
looks good on paper.
my BW S300/63 has a nice hot size (v comp) the turbo really likes RPM. i have no doubt it will pull happily to 9000. my low EGTs (1500 at 8500) indicate this.
i will add it into my stickied turbo comparison thread...
howard
Trending Topics
#8
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,136
Likes: 564
From: Florence, Alabama
"The dimensions aside, both the compressor and the turbine are very different in design with this FMW turbo."
yes, i agree. my dimensional comparison between turbos, using average wheel areas of course only goes so far. it does, however, provide an excellent starting point for comparing turbos.
turbos are exciting ATM as there are alot of forward strides being made and airflow is everything... all you have to do is compare HP and BOOST plots of a dyno run to see this.
any upward wiggle in boost and you have a bump in HP.
of course to be technically correct, it isn't boost as in PSI that gets it done, it is flow or the amount of oxygen molecules entering the engine.
hc
yes, i agree. my dimensional comparison between turbos, using average wheel areas of course only goes so far. it does, however, provide an excellent starting point for comparing turbos.
turbos are exciting ATM as there are alot of forward strides being made and airflow is everything... all you have to do is compare HP and BOOST plots of a dyno run to see this.
any upward wiggle in boost and you have a bump in HP.
of course to be technically correct, it isn't boost as in PSI that gets it done, it is flow or the amount of oxygen molecules entering the engine.
hc
#9
They actually arent. The turbine wheel use in the S362 FMW is the same as in Howard's turbo, and the compressor is only slightly smaller and capable of ~3lb/min less. Overall performance will be rather similar, with the FMW version being quicker spooling.
#10
From what I have read, it is the same turbine wheel as used in the original S362 (S300SX 8375), with a FMW compressor wheel similar to the one out of the newer EFR 8374 with different dimensions/trim (61.4mm inducer/83.4mm exducer on the S300SX FMW vs. 62.6mm inducer/83mm exducer on the EFR).
#11
From what I have read, it is the same turbine wheel as used in the original S362 (S300SX 8375), with a FMW compressor wheel similar to the one out of the newer EFR 8374 with different dimensions/trim (61.4mm inducer/83.4mm exducer on the S300SX FMW vs. 62.6mm inducer/83mm exducer on the EFR).
#13
#14
looking more into this turbo.. on nasioc they mention the option of getting the turbine in either flat tip or cup tip. in the original posting the boost lab doesn't seem to give the option and I'm not sure which one they're selling. Either way, which compressor option would be more ideal on a 13b?
#16
looking more into this turbo.. on nasioc they mention the option of getting the turbine in either flat tip or cup tip. in the original posting the boost lab doesn't seem to give the option and I'm not sure which one they're selling. Either way, which compressor option would be more ideal on a 13b?
#18
Clipping is simply removing material from the wheels. You'll typically see it on turbos that have bent fins from heat or erosion from debris. FYI Kg Parts use to sell the R85 turbo kits that were using S362 turbos. Though that specific S362 is different from what's being sold today you can still use that for a basis of research.
I owned an R85 turbo kit for a period, that's what started my love affair for Borg Warner turbos. I literally BEAT THE SNOT out of the turbo and never once had a problem with it. To get the exact specs of the older S362 (R85 turbo) search the threads for the one company that would do modifications to install a 66mm compressor wheel. From memory the turbine wheel was slightly larger and the turbine housing A/R was larger than the standard size offered today.
I owned an R85 turbo kit for a period, that's what started my love affair for Borg Warner turbos. I literally BEAT THE SNOT out of the turbo and never once had a problem with it. To get the exact specs of the older S362 (R85 turbo) search the threads for the one company that would do modifications to install a 66mm compressor wheel. From memory the turbine wheel was slightly larger and the turbine housing A/R was larger than the standard size offered today.
#19
Clipping is simply removing material from the wheels. You'll typically see it on turbos that have bent fins from heat or erosion from debris. FYI Kg Parts use to sell the R85 turbo kits that were using S362 turbos. Though that specific S362 is different from what's being sold today you can still use that for a basis of research.
I owned an R85 turbo kit for a period, that's what started my love affair for Borg Warner turbos. I literally BEAT THE SNOT out of the turbo and never once had a problem with it. To get the exact specs of the older S362 (R85 turbo) search the threads for the one company that would do modifications to install a 66mm compressor wheel. From memory the turbine wheel was slightly larger and the turbine housing A/R was larger than the standard size offered today.
I owned an R85 turbo kit for a period, that's what started my love affair for Borg Warner turbos. I literally BEAT THE SNOT out of the turbo and never once had a problem with it. To get the exact specs of the older S362 (R85 turbo) search the threads for the one company that would do modifications to install a 66mm compressor wheel. From memory the turbine wheel was slightly larger and the turbine housing A/R was larger than the standard size offered today.
At the shop I used to work at we always recommended Borg Warner turbos over the Garret gt series as they spooled about the same time, and were cheaper and more reliable. The Borgs seemed almost indestructible as long as you didn't blow the engine and send crap through the turbine wheel.
#21
I believe there is one member here who uses the turbo on his car. I have used them on a few different applications and they are nice little turbos. Its a much better turbo than a T04Z because responds quicker and makes similar peak power. The more efficient compressor will help with slightly lower intake temps as well.
#24
I street tune the cars as I do not have a dyno, YET. I'm not sure what information you really want. We built him one of our VE turbo manifolds; he has very little mods. Just a front mount intercooler and a Power FC. Believe it or not the factory ignition is doing just fine.
#25
I have an S366 I picked up for my N/A 6pT build. The PO told me he was making close to 500 WHP at 15 psi with his large steetport S5 13BT block.
I'm shooting for 400 on my stock port block. Maybe more if I can afford AI after doing a v-mount.
I'm shooting for 400 on my stock port block. Maybe more if I can afford AI after doing a v-mount.