E90Post
 


Extreme Powerhouse
 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > BMW E90/E92/E93 3-series General Forums > Regional Forums > Australia > RB TURBOs: SMOKER vs NON-SMOKER



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      05-16-2018, 07:08 PM   #45
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aus335iguy View Post
It would be good to gather a list of people running the new turbos to show that they dont have problems or not as the case may be.
Gather a list? As in what make a thread with names and phone numbers? Yeah we are sure our hundreds of turbo customers over the past couple years would LOVE that... LOL.

Anyway not sure you read the RB reliability stats thread or not- but rest assured that would be a VERY bold move in this day and age (with the world wide web) to straight out fudge figures or to say there is a 0% failure rate when there is those with failures within the timeline and product lines as stated. Also rest assure that since we've made that thread, we are SURE the TROLLS are just scavenging the world just waiting for a bad story to appear... like dying to push it in the ole face and rightly so as we did it to ourselves by releasing the information in the first place (ie. this sort of thing places a LARGE TARGET ON THE BACK 100%). Unfortunately for them however is that they do not have to search, as once we eventually get a return out of all of those specified products we will disclose it ourselves. The clock keeps ticking by, we are kicking out tons of product, and it is crickets so we are most definitely doing something right. Alongside this we are busier than ever- we have been averaging about 5-9 sets per week shipped this busy season and have a 22 set backlog at this very moment. That number is growing out of control, quite frankly, but it will taper off we are sure as the year progresses. Lastly out of ALL of this backlog there is not a single set in for servicing, it is all just new orders.

Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-16-2018 at 07:54 PM..
Appreciate 1
      05-16-2018, 07:23 PM   #46
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socket View Post
This thread is two years old
As Rob points out the reliability of his product has improved since the release of his classic range. People did have smoking problems, me inciuded.
Mine were posted back to Rob and rebuilt. Whole exercise left me out of pocket several thousand dollars for removal, shipping and reinstallation for no fault of my own so naturally people at the time were a little pissed. Especially given the turbos failed with only a few thousand Km on them. Wasn’t just one or two people either, it was more like 1 in 3 as hightlighted in this thread. While Rob did the right thing and repaired the units, people still had to stump up large out of pocket $$ to get their turbos fixed and understandably were pretty dirty. RB Turbo rep was dirt as a result. Throw on top this the blame was leveled at tunes, install problems or lack of oil change and other excuses was just an insult given the number and frequency of failures... This messy and unfortunate period for the N54 community is behind us and the world has moved on.

RIP
Socket,

You definitely got a real bum deal sir. I will try to give you some closure, however, as you are definitely (and rightly so) jaded over it all. The RB set you sent in for repair in later 2015 had a defective component, which is why we covered it under warranty and billed you $0 for the repair. It is unfortunate that we're not local to you and there was International shipping involved, labor costs, etc.- but we did hold our end of our warranty policy 100% and pretty sure it was literally no questions asked (on this set). You also may be aware, that the owner that you sold the repaired RB Classics to ran the turbos for the years onward and beat on them very hard and they never skipped a beat in his 1M- until eventually he recently popped his engine- and even yet is still is saying they are perfect and last we heard plans on reusing them. We know you ended up being talked into buying some turbos from another vendor, then ran into another failure and had to go through it all AGAIN, so with multiple issues with multiple vendors as said it was a bum deal for you. We are certain had you not dumped off the RB's, you'd had a much more "acceptable" experience when said and done- it just wasn't in the cards and we understand all things considered. Once again very long ago and lessons are learned, but it was a snapshot in time indeed and things progress of course.

Your issue aside and to the others, yes 2010-2014/2015 was literally in the stone age of turbo charging these vehicles. There was a bad deal for many parties but most over some considerable time; certainly not all as many still are running them TODAY. We are seeing returns pop up sporadically from this era these days as one would expect as time goes on. Not saying we built the turbos in the yesteryears as well as we do today (not by a large margin) but with the lessons learned over the years there were many things we mandate NOW that wasn't even a consideration then. Things like running high flow inlets (and outlets for RHD) on all upgrades, in some cases oil drains, recommended quality oils, mandate adjusting BOV correctly and using larger bungs; are all things WE as a community learned along the way. Make no mistake these things are all important and the later arrivers had that benefit on their side from day 1- we did not. In fact most of the late arrivers are JUST now passing the 2 year mark of production, which is where WE were in "2012". Even with all of the knowledge on their side from day 1, it'll be interesting to hear the feedback with their 2 more years to reach our "2014"- let alone our "2016" or "2018".

Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-16-2018 at 08:06 PM..
Appreciate 1
      05-16-2018, 08:07 PM   #47
Coupes33
Major
373
Rep
1,392
Posts

Drives: 2006 335i, 2017 Audi S3
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia

iTrader: (0)

People can only comment on their own experiences. I ran a set of RB Classics for 27,000km without any issues. I installed them myself and took care in ensuring everything was done correctly. Also, I did engine oil changes every 5,000kms. Whether any of this resulted in the good service that I experienced from these turbos, I am not sure. I have now replaced them with the Super RB Evo turbos and haven't encountered any issues as yet.
Appreciate 2
      05-16-2018, 10:15 PM   #48
T1M
Captain
Australia
196
Rep
657
Posts

Drives: AW MY12 1M
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coupes33 View Post
People can only comment on their own experiences. I ran a set of RB Classics for 27,000km without any issues. I installed them myself and took care in ensuring everything was done correctly. Also, I did engine oil changes every 5,000kms. Whether any of this resulted in the good service that I experienced from these turbos, I am not sure. I have now replaced them with the Super RB Evo turbos and haven't encountered any issues as yet.
As you know I bought these. They were pretty worn after ‘only’ 27,000kms use and definitely needed rebuilding. The rear turbo had enough bearing play to allow the compressor to touch in the inside of the snout but the front was ok so before touching them the front turbo was run on a VSR balancer. It achieved a balance figure of 0.389, almost 4 times the maximum my turbo builder deems acceptable. It was also found the compressor cover snouts were CNC’d off axis which led to uneven compressor clearance (which we also corrected during the rebuild).

I think manufacturing practices that used to exist have probably been corrected now, and if I was to buy turbos new it’d be RB Nexgens. Rob always had the right idea using the TD04 CHRA and is still one of few doing it. However some brands are using non MHI parts or full Chinese construction (and not good Chinese either) and others are persisting with trying to make the tiny TD03 CHRA support the loads larger turbines at higher boost pressures create. My turbo builder has had a look at some Hexons based on TD03’s and said to be very nice about it they’ve had to resort to some very ‘creative’ engineering choices. It was not something he recommended doing, they’re really just too small.

IMO of course, I’d suggest that anyone looking at buying twins, look for who’s using oem MHI parts and CHRA’s, whose VSR balancing and who’s using TD04 centre sections. There’s really only one who ticks those boxes. You still have to keep our oil temps down, film strength drops rapidly after 120 dec C or so. Run an oil with a good HTHS value and strong antiwear additive pack. Stock inlet should be avoided over something like 15psi boost on a 15T Comp due to the large pressure drop in the rear inlet especially, and un-Crush the stock outlets.
Appreciate 1
      05-16-2018, 11:01 PM   #49
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T1M View Post
As you know I bought these. They were pretty worn after ‘only’ 27,000kms use and definitely needed rebuilding. The rear turbo had enough bearing play to allow the compressor to touch in the inside of the snout but the front was ok so before touching them the front turbo was run on a VSR balancer. It achieved a balance figure of 0.389, almost 4 times the maximum my turbo builder deems acceptable. It was also found the compressor cover snouts were CNC’d off axis which led to uneven compressor clearance (which we also corrected during the rebuild).

I think manufacturing practices that used to exist have probably been corrected now, and if I was to buy turbos new it’d be RB Nexgens. Rob always had the right idea using the TD04 CHRA and is still one of few doing it. However some brands are using non MHI parts or full Chinese construction (and not good Chinese either) and others are persisting with trying to make the tiny TD03 CHRA support the loads larger turbines at higher boost pressures create. My turbo builder has had a look at some Hexons based on TD03’s and said to be very nice about it they’ve had to resort to some very ‘creative’ engineering choices. It was not something he recommended doing, they’re really just too small.

IMO of course, I’d suggest that anyone looking at buying twins, look for who’s using oem MHI parts and CHRA’s, whose VSR balancing and who’s using TD04 centre sections. There’s really only one who ticks those boxes. You still have to keep our oil temps down, film strength drops rapidly after 120 dec C or so. Run an oil with a good HTHS value and strong antiwear additive pack. Stock inlet should be avoided over something like 15psi boost on a 15T Comp due to the large pressure drop in the rear inlet especially, and un-Crush the stock outlets.
T1M,

Hopefully your builder is pretty good. We've had to rebuild probably 5 sets of our turbos over the years, nearly immediately after they were rebuilt from another. In fact we just had to do exactly this a few weeks back, and we can tell you we have not heard of one occasion it has gone well... but perhaps it does at times and as such we just don't hear about it.

As for VSR balancing an older turbo- especially one that has been used for a long while- typically the results aren't that great even if the unit was absolute perfection on initial build. As these units were originally purchased in 2012 this was in an era when we outsourced our VSR balancing function (from a shop in the UK that we later realized had some fairly antiquated equipment- and also think they may have been doing a "quickie" job which is unfortunately common when outsourcing). As for the result you achieved you mean 0.389g max correct? If so that would be damn good, REALLY good, for an old used unit. FWIW 1.5g is what is known as the "acceptable" range, however we balance all new units to ~0.1g across the entire RPM range. Having been in the business we know when you put an old used unit on the machine you are seldom going to see a brand new like 0.1g resultant.

Regarding the off Axis CNC- this is something we have never seen/corrected/etc over the years- quite frankly something I'm not sure is correct. Feel free to email us any additional info, would like to see that portion in more detail if there is anything remaining.

Overall agree with you though, we use some pretty high end stuff- cutting corners to save a buck is not really top priority over here- and outsourcing anything such as balancing is no longer in any sort of our processes (for quite a long while now). 100% wish we had the equipment we've had the past couple years and the build strategies as well since introduction; but that is just 20/20 hindsight speaking and nothing we can do to change that now.

Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-16-2018 at 11:26 PM..
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 12:43 AM   #50
T1M
Captain
Australia
196
Rep
657
Posts

Drives: AW MY12 1M
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob@RBTurbo View Post
T1M,

Hopefully your builder is pretty good. We've had to rebuild probably 5 sets of our turbos over the years, nearly immediately after they were rebuilt from another. In fact we just had to do exactly this a few weeks back, and we can tell you we have not heard of one occasion it has gone well... but perhaps it does at times and as such we just don't hear about it.

As for VSR balancing an older turbo- especially one that has been used for a long while- typically the results aren't that great even if the unit was absolute perfection on initial build. As these units were originally purchased in 2012 this was in an era when we outsourced our VSR balancing function (from a shop in the UK that we later realized had some fairly antiquated equipment- and also think they may have been doing a "quickie" job which is unfortunately common when outsourcing). As for the result you achieved you mean 0.389g max correct? If so that would be damn good, REALLY good, for an old used unit. FWIW 1.5g is what is known as the "acceptable" range, however we balance all new units to ~0.1g across the entire RPM range. Having been in the business we know when you put an old used unit on the machine you are seldom going to see a brand new like 0.1g resultant.

Regarding the off Axis CNC- this is something we have never seen/corrected/etc over the years- quite frankly something I'm not sure is correct. Feel free to email us any additional info, would like to see that portion in more detail if there is anything remaining.

Overall agree with you though, we use some pretty high end stuff- cutting corners to save a buck is not really top priority over here- and outsourcing anything such as balancing is no longer in any sort of our processes (for quite a long while now). 100% wish we had the equipment we've had the past couple years and the build strategies as well since introduction; but that is just 20/20 hindsight speaking and nothing we can do to change that now.

Rob
Cheers Rob. They do a lot of time attack and tarmac rally turbos with an excellent track record. They did my old evo and many of the guys cars I tuned turbos as well. I just updated the compressors to billet 15T spec and left the 12 blade MHI TD04L turbine and shaft alone. I trust them enough to try them, and if something goes wrong its $30 shipping and next day delivery with a week turnaround time.

Point taken about them not holding balance over time, he did say it should have been better, though. The balancing was done originally from those you outsourced to by taking material out of the back of the compressor wheel, it looked a bit shabby but I'm told a few years ago this was pretty normal for cast wheels. Billet wheels are much closer to zero, in fact one of mine after being build ran up at 0.0614 G untouched which was nice, the other took a little more work but came down to 0.0184 G after trimming. They have a <0.1G policy too but I asked them to be a bit more pedantic.

The off-axis compressor cover was noted after rebuilding, it was in the range of 0.8-1mm off and was correctable easily enough. I don't have pics of this, it was just mentioned to me after the fact as it wasn't a showstopper just a hmmm that's interesting. With any luck they'll last a long time, and they'll have a pretty easy life on my car, I'm only planning to run around 15psi.
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 06:21 AM   #51
Coupes33
Major
373
Rep
1,392
Posts

Drives: 2006 335i, 2017 Audi S3
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia

iTrader: (0)

I agree Tim that the RB Classics were worn and definitely required rebuilding. It was on that basis that I sold them. Even with all that wear, they didn't smoke and still performed ok with 11.3s runs before removal. Your rebuild sounds like it has gone well. I hope they work well for you.
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 07:37 AM   #52
Socket
Lieutenant General
Socket's Avatar
4525
Rep
11,898
Posts

Drives: 335i
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Australia

iTrader: (4)

Garage List
2008 BMW E92  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob@RBTurbo View Post
Socket,

You definitely got a real bum deal sir. I will try to give you some closure, however, as you are definitely (and rightly so) jaded over it all. The RB set you sent in for repair in later 2015 had a defective component, which is why we covered it under warranty and billed you $0 for the repair. It is unfortunate that we're not local to you and there was International shipping involved, labor costs, etc.- but we did hold our end of our warranty policy 100% and pretty sure it was literally no questions asked (on this set). You also may be aware, that the owner that you sold the repaired RB Classics to ran the turbos for the years onward and beat on them very hard and they never skipped a beat in his 1M- until eventually he recently popped his engine- and even yet is still is saying they are perfect and last we heard plans on reusing them. We know you ended up being talked into buying some turbos from another vendor, then ran into another failure and had to go through it all AGAIN, so with multiple issues with multiple vendors as said it was a bum deal for you. We are certain had you not dumped off the RB's, you'd had a much more "acceptable" experience when said and done- it just wasn't in the cards and we understand all things considered. Once again very long ago and lessons are learned, but it was a snapshot in time indeed and things progress of course.

Your issue aside and to the others, yes 2010-2014/2015 was literally in the stone age of turbo charging these vehicles. There was a bad deal for many parties but most over some considerable time; certainly not all as many still are running them TODAY. We are seeing returns pop up sporadically from this era these days as one would expect as time goes on. Not saying we built the turbos in the yesteryears as well as we do today (not by a large margin) but with the lessons learned over the years there were many things we mandate NOW that wasn't even a consideration then. Things like running high flow inlets (and outlets for RHD) on all upgrades, in some cases oil drains, recommended quality oils, mandate adjusting BOV correctly and using larger bungs; are all things WE as a community learned along the way. Make no mistake these things are all important and the later arrivers had that benefit on their side from day 1- we did not. In fact most of the late arrivers are JUST now passing the 2 year mark of production, which is where WE were in "2012". Even with all of the knowledge on their side from day 1, it'll be interesting to hear the feedback with their 2 more years to reach our "2014"- let alone our "2016" or "2018".

