HTP 3" Turbo Inlet

[smoogs12]

@bmylez I would hope not lol

[Deldran]

When I get an intake I will be going from stock to 3" I will also do the test and post results in here

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[86AmishMs3]

Honestly my take on the whole 3" tip, stock turbo is this:

1. It will help out, you will have less frictional losses/ gram of air consumed by going to a bigger pipe. Frictional losses = pressure drop. So there should be a little less vacuum inlet tract.

2. If you have a smooth transition from 3" to 2" to where the actual turbo inlet is you will increase velocity. When increasing velocity due to bernoulli effect there will be less pressure behind that air, giving a sort of ram effect. But the problem is the pressure loss is still high at the 2" inlet

3. Considering the vacuum is still higher in the 2" inlet part of the turbo...I still see minimal gains. I suspect there will be gains but nothing major. And this thinking is from an aftermarket 2.5" to a 3". I would say if you're going to go 3" and you're stock turbo inlet then great!, but if you already have an aftermarket tip...then I don't think you can justify the money spent to go 3"

4. Which concludes me to my next point...you're still trying to skate uphill. Buy a bigger, more efficient turbo.

[Deldran]

I agree with what u said I just want to help find hard data on the subjects.

I by no means think that a full 3" intake will make my Turbo more than what it is.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[dead-zone]

I got the 2.5 and the turbo sucks like a hungry baby sucking the nipple

[Brennan]

Originally Posted by 86azms3 3. Considering the vacuum is still higher in the 2" inlet part of the turbo...I still see minimal gains. I suspect there will be gains but nothing major. And this thinking is from an aftermarket 2.5" to a 3". I would say if you're going to go 3" and you're stock turbo inlet then great!, but if you already have an aftermarket tip...then I don't think you can justify the money spent to go 3"

Suppose that someone is upgrading a stock TIP and has a 2.5" SRI currently (maybe me), does it make sense to go with a 3" TIP thinking that said person may go with a 3" intake in the future? Seems to me like it would.

[smoogs12]

Originally Posted by Brennan Suppose that someone is upgrading a stock TIP and has a 2.5" SRI currently (maybe me), does it make sense to go with a 3" TIP thinking that said person may go with a 3" intake in the future? Seems to me like it would.

Do you plan on BT? Or are you buying it just because?

But at any rate, yes just buy the 3" tip now, unless you just want to spend money on a 2.5" tip that you wont need.

[Brennan]

Originally Posted by smoogs12 Do you plan on BT? Or are you buying it just because? But at any rate, yes just buy the 3" tip now, unless you just want to spend money on a 2.5" tip that you wont need.

Not planning on BT, but that doesn't mean it'll never happen. Just figuring a 3" TIP doesn't hurt anything and is only $25 more (from HTP). Thanks.

[smoogs12]

Originally Posted by Brennan Not planning on BT, but that doesn't mean it'll never happen. Just figuring a 3" TIP doesn't hurt anything and is only $25 more (from HTP). Thanks.

Yeah there really is no reason not not go 3".

Up until recently price was the main reason. Seeing as that price gap has closed, there is really no reason not to.

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by 86azms3 ...But the problem is the pressure loss is still high at the 2" inlet Considering the vacuum is still higher in the 2" inlet part of the turbo...I still see minimal gains.

But wouldn't the pressure drops be compounded? For instance, the pressure drop at the inlet will be there regardless, but it's pressure input is based off the rest of the TIP / intake. So if there is a considerable drop in that "up stream" region, then it'll only make the 2" restriction worse.

Put differently, lets say the 2" inlet causes a 2 psi vac at 350 g/s... If there was already a 2psi drop from the filter / intake / TIP, would that 2" inlet see -4psi?


Your the fluids expert hahaha. I just always understood that pressure drops were cumulative, and that even if a bottleneck exists in one portion of a flow tract, improvements can still be made elsewhere (with diminished returns obviously).

