no water cooled turbo

[Anonymous]

HI as a lot of you know Im turboing my ford falcon, but there is another thing...im planing to turbo anoter car a fuel injected one, and because I use a mitubishi turbo water cooled...and work super well, I bought another, but im planing not to conect the water lines, because is not to easy to the car im turboing..is a 1997 buick century, and I was wondering if its posible to delet the water cooling lines ans use the turbo just with the oil lines?...I dont know if any one know something...I will apreciate all the help i can get

niel

 

[nitrousnick]

no ,you dont need to connect the coolent lines

 

[Anonymous]

no ,you dont need to connect the coolent lines

GOOD GOD NO!!!!!!!!!

If a turbo has water cooling lines then you MUST hook them up. If you don't then the turbo will run for about 10,000 miles, maybe, and then seize. A turbo that does not have water cooling has a larger oil capacity to act as the cooling fluid.

 

[nitrousnick]

thats your opinion

 

[Anonymous]

Its not opinion. The turbo needs to be cooled somehow or the bearings will fry and weld themselfs to the main shaft and the turbo housing. In a water cooled turbo the water does the cooling and the oil is there for lubrication of the main bearings. Since the water does the cooling the turbo holds very little oil, in most cases just enough to lubricate it.
In an oil cooled turbo the all the space that would have been taken up by water in a water cooled turbo is now oil. This gives the turbo a much larger oil capacity and the oil both lubricates and cools.

Most damage that occurs from heat to a turbo happens after you shut the motor off. If you have nowhere for that heat to go because there is no water and not enough oil then the bearings, shaft, and housings are going to heat soak and that is when bad things happen . Also in a waterless water cooled turbo the oil will turn to a "coke-like" consistency due to the heat. This is very hard on a turbo on start-up.

And lastly, why would a manufacturer put these water cooling jackets in the turbo if it didn't need them?

btw nckwiencek, I meant no disrespect by my first post or this post, just wanted to come across very clear.

 

[Anonymous]

In an oil cooled turbo the all the space that would have been taken up by water in a water cooled turbo is now oil.

That's not true.

 

[XFlow_Fairlane]

thats funny....

when I was having the hybrid built for my TC I had both center sections...

the turbo shop said to run the wet centered T3 since it had LARGER oil passages in it and would work better running in a DRY app then a DRY housing would. plus I could always hook it up later on it I wanted....so that is what I ran. I put about 5K on the car then wrecked it though

btw the oil does most of the cooling anyway in a turbo (that is what is closest to the exhaust side) general rumor was they started making WET housings to reduce the change of cokeing in the housing but increasing the thermal mass to help reduce temps on shutdown. either way if you think about it once that oil flow stops there is ALOT of heat in that manifold and turbine to heat soak into the centersection.....have 2 oz of water TOPS in there isn't gonna do jack either

 

[Anonymous]

I didnt want this to turn on so quick but thanx a lot for the info...so now...showuld i delet the whater lines?..maybe I can put some coolant in the turbo then close the chamber with some screwes that match the lines...what do you think?

niel

 

[Anonymous]

You have no possible way whatsoever to get coolant to the tubo?....not one possibility ever?....

the water cooled turbo is a great turbo becasue it runs WAY cooler and the posibility of it detroying itself under even normal operating temps is much much less. Its almost like really good insurance.

 

[Anonymous]

If a turbo has water cooling lines then you MUST hook them up. If you don't then the turbo will run for about 10,000 miles, maybe, and then seize. A turbo that does not have water cooling has a larger oil capacity to act as the cooling fluid.

That's true. Also the water cooled turbo's don't have as much material cast into it as a oil only turbo so it's goin to heat MUCH faster than a normal oil only one

 

[Anonymous]

In an oil cooled turbo the all the space that would have been taken up by water in a water cooled turbo is now oil.

That's not true.

Ummm.. normally you are very helpful and explain things linc's, but this has me scratching my head.