Rob
Thanks Rob, yes you def held up your end of the bargain and repaired everything under warranty and stood by your product. Is ancient history that pales into insignificance with the drama's and expensive we had on the RHD ST install.... All up the RHD ST install has cost over $25K and I there is more to spend with a new manifold, new pipes, hood modifications etc to come.....lol #modderslife
Appreciate 1
      05-17-2018, 08:01 AM   #53
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T1M View Post
Cheers Rob. They do a lot of time attack and tarmac rally turbos with an excellent track record. They did my old evo and many of the guys cars I tuned turbos as well. I just updated the compressors to billet 15T spec and left the 12 blade MHI TD04L turbine and shaft alone. I trust them enough to try them, and if something goes wrong its $30 shipping and next day delivery with a week turnaround time.

Point taken about them not holding balance over time, he did say it should have been better, though. The balancing was done originally from those you outsourced to by taking material out of the back of the compressor wheel, it looked a bit shabby but I'm told a few years ago this was pretty normal for cast wheels. Billet wheels are much closer to zero, in fact one of mine after being build ran up at 0.0614 G untouched which was nice, the other took a little more work but came down to 0.0184 G after trimming. They have a <0.1G policy too but I asked them to be a bit more pedantic.

The off-axis compressor cover was noted after rebuilding, it was in the range of 0.8-1mm off and was correctable easily enough. I don't have pics of this, it was just mentioned to me after the fact as it wasn't a showstopper just a hmmm that's interesting. With any luck they'll last a long time, and they'll have a pretty easy life on my car, I'm only planning to run around 15psi.
T1M,

Hopefully they machined your entire compressor cover for the wheel as the billet and OE contour profiles are not really the same. Even then not sure how the entire profile would align, it is likely it is not ideal and some areas would be out of tolerance. FWIW all of our 15T billet wheel setups are machined ONLY from fresh uncut housings, whereas any returned "RB Classic" 15T cast wheel housings we machine for only larger wheel setups.

Also it would seem your shop would've provided a VSR trace per each rebuilt turbo which specifies these results- care to share? Reason asked is that we have never heard of an assembly dynamic VSR balance level of 0.0184g as it just is not obtainable. Perhaps you have a decimal off however, that would make more sense. Either way you trust them and if not they are close and that is all good, but as has been discussed in this thread the biggest problem is the labor in it all.

About the balance check of the used unit- it really just depends on what the results were in actuality and also what the results of the unit would've been when new. As these units were from 2012 with the VSR function outsourced, we honestly do not believe they were ever even as good as the 0.389g even from day 1. We'd be willing to bet that most of our outsourced balancing, knowing what we know today, was probably closer to 0.5-0.9g max levels as that is what is very easily obtainable and "quick". At any rate if they got better over time, that is great but just not likely whatsoever. Likewise most of the aftermarket turbos we see, even new, are in the 0.5-0.9g max range. So not sure if we have some decimals off, or what exactly it is that has broken down with the communication path with your shop- but 0.389g max is actually really good for even a lightly used and balanced to perfection when new unit let alone a much older heavily used/tracked turbo that was likely never balanced to perfection in the first place.

Regarding the off-axis cover: Just so you know there is only about ~0.3mm clearance between the wheel and housing. So the point is if there was even ~0.3mm the off axis would not only be EXTREMELY visually obvious, more importantly the wheel would not even spin in the housing which obviously would be instant turbo death. So we believe there could be some "misinformation" or "miscommunication" going on with this entire point- we use high quality machinery/tooling and our tolerances for a part like this would be at most 0.03mm, MAYBE 0.05mm if there is some error such as debris caught in the tooling or perhaps too much clamping force is used... BUT even that would be visually noticeable to a trained eye when it comes to wheel symmetry. In short these figures would have to have been very largely exaggerated.

For reference here is a VSR trace of the last unit we balanced last night just to give you an idea of the actual values- FWIW anything around 0.1g is very very good.

Rob
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-17-2018 at 08:31 AM..
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 10:09 AM   #54
Mayuri Krab
The Cheap Arse Asian
Mayuri Krab's Avatar
Australia
47
Rep
585
Posts

Drives: E90 335i & R33 Skyline GTS-T
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Perth, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Hello mr socket i bought your old OEMs lol

20k kms later and still boosting strong
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 05:15 PM   #55
Socket
Lieutenant General
Socket's Avatar
4525
Rep
11,898
Posts

Drives: 335i
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Australia

iTrader: (4)

Garage List
2008 BMW E92  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayuri Krab View Post
Hello mr socket i bought your old OEMs lol

20k kms later and still boosting strong
Lol nice to hear Mr Krabs
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 09:25 PM   #56
T1M
Captain
Australia
196
Rep
657
Posts

Drives: AW MY12 1M
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coupes33 View Post
I agree Tim that the RB Classics were worn and definitely required rebuilding. It was on that basis that I sold them. Even with all that wear, they didn't smoke and still performed ok with 11.3s runs before removal. Your rebuild sounds like it has gone well. I hope they work well for you.
Yep you were 100% accurate in your description of them prior to sale. I knew what I was getting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob@RBTurbo View Post
T1M,

Hopefully they machined your entire compressor cover for the wheel as the billet and OE contour profiles are not really the same. Even then not sure how the entire profile would align, it is likely it is not ideal and some areas would be out of tolerance. FWIW all of our 15T billet wheel setups are machined ONLY from fresh uncut housings, whereas any returned "RB Classic" 15T cast wheel housings we machine for only larger wheel setups.

