Thank You!
I can't stress enough how valuable information like this is. Possessing only hand tools and limited funds (and knowledge), I don't want to get into custom axle or mount work. But I also wanted to avoid building up an axle with a posi and new parts only to have to throw all that time & $$ away when the axle broke or proved inadequate.
We basically got the turbo for the big grades we encounter out west, especially when we are tooling around the Rockies at altitude. The Banks does a good job of this. Also to be able to pull off passes on 2-lanes around the 5-under drivers that plague Washington's highways. Even fully lit, the turbo only produces < 400 lb/ft so I think even if I was towing something moderate on a grade it wouldn't compare to a Duramax @ 700lb/ft or as you said, heavy towing. Any guidelines on how much weight does start causing problems?
I'll give the bolt-on 80's 14 bolt (w/ wheel swap) some consideration but will likely stay with the 10 bolt. Again, thanks!
turbo geeking tangent:
I think the Banks was styled that way because it gave the biggest possible numbers that look good for marketing. I've got a turbocharged sporty gas car as my DD, so I'm a bit familiar with turbo selection. In the sport world people choose huge turbos that only kick on right near redline (due to very high flow/spooling requirements) but then produce stupendous power. Taken to the extreme, this produces cars known as "dyno queens" cars with turbos so powerful that they are undriveable. They produce 1000hp or whatever on the dyno but going from 150 to 800 hp in the space of 200rpm @ WOT produces uncontrollable wheelspin....so they aren't actually drivable!
Anyways this relates to Banks in that I think they wanted to post some good numbers in a difficult application. So they chose a larger than necessary turbo with a high flow requirement. As you pointed out, a lack of wastegating compounds the issue. There are 3 ways to improve the situation:
1. Smaller turbo. Most non-sporty turbo cars go this route because it is a very driveable setup. Minimal turbo lag, just feels like more cylinders. Some diesels have too (I believe early 12v Cummins and TDI VW's). However, don't post big numbers and run out of breath before the engine does.
2. Sequential turbos (as opposed to twin). One small and one large, best of both worlds. E.G. RX-7, 300zx, etc...
3. Variable Vane Geometry Turbos. Using technology invented by Honeywell for the high-bypass turbofan in aviation, they can change the effective size of the exhaust housing. Pretty cool, very expensive, and currently used by all diesel engines for all makes sold in the US, IIRC.
Anyways, I'm still trying to learn more about wastegating as it applies to flow rates but it clearly has an effect. I read an article that used the banks kit but substituted the Ford IDI Banks turbo like you mentioned for the same reasons. Unfortunately they didn't get into drivability or do much post-analysis after the install. After a long line of other chassis upgrades though I would consider a turbo swap.
/turbo rant
Reply With Quote
. The GVWR on my V1500 sub is 7300lbs! I found one set 1800/wheel (still no thanks) and some others that were unlisted (also not buying). I don't know what a taco'd truck wheel looks like but I don't want to find out!