[86AmishMs3]

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn But wouldn't the pressure drops be compounded? For instance, the pressure drop at the inlet will be there regardless, but it's pressure input is based off the rest of the TIP / intake. So if there is a considerable drop in that "up stream" region, then it'll only make the 2" restriction worse. Put differently, lets say the 2" inlet causes a 2 psi vac at 350 g/s... If there was already a 2psi drop from the filter / intake / TIP, would that 2" inlet see -4psi? Your the fluids expert hahaha. I just always understood that pressure drops were cumulative, and that even if a bottleneck exists in one portion of a flow tract, improvements can still be made elsewhere (with diminished returns obviously).

Of course its cumulative. But the frictional losses in a contraction of a pipe are proportional to the ratio of the cross sectional areas...meaning that there will be a larger frictional loss (pressure drop) reducing from say a 3" to a 2" pipe, then say a 2.5 to a 2" pipe. That shouldn't come as much suprise. And I'm saying this will offset some of the less frictional losses that were gained from going from a 2.5" to a 3" pipe before the reduction. My guess is without pulling out my chemE bible is that you're still better off with a 3" pipe, but the reduction at the turbo inlet negates a lot of what you gained.

But in any piping system you want to reduce the amount of contractions, expansions, bends, length to have the lowest pressure drop. Also important is the relationship between diameter and fluid velocity. You go too big of a pipe you're vastly affecting fluid velocity and you'll actually decrease performance. I'm sure within the confines of an engine bay though you won't realize that problem though.

All this can be calculated fairly well from theory...but I'm lazy.

[djuosnteisn]

Originally Posted by 86azms3 Of course its cumulative. But the frictional losses in a contraction of a pipe are proportional to the ratio of the cross sectional areas...meaning that there will be a larger frictional loss (pressure drop) reducing from say a 3" to a 2" pipe, then say a 2.5 to a 2" pipe. That shouldn't come as much suprise. And I'm saying this will offset some of the less frictional losses that were gained from going from a 2.5" to a 3" pipe before the reduction. My guess is without pulling out my chemE bible is that you're still better off with a 3" pipe, but the reduction at the turbo inlet negates a lot of what you gained. But in any piping system you want to reduce the amount of contractions, expansions, bends, length to have the lowest pressure drop. All this can be calculated fairly well from theory...but I'm lazy.

Lol, you don't need to calculate it. I'm just picking your brain.... because you actually own a chemE bible


What's the frictional loss going from open atmosphere into the end of a pipe (basically worst case reduction)? Cause if the frictional loss was proportional with the change in diameter, that would make it infinite, right? Where does the diminished friction increase begin to take effect?

[86AmishMs3]

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn Lol, you don't need to calculate it. I'm just picking your brain.... because you actually own a chemE bible What's the frictional loss going from open atmosphere into the end of a pipe (basically worst case reduction)? Cause if the frictional loss was proportional with the change in diameter, that would make it infinite, right? Where does the diminished friction increase begin to take effect?

The valuations I gave are heuristics for special circumstance. For example for a cross sectional ratio of less then .715...the frictional factor is:

F=(K*V^2)/2 for turbulent flow in smooth pipe. K= .4 (1.25-(A2/A1)

Now in your scenerio that you just described...the ratio is infiniti. So you use a differenty heuristic where K = .75(1-A2/A1) as you can see A2/A1 is basically A2/infiniti = 0 so then K = .75 for an open atmosphere condition.

There are sooo many heuristics for scenerios...to make life easier.

[86AmishMs3]

It's hard to explain fluid dynamics IMO. But for the most part fluid dynamics are intuitive. The only thing counter intuitive is where bigger pipes actually reduce flow and increae pressure drops. And that happens at certain flows. Why huge cams and big intake runners are great for higher rpm performance but not low rpm performance

[Matt H.]

FYI guys i think this intake would be pure sex the person wanting the gtx28 turbo as this turbo does not have the 4 inch inlet but a 3 and htp has three inlet to tip sizes the three is one of them just think this would be a very responsive and clean setup!!!