Do you agree that an oil cooled turbo has a larger oil capacity?

the turbo shop said to run the wet centered T3 since it had LARGER oil passages in it and would work better running in a DRY app then a DRY housing would. plus I could always hook it up later on it I wanted....so that is what I ran. I put about 5K on the car then wrecked it though

2 things:
1) a water cooled turbo will run for about 10,000 miles without water before damage causes it to seize.

2)No disrespect to the turbo shop but they probably told you that knowing it would void the warranty and you would need a new turbo in 10,000 miles.

And I said it above but it's worth mentioning again:
why would a manufacturer put these water cooling jackets in the turbo if it didn't need them?

I really don't want this to turn into a "flame-fest". Im just relating the information I have gleaned form my short time reaserching turbos. If someone knows more than I do then I will defer to that person. Im secure enough to admit when I am in error.

Have a wonderful weekend!!

 

[XFlow_Fairlane]

the turbo was built by performance techniques in california. so not what I would call a shady (ssautochrome) shop. This shop I think is the main supplier of Turbonetics turbos. generally if you are a race shop seeing race turbos you want them to last or else once word spreads you can watch your business go bye bye

the oil capacity it the SAME in an dry and wet turbo. oil is pumped through the bearings and then simpley drains back to the oil pan.once the motor is shut off the only oil in there is the film/foam in the centersection that is still draining out (oil comes out of the bearings as a froth/foam substance)

my instance was on a ford 2.3L T3 turbo. the first ones from the factory 83-84 had no water jackets on them. Ford made the switch as a possible warrenty issue that could come up (lots of cars with turbos = big warrenty issue) they had no evidence of a problem but wanted to cover their butts. if you look at a wet and dry T3 center the water jacket is SMALL (you would be lucky to pour a "shot" into the housing) and is fed from a 5/16"-3/8" line TEE'd off a heater hose. Also this small jacket is only in the center of the turbo (ie between the bearings) so the only heat that gets to the water is what has soaked past the bearing and oil anyways. get a couple T3's a take them apart and you will see what I mean. there is not a full flow water supply feeding it ....just what can bypass the heater through that small line.

I don't mean to start a flame war either but I have been missing with T3 turbos since 1997 and have cooked 2-3 of them.....from failed oil seals only (these were all 150K plus mile turbos that were being boosted to 18psi)

I know linc knows his turbo stuff and is well versed on it so maybe he knows more about the exact turbo in question.

 

[Anonymous]

What turbo_fairlane_200 said.

I have never noticed any differences between oil passgaes inside, but never looked at the two side by side that close.

The water jacket is so small (Maybe a half ounce capacity?) that I don't see how it could do much good......no capacity. I mean it can't hurt, but there is just NO SURFACE AREA inside. It's like an air cooled engine with no cooling fins! :x I would like to see the lab tests that show differential in temps from before/after coolant flow. I know it can't be much. I think the only turbos it might save are the idiots that are running the tar out of their cars, shutting off immediately after leaving the freeway, and changing the oil every 12,000 miles. (warranty claims again)

There are too many guys successfully running around with no coolant in their "water jacketed" turbos (oil only) to say that you will burn them up.
GOOD, CLEAN oil flow is 99% important to turbo life than a little trickle of water going around the bearing housing.

If you get the hoses hooked up, fine. If not, that's fine too. either way its about a horse apiece.

 

[Anonymous]

the turbo was built by performance techniques in california. so not what I would call a shady (ssautochrome) shop. This shop I think is the main supplier of Turbonetics turbos. generally if you are a race shop seeing race turbos you want them to last or else once word spreads you can watch your business go bye bye

What turbo_fairlane_200 said.

I have never noticed any differences between oil passgaes inside, but never looked at the two side by side that close.

The water jacket is so small (Maybe a half ounce capacity?) that I don't see how it could do much good......no capacity. I mean it can't hurt, but there is just NO SURFACE AREA inside. It's like an air cooled engine with no cooling fins! Mad I would like to see the lab tests that show differential in temps from before/after coolant flow. I know it can't be much. I think the only turbos it might save are the idiots that are running the tar out of their cars, shutting off immediately after leaving the freeway, and changing the oil every 12,000 miles. (warranty claims again)

There are too many guys successfully running around with no coolant in their "water jacketed" turbos (oil only) to say that you will burn them up.
GOOD, CLEAN oil flow is 99% important to turbo life than a little trickle of water going around the bearing housing.