Also it would seem your shop would've provided a VSR trace per each rebuilt turbo which specifies these results- care to share? Reason asked is that we have never heard of an assembly dynamic VSR balance level of 0.0184g as it just is not obtainable. Perhaps you have a decimal off however, that would make more sense. Either way you trust them and if not they are close and that is all good, but as has been discussed in this thread the biggest problem is the labor in it all.

About the balance check of the used unit- it really just depends on what the results were in actuality and also what the results of the unit would've been when new. As these units were from 2012 with the VSR function outsourced, we honestly do not believe they were ever even as good as the 0.389g even from day 1. We'd be willing to bet that most of our outsourced balancing, knowing what we know today, was probably closer to 0.5-0.9g max levels as that is what is very easily obtainable and "quick". At any rate if they got better over time, that is great but just not likely whatsoever. Likewise most of the aftermarket turbos we see, even new, are in the 0.5-0.9g max range. So not sure if we have some decimals off, or what exactly it is that has broken down with the communication path with your shop- but 0.389g max is actually really good for even a lightly used and balanced to perfection when new unit let alone a much older heavily used/tracked turbo that was likely never balanced to perfection in the first place.

Regarding the off-axis cover: Just so you know there is only about ~0.3mm clearance between the wheel and housing. So the point is if there was even ~0.3mm the off axis would not only be EXTREMELY visually obvious, more importantly the wheel would not even spin in the housing which obviously would be instant turbo death. So we believe there could be some "misinformation" or "miscommunication" going on with this entire point- we use high quality machinery/tooling and our tolerances for a part like this would be at most 0.03mm, MAYBE 0.05mm if there is some error such as debris caught in the tooling or perhaps too much clamping force is used... BUT even that would be visually noticeable to a trained eye when it comes to wheel symmetry. In short these figures would have to have been very largely exaggerated.

For reference here is a VSR trace of the last unit we balanced last night just to give you an idea of the actual values- FWIW anything around 0.1g is very very good.

Rob
Stock covers were machined to use instead. If one side of the cover was machined out to centre the compressor in the snout I was told the tolerance on the other side was apparently too large. When I received the turbos from the original owner and was testing it the compressor could touch the housing I found it coils on one side but could not on the other, which seems to support the claim? Either way it was corrected and the builder was happy with the compressor to housing clearance after he machined the stock covers.

I didn’t ask for balance traces, just asked what the balance figures were. I know it’s become an N54 turbo marketing point now to give customers confidence in the items as it was common knowledge the classics and perhaps other brands turbos back in the day weren’t well balanced but in other markets where this was never a problem (GTR’s, Evo’s etc) they’re not commonly supplied with turbos.

It would stand to reason that if the VSR balancer reports to 5 significant figures and 4 decimal places, ie: it reports to one ten thousandth of a G, that the 3rd and 4th significant figures are within its measurement range and well above the limit of detection. Ie: if it can report 0.0614 and the 4th decimal place is accurate - the machine is sure it’s 4 and not 3 - the 2nd and 3rd decimal places, being one one hundredth and one one thousandth of a G, respectively, would be well over 2 standard deviations from the LOD and therefore accurate. Hence mathematically speaking 0.0184 G isn’t outlandish as it’s still reporting to one ten thousandth of a G. I’m not a turbo engineer or manufacturer though so I’m just looking at this from a math point of view.

In any case I’m happy with them and the given the cost, time and inconvenience of buying items like this out of the US especially when failures occur, I think it makes a lot of sense to utilise local companies where possible.
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 09:53 PM   #57
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T1M View Post
Yep you were 100% accurate in your description of them prior to sale. I knew what I was getting.



Stock covers were machined to use instead. If one side of the cover was machined out to centre the compressor in the snout I was told the tolerance on the other side was apparently too large. When I received the turbos from the original owner and was testing it the compressor could touch the housing I found it coils on one side but could not on the other, which seems to support the claim? Either way it was corrected and the builder was happy with the compressor to housing clearance after he machined the stock covers.

I didn’t ask for balance traces, just asked what the balance figures were. I know it’s become an N54 turbo marketing point now to give customers confidence in the items as it was common knowledge the classics and perhaps other brands turbos back in the day weren’t well balanced but in other markets where this was never a problem (GTR’s, Evo’s etc) they’re not commonly supplied with turbos.

It would stand to reason that if the VSR balancer reports to 5 significant figures and 4 decimal places, ie: it reports to one ten thousandth of a G, that the 3rd and 4th significant figures are within its measurement range and well above the limit of detection. Ie: if it can report 0.0614 and the 4th decimal place is accurate - the machine is sure it’s 4 and not 3 - the 2nd and 3rd decimal places, being one one hundredth and one one thousandth of a G, respectively, would be well over 2 standard deviations from the LOD and therefore accurate. Hence mathematically speaking 0.0184 G isn’t outlandish as it’s still reporting to one ten thousandth of a G. I’m not a turbo engineer or manufacturer though so I’m just looking at this from a math point of view.

