Let's talk turbos

Run the same charger that they build off of which is a borg 14969880000 and it will do exactly the same thing, the reason it does this is because the turbine housing is too small, the 1.32 is meant for the 12.7 detroit and not a 14.6L cat.

I'd want to defend myself too if I overpaid for a charger that doesn't out preform a box charger.

Anyone who understands turbos within the industry thinks they are a joke, sorry I know enough to understand that.

 

There’s a guy that lives close to me who has an old 9370 IH, with a BC II or III 400 in it. He inframed the engine a while back and I believe he said he put a 12.7DD turbo on it. Truck runs very strong. I don’t know much about swapping turbo’s around, on mechanical or electronic engines.

 

Ahhh they use more than one housing size fella.

 

You got more boost with the same size turbine housing? That's interesting. How much and what are the drive pressure numbers?

 

I own two 4MG B models. I had a 177148 on one of them, and then put it on the other and put a 78mm Blaylock on the first, which is our primary truck, which we use as our lowboy tractor primarily in Eastern Idaho and Western Wyoming.

177148 pros:

Very quick spool up, much better low end power. Jakes probably slightly better than
stock turbo, but no empirical data to back it up. Runs much cleaner. Mileage was good. Cost $1500.

Cons: Tends to build slightly higher exhaust temperatures, pretty even from 1400 to 1800 or more though. Max boost before wastegate opens 24-26 lbs., mostly dependent on ambient temperature. It did not seem to breathe as well at higher RPM and full fuel. Again, no emperical data, just my perception.

Switchblade Pros:

Slightly cooler exhaust temperature. Seems to breathe better at higher RPMs, boost up to 34lbs. or so, a fair bit higher in sub-zero temps.

Cons:
Poorer Jake brake performance, despite adding the gismo to close it down when Jakes are on. Better spool up than stock, but nowhere near as quick as the 177148. Pretty dirty compared to 177148. Mileage typically 3 tenths lower. Expensive. I paid $3400 for it.

When we ran the two together the second truck (177148) out pulled the first with the same exact load (730C articulated haul trucks), but the first truck was on a fresh out of frame, and pulling a heavier 4 axle Eager Beaver 55 ton trailer while the other was pulling a 3 axle 50 ton Aspen.

When I first got the Switchblade the mechanism would stick. Jim Blaylock sent us a new housing immediately, and was very good to deal with.

At that time the engines were set up identically, but as mentioned the truck with the Blaylock turbo was fresh, with new nozzles (less power).

I have about 50K on the first truck out of frame now, and have since swapped for marine nozzles, but cut the fuel and torque back a turn.

I haven't had either truck on a dyno, but I would guess we are running 475ish at most. We pull up to 140k at high elevations often. I try to set the trucks so we don't have to watch the pyro like a hawk, but still need to watch it on long steep pulls and back off a half a gear to let them pull a bit less than wot.

Conclusions:

Were I to do it again I would get the 177148 for more normal hauling, and probably get someone's help more knowledgeable than myself to build a turbo for the truck that we use mostly hauling heavier. I do feel that the switchblade spools a bit better than stock, but nowhere near what the 177148 does.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it snake oil, but in hindsight I wish I would have consulted someone to build a better turbo set up for our use, for probably no more money.

Regarding the extra boost vs. the 177148, I do not know the drive pressure to get the extra boost, nor how much hotter the intake temperature is at the higher boost. There certainly must be a diminishing point of return though, or at least a psychological component that one feels there is more power by seeing more boost.

That is my perception of the two turbos. Take it for what it's worth. I do not have drive pressure or intake temp gauges installed, so it's basically a wild-### guess.

 

Where ya been hiding?

 

Here and there. I just stop in once in awhile to see if I have missed much on dinosaur engines!

 

I’ve said it multiple times, for a working mechanical cat the 177148 is a great all around charger.

What you posted doesn’t surprise me at all

 

OXBOW how do you think a 1.32 non wastegate turbo would work on either of your two motors compared to the 177148? Do you think you have enough fuel to keep it spooled? I have a 3zj but run 4.33 gears so I’m torn between a 177148 and the 14969880000

 

I don't know enough about different turbo arrangements to say one way or the other what would work. It would be nice to be able to try before you buy wouldn't it.

Maybe some of the other guys can help.