If you get the hoses hooked up, fine. If not, that's fine too. either way its about a horse apiece.

My apologies. I stand corrected. Thank you both for straightening that out for me.

 

[XFlow_Fairlane]

I was told the the exhaust side drain on the watercooled was SLIGHTLY larger....IE it can take more cokeing before problems. so really unless you plan on leaving the same turbo on your setup for nearly 100K then it doesn't really matter

 

[Anonymous]

This is a friend of bruzers, again, from the deep dark world of turbo dodges.

I have seen NO obvious signs of intelligence here...

A watercooled turbo housing has a decreased oil capacity inside, as well as significantly smaller structural thickness of the material that makes up the center section. The watercooled sections were designed to HAVE WATER IN THEM to take out heat.

As far as capacity of coolant in the turbo? MEANINGLESS unless you have some super machine that reverses osmosis... C'mon. Heat convection alone is going to drive HUGE amounts of water through the center of a turbo - LONG after I shut off my measily 2.2L of fury, I can see water flow in the radiator JUST from the turbo section. With ~500* heats easily found in the metal (probably much higher) in the exhaust areas, the water is near instantly vaporized - this takes HUGE amounts of heat and energy from the system INTO the water - to be dissipated in the radiator. So the 'volume' and 'surface area' inside the turbo JUST DONT MATTER.

Also, the oil input/drain - will have NO change of EFFECT on a turbo - design wise. Using a watercooled centersection, the result would probably be a smaller drain, because its going to take LESS oil flow to cool the turbo efficiently. But this is TRULY NO indication of true oil flow capacity - a terrible comparison indeed.

The FACT is that a turbo can LONG outlast any car, if used in its limits. An oil-cooled only turbo, will have MUCH larger oil capacity, and usually larger areas of the shaft exposed to dissipate the shaft heat taken in by the turbine (which is WELDED to the shaft).

A water cooled turbo has none of these (usually) and will therefore suffer a horribly burning death that includes seizure of the motor (ask me how I know) if it endures a long life w/o water in there to PROPERLY take care of the heating problem

NOW - you CAN get away with using a water-cooled turbo, sans water. IF your operating conditions are such that the turbo never sees excess heat production or heat levels on the shaft, or in the exhaust. A very rich setup with EGT's in the 1300's and less will probably not have a problem. A proper setup running 1400~1700* WILL. The amount of boost, and how long its used will also effect the life of the turbo - LONG periods of boost (yee haw) will increase the heat a LOT, or LARGE boost #'s (20+ psi in the dodge world).

I could give a lesson in thermodynamics next if neccessary?

 

[Anonymous]

Ahemmm.....

There are too many guys successfully running around with no coolant in their "water jacketed" turbos (oil only) to say that you will burn them up.

 

[Anonymous]

Back at ya....

This is a friend of bruzers, again, from the deep dark world of turbo dodges.

NOW - you CAN get away with using a water-cooled turbo, sans water. IF your operating conditions are such that the turbo never sees excess heat production or heat levels on the shaft, or in the exhaust. A very rich setup with EGT's in the 1300's and less will probably not have a problem. A proper setup running 1400~1700* WILL. The amount of boost, and how long its used will also effect the life of the turbo - LONG periods of boost (yee haw) will increase the heat a LOT, or LARGE boost #'s (20+ psi in the dodge world).

 

[Anonymous]

tried to say that. A lot less talking though

 

[Anonymous]

Man, you guys can explain as much as you want, but I have seen a LOT of guys run water cooled turbos "dry" with plenty of oil going through them, and they have not had problems.

Not saying you won't, but listen to the voice of experience. They work fine 99% of the time with no water in them. (of all the guys I know that have run them).

You can't say "THEY'LL BURN UP FOR SURE!!!!!" when so many guys are tearing around with no water in their water cooled turbos, and they are FINE.