In any case I’m happy with them and the given the cost, time and inconvenience of buying items like this out of the US especially when failures occur, I think it makes a lot of sense to utilise local companies where possible.
Good deal on cutting fresh housings to match the new 15T billet wheels- that is the really the only way you can ensure it would've been correct without upping the wheel size.

As for the old housings, as stated, if they were even .002" (.05mm) off axis it would've been very visually noticeable when new; and they wouldn't have even been shipped. 5+ years later and worn out turbos why does it seem that way to you? Not sure. Regardless we will buy them back if you have them laying around, RHD compressor housings are something we tend to ship out but never get back so the more we get back the merrier. Shoot over an email if interested- the shipping would be cheap on just those 2 compressor housings.

As for your decimal stand to reason math- it is not correct. As you maybe aware we've been very intimate with a VSR for about 4 years now, that is working with it nearly every day of every week of every month... and what you are saying just isn't right. It makes most sense that your turbos were 0.184g (which is a great balance), and that the old RB was 3.89g (which would be very very poor, like explode any minute poor; but expected for an old used failing turbo that probably has a ton of oil coked up on the turbine).

If you had the performance report, of course we could've shown this out- but not the case and that is ok we will just have to use experience to straighten it all out. Just remember most shops believe anything under 1.5g is "acceptable", this is even built into our VSR's software showing as such (ie. provides a balance under this line marker at the top of the screen). While anything under that level is thus assumed to be ok, it just is not that great and the lower the vibration levels of course the better the turbo assembly is balanced. It is typically THOUGHT to be very acceptable, a step up so to speak- to be in the 0.5g-0.9g range which is an easily attainable quickie balancing level which is quite a bit better than the high threshold. This would explain why your shop thought the old RB was 4x as bad as it should be (0.9g x 4 = 3.6g).

Anyway we took the initiative a few years back to up the ante for the sake of quality and proof that every unit is balanced the best it can be balanced (~0.1g) and provide the documentation as such, additionally most customers prefer the actual "Performance Report" than just "trust us, it was done". We too feel the same way, especially after outsourcing the function and always wondering if the shop REALLY went the extra mile or if they were about saving time. Knowing what we know today, they probably were more about saving time than putting in the effort to get every unit to the 0.1g range.

PS. Most do not provide balancing forms in this market. Most do not because they either are not building the turbos theirselves, are outsourcing some or all of the balancing function, are not obtaining the quality results as they are not putting in the time, or simply just do not have the better equipment that is needed to get the top tier results consistently.

Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-17-2018 at 10:15 PM..
Appreciate 0
      05-17-2018, 11:36 PM   #58
T1M
Captain
Australia
196
Rep
657
Posts

Drives: AW MY12 1M
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Ok I think we have a units issue. What units are you reporting in?

I get that N54 turbo customers want reports now. I was just making the point that on other marques where turbos didn’t / don’t have failure epidemics customers aren’t as sensitive. It’s nice that you do provide them.

Last edited by T1M; 05-18-2018 at 04:35 AM..
Appreciate 0
      05-18-2018, 06:38 AM   #59
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T1M View Post
Ok I think we have a units issue. What units are you reporting in?

I get that N54 turbo customers want reports now. I was just making the point that on other marques where turbos didn’t / don’t have failure epidemics customers aren’t as sensitive. It’s nice that you do provide them.
T1M,

We think you are getting a little bit twisted as to why the balancing reports are being provided. They are being provided to demonstrate that we have the equipment, skills, and equally importantly to both are taking the TIME to get a perfect top tier balance on every single unit. Contrary to what you may believe, very VERY VERY few in the world are doing such things and especially to these levels- EVERY time. Quite frankly most do not even have equipment that is capable of doing a great job, and/or are outsourcing and getting basic results. So in a more limited number of words, it is basically flexing the muscles of capability and flaunting it accordingly.

When it comes to the failure epidemic aspect- if you take a basic built upgraded turbo (or a Top Tier built upgraded turbo for that matter) and install it/them on a single (or many) N54's, and subsequently in cookie cutter fashion push them all to 20+psi @ 500+whp @70+% WGDC's on stock inlets/outlets (worse yet OE RHD outlets) they simply are not going to have great longevity. The big thing here is that the N54 has horrific plumbing in OE form (even more so with RHD), and as this is N54 specific it is something that is not really typical across other platforms that you speak of such as GTR's/EVO's/etc. This platform has humbled COUNTLESS vendors over the past decade, even vendors with much experience on other platforms have came and gone. At any rate no one in their right mind would try these things these days, much had to be learned, and unfortunately we all had to live and learn our way through it... all of this has little to do with the Balancing reports we provide however.

As for VSR units- they usually are the same from what we have seen on most equipment. What RPM ranges are they balancing across? They are doing complete assembly balancing by accelerating a complete CHRA across an entire operating RPM band whilst pushing heated oil/etc through the assembly correct? What specific machine/equipment does your shop utilize?

In conclusion whether the your units were rebuilt to basic or top tier levels- you are only running 15psi. You are also running high flow inlets, likely with some upgrades to the outlets as well. You are also probably using a better quality oil. Your WGDC's will probably be in the 30-40% range. You will probably take the moment to adjust your BOV and plumb it in accordingly with a larger bung. You are using knowledge learned over the years, so when you add this all together you should be fine regardless.

Thanks,
Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-18-2018 at 06:57 AM..
Appreciate 0
      05-18-2018, 09:14 AM   #60
T1M
Captain
Australia
196
Rep
657
Posts

Drives: AW MY12 1M
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia

iTrader: (0)

I’m not sure what they have equipment wise. They’ve been around for many years, do essentially everything in house and have an unmarred track record in mostly competition usage scenarios. I’m sure they’re built as well as they can be and I’m yet to know of or hear about a failure.

In part due to our trade relationship with Japan and import laws, Australians have been buidling high powered GTR’s and anything else you care to name since they came out. A good portion of that work is ‘high flowing’ stock turbos, unless the customer wants to level up to full aftermarket. There’s quite a few excellent turbo modification businesses here who have their own VSR gear and have done for a very long time, because it’s the right way to do it and the only way to ensure they aren’t going to grenade when pushed hard. And Australians love to push cars hard.

Balance reports here at a local level are seriously not a thing. They’re not a thing in VAG world with tuned Audi’s or VW’s, not a thing with AMG’s/Merc’s, not a thing with evos, STI’s; I’ve owned and modified a few cars in that list as have close friends and really I’ve never heard of or read about anyone receiving one with a turbo and unless they’re a bit nerdy like me, even asking about it. We’re splitting hairs over the reason I guessed RB Turbo now do, but whatever the reason like I said before it’s a nice touch to do so now that you can. For folks like me it’d help put to bed concerns from days gone by and for others it’d be like hey cool I got this printout with a squiggly line.

N54’s are a horrible platform to try and extract power from largely due to the packaging issues of the turbos, inlets and outlets especially as you say on RHD. Folks don’t know how to calculate pressure drop and tune accordingly and until recently no one had even flow tested the stock inlets. Oil temps I’d start doing a cool down lap on in my old Evo are almost normal cruising temps on these cars, so yes large restrictions, high oil temps and crap oil sure no wonder these engines eat turbos. Tuning is still in its infancy with these too so it all goes hand in hand.

I was spoiled with jap cars and their high quality Japanese made aftermarket parts, hell even my golf had a very nice turbo kit but this BMW has been a shock. So many rubbish parts, cheap everything, silicone everything that has to be jammed in between things, zip tied to other things...but it makes sense as the cars I came from were 50-60k plus sports cars or homologation rally cars whereas the 135/335 platform which everthing is catered towards are ordinary vehicles and 15-30k in the used market now.

It was pretty obvious coming in that to get air into the engine, you had to get air into and out of the turbos and the tiny stock parts aren’t up to the task. Oil temps need to come down a lot and this low SAPS oil isn’t going to cut it. I’ve taken steps to address these things but still I’m not planning to push it hard at all. Being a 1M I don’t want to hack it up either, I just want an effortless 400whp with easily controllable IAT’s and lower turbine backpressure to allow me to run a bit more timing and call it a day. I feel it’s the wrong platform for big numbers, there’s so many others that do it better for less effort. Hell even the Hennessey Jeeps are nearly as quick as the worlds fastest N54’s and they’re 2.3 tonnes of SUV with just a blower upgrade, exhaust, injectors and a tune.

We’re our of the dark ages now so hopefully the next 5-10 years sees big things for the platform.
Appreciate 0
      05-18-2018, 09:27 AM   #61
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant Colonel
Rob@RBTurbo's Avatar
United_States
387
Rep
1,571
Posts

Drives: '08 335I AT, '14 M6 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T1M View Post
I’m not sure what they have equipment wise. They’ve been around for many years, do essentially everything in house and have an unmarred track record in mostly competition usage scenarios. I’m sure they’re built as well as they can be and I’m yet to know of or hear about a failure.

In part due to our trade relationship with Japan and import laws, Australians have been buidling high powered GTR’s and anything else you care to name since they came out. A good portion of that work is ‘high flowing’ stock turbos, unless the customer wants to level up to full aftermarket. There’s quite a few excellent turbo modification businesses here who have their own VSR gear and have done for a very long time, because it’s the right way to do it and the only way to ensure they aren’t going to grenade when pushed hard. And Australians love to push cars hard.

Balance reports here at a local level are seriously not a thing. They’re not a thing in VAG world with tuned Audi’s or VW’s, not a thing with AMG’s/Merc’s, not a thing with evos, STI’s; I’ve owned and modified a few cars in that list as have close friends and really I’ve never heard of or read about anyone receiving one with a turbo and unless they’re a bit nerdy like me, even asking about it. We’re splitting hairs over the reason I guessed RB Turbo now do, but whatever the reason like I said before it’s a nice touch to do so now that you can. For folks like me it’d help put to bed concerns from days gone by and for others it’d be like hey cool I got this printout with a squiggly line.

N54’s are a horrible platform to try and extract power from largely due to the packaging issues of the turbos, inlets and outlets especially as you say on RHD. Folks don’t know how to calculate pressure drop and tune accordingly and until recently no one had even flow tested the stock inlets. Oil temps I’d start doing a cool down lap on in my old Evo are almost normal cruising temps on these cars, so yes large restrictions, high oil temps and crap oil sure no wonder these engines eat turbos. Tuning is still in its infancy with these too so it all goes hand in hand.

I was spoiled with jap cars and their high quality Japanese made aftermarket parts, hell even my golf had a very nice turbo kit but this BMW has been a shock. So many rubbish parts, cheap everything, silicone everything that has to be jammed in between things, zip tied to other things...but it makes sense as the cars I came from were 50-60k plus sports cars or homologation rally cars whereas the 135/335 platform which everthing is catered towards are ordinary vehicles and 15-30k in the used market now.

It was pretty obvious coming in that to get air into the engine, you had to get air into and out of the turbos and the tiny stock parts aren’t up to the task. Oil temps need to come down a lot and this low SAPS oil isn’t going to cut it. I’ve taken steps to address these things but still I’m not planning to push it hard at all. Being a 1M I don’t want to hack it up either, I just want an effortless 400whp with easily controllable IAT’s and lower turbine backpressure to allow me to run a bit more timing and call it a day. I feel it’s the wrong platform for big numbers, there’s so many others that do it better for less effort. Hell even the Hennessey Jeeps are nearly as quick as the worlds fastest N54’s and they’re 2.3 tonnes of SUV with just a blower upgrade, exhaust, injectors and a tune.

We’re our of the dark ages now so hopefully the next 5-10 years sees big things for the platform.
Couldn't agree more with all of the above...

From 2004-2009 we worked exclusively with the Japanese market, primarily Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4/Dodge Stealth TT/Subaru WRX. All our builds were fairly basic, we used typical machinery, and failures were unheard of and it was great. Entering into this platform, needless to say, we were quite confident it would be the same. Unfortunately the N54 platform ate us alive in comparison... and it continues to eat all others who join it one by one slowly but surely. Usually it takes years for this to be noticed, as these failures typically do not happen overnight. By the time they start popping up, there are a lot of units in the field, and things can get ugly (ie. Hexon). We hear about it all behind the scenes, some vendors seem to escape the forum scrutiny and some are ousted at every turn- it doesn't help to be the first out there pumping out units in this regard as time isn't on your side nor was the platform advancements. It also doesn't help (heaven forbid) if there is a defect which affects a batch of units which can easily happen in this industry. Fortunately we have everything nailed down to a science, it took a while, but we are seeing 0% failure rates over years and all things considered in THIS platform that is simply amazing.

Best of luck with your locally refurbished RB's, if you ever have any questions shoot over an email.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________________

To any others in this thread- or any friends of friends who maybe in the know- we have not really ever been able to find anyone who has any of these old RB Classic units laying around. Not sure if customers just trashed them, are still running them, have them on a shelf, or what; but if anyone has any they DO have value- they can be refurbished to perfection/etc. Do NOT hesitate to shoot us an email, we do enjoy putting our latest touches on our products and (shipping aside) it is very affordable. If any number of sets can be corralled up, shipping them as a single package would help out but as of now we can not even find a single set. As always we are an email away, and of course please contact us DIRECTLY.

Thanks,
Rob

Last edited by Rob@RBTurbo; 05-18-2018 at 09:46 AM..
Appreciate 0
      08-11-2018, 08:46 PM   #62
schmick325
Private
25
Rep
93
Posts

Drives: 2012 BMW 1M
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Brisbane, Australia

iTrader: (0)

I have a pair of RB Next Gen plus's coming off in 10 days for suspect failure. After 2000 kms they are down on power and sound horrible. Car is also using oil as well.

Installed by Advan.
Appreciate 0
      08-11-2018, 09:49 PM   #63
Brule
Brigadier General
Australia
827
Rep
3,189
Posts

Drives: 2007 335i e92 6spd man
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Darwin

iTrader: (0)

These will be interesting to look at.
Appreciate 0
      08-11-2018, 10:37 PM   #64
schmick325
Private
25
Rep
93
Posts

Drives: 2012 BMW 1M
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Brisbane, Australia

iTrader: (0)

Yeah I'm keen to get the bottom of it. The whole process has been a complete nightmare.
Appreciate 0
      08-12-2018, 01:55 AM   #65
Brule
Brigadier General
Australia
827
Rep
3,189
Posts

Drives: 2007 335i e92 6spd man
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Darwin

iTrader: (0)

What symptons do you have? Mechanical, metal on metal, whistling, smoking or dripping oil?

New turbos should be fun.
Appreciate 0
      08-12-2018, 03:45 AM   #66
schmick325
Private
25
Rep
93
Posts

Drives: 2012 BMW 1M
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Brisbane, Australia

iTrader: (0)

All of the above except for dripping oil / noticeable smoke

Car is using oil as well.

It has been boost tested to 35psi with no leaks.

Short of R/R turbo's, everything checks out ok in shop tests.

Since the below vids were made the noise is worse and power is down.

This is how Advan gave the car back to me along with an exhaust leak and other install issues.




Last edited by schmick325; 08-12-2018 at 04:22 AM..
Appreciate 0
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 PM.




e90post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST