[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by feuer

Correct. 10 to 12 weekends per year, from March thru October, running 20psi. Also, almost daily driven. I don’t drive it only when I’m fixing something on it. Been through 4 coolant pumps too. With all certainty I claim that had these be aftermarket: Pure, RB, Vargas, MMP would have failed a lot quicker, even those that are “made” to boost past 20psi tune.

How do you know Pures or RB's would have failed quicker than the stock turbos? I know that at least the RB's have bigger bearings/bushings/thrust plates than the stock turbos.....so I would think they would be more "reliable". It's really hard to say which turbos are more "reliable" unless you have done back to back scientific tests with some sort of "control" group.

I find it hard to believe that turbos with larger bushings and thrust plates would fail sooner than the stock turbos as the same boost levels. How are you so certain than the stock turbos lasted longer than RB or Pure turbos would have? Where's your data?

[feuer]

Originally Posted by iqraceworks

How do you know Pures or RB's would have failed quicker than the stock turbos? I know that at least the RB's have bigger bearings/bushings/thrust plates than the stock turbos.....so I would think they would be more "reliable". It's really hard to say which turbos are more "reliable" unless you have done back to back scientific tests with some sort of "control" group.

I find it hard to believe that turbos with larger bushings and thrust plates would fail sooner than the stock turbos as the same boost levels. How are you so certain than the stock turbos lasted longer than RB or Pure turbos would have? Where's your data?

I have replaced more aftermarket that OEM turbos and that’s is more scientific than whatever you will come up with

[TheMidnightNarwhal]

Originally Posted by feuer

I have replaced more aftermarket that OEM turbos and that’s is more scientific than whatever you will come up with

But why? We want to learn and understand why the aftermarket ones aren't as good once you want power goal higher than stage2+. I respectfully disagree, that's not scientific at all and just anecdotal. Like we want to know from facts or technical aspect you know what I mean? I get your point but it doesn't tell us anything. Especially when others say the internals are better, how can the aftermarket fail more?

If I wasn't going just stage2+ I would consider aftermarket turbos for sure but then you wrote what you wrote without elaborating more on it so I'm pretty lost tbh.

[feuer]

Originally Posted by TheMidnightNarwhal

But why? We want to learn and understand why the aftermarket ones aren't as good once you want power goal higher than stage2+. I respectfully disagree, that's not scientific at all and just anecdotal. Like we want to know from facts or technical aspect you know what I mean? I get your point but it doesn't tell us anything. Especially when others say the internals are better, how can the aftermarket fail more?

If I wasn't going just stage2+ I would consider aftermarket turbos for sure but then you wrote what you wrote without elaborating more on it so I'm pretty lost tbh.

On the forums is all mostly anecdotal. Most frequent issue is blowing oil and some damaged shafts and impellers. Manufacturers usually always blame either the tune or installer error. Take it however you want. That has been my experience from working on these engines. I have two which I track personally. Second one has been single turbo retrofitted since 2020. The threads on failed aftermarket, and failed again after they have been sent back for rebuild or exchanged far exceed the threads of failed OEM turbos. People like me who track these often either have OEM twins, custom twins setup with renowned brand turbos like Gerett, or went single. Track is lot more challenging on whole drivetrain compared to drag racing or aggressive street driving.

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by iqraceworks

How do you know Pures or RB's would have failed quicker than the stock turbos? I know that at least the RB's have bigger bearings/bushings/thrust plates than the stock turbos.....so I would think they would be more "reliable". It's really hard to say which turbos are more "reliable" unless you have done back to back scientific tests with some sort of "control" group.

I find it hard to believe that turbos with larger bushings and thrust plates would fail sooner than the stock turbos as the same boost levels. How are you so certain than the stock turbos lasted longer than RB or Pure turbos would have? Where's your data?

Stock ones would fail sooner, especially if you rinsed them at 20psi+ regularly

20psi on even the OEM Billets should last as long or outlast OEM stock ones.

Failure rates are a good indication but how hard and how often it's driven and wether it's tracked all have an effect on longevity. Freur is just making assumption, with no evidence to back up his claims.

[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by feuer

I have replaced more aftermarket that OEM turbos and that’s is more scientific than whatever you will come up with

Since you said "aftermarket turbos" and didn't call out a specific brand (like RB Turbos).....I would have to assume you are talking about the junk ebay turbos that are all over the place.

Yes....I agree with you, stock turbos are going to be more reliable than cheap china eBay turbos.....but I would be willing to bet that a set of RB TWO's at 20psi are going to be much more reliable than a set of stock turbos as 20psi. How could they not? Larger bushings, thrust plates, and bigger oil channels machined in the thrust plates. There is no way they are going to be less reliable.

Are you saying OEM turbos that are designed around 8-10psi operating pressure are going to out last a set of turbos that have been beefed up to handle much more than that? That doesn't make sense at all.

[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by Saif2018

Stock ones would fail sooner, especially if you rinsed them at 20psi+ regularly

20psi on even the OEM Billets should last as long or outlast OEM stock ones.

Failure rates are a good indication but how hard and how often it's driven and wether it's tracked all have an effect on longevity. Freur is just making assumption, with no evidence to back up his claims.

If you have been here on the forums long enough, you start to realize that's just what he does. Makes claims.....can't back them up.....then he results to insulting people and name calling when they call him out. I'm sure this thread will be no different.

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by iqraceworks

If you have been here on the forums long enough, you start to realize that's just what he does. Makes claims.....can't back them up.....then he results to insulting people and name calling when they call him out. I'm sure this thread will be no different.

Yeah, that's typically what he does.

[rjahl]

I don't see how anyone could really produce comparison data on these turbos. Just far too many factors to look at.

How would you start? Failures per hours driven, factors for Max compressor RPM and duration. Heat cycles... or duration of driving cycles.

Good luck developing that matrix.

Then comes the whole "quality" question. Where " quality " means meeting the expectation of the customer. OEM has a completely different expectation than a stage two set up.

[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by rjahl

I don't see how anyone could really produce comparison data on these turbos. Just far too many factors to look at.

How would you start? Failures per hours driven, factors for Max compressor RPM and duration. Heat cycles... or duration of driving cycles.

Good luck developing that matrix.

Then comes the whole "quality" question. Where " quality " means meeting the expectation of the customer. OEM has a completely different expectation than a stage two set up.

I agree...determining "reliability" is pretty darn tough....way to many variables to factor in. That being said..."theoretically".... turbos with larger bearings/bushings/thrust plates should be able to handle more boost psi ...because physics.

Most people that have some common sense can assume that something like RB or Pure with upgraded components should last longer than stock at a given boost level, but in the end...there are just too many variables to really prove anything with hard data.

When it's all said and done....it's all personal choice. Buy what you want....and have fun with it ....as long as they last

[feuer]

Originally Posted by iqraceworks

If you have been here on the forums long enough, you start to realize that's just what he does. Makes claims.....can't back them up.....then he results to insulting people and name calling when they call him out. I'm sure this thread will be no different.

Originally Posted by Saif2018

Yeah, that's typically what he does.

That’s exactly how I would describe you two, weird coincidence! For reference, I have worked on these engines and been on these forums long before you got your own n54 powered cars. Going back over a decade, one can find plenty of threads on failed non oem turbos. Anyhow, since you are making it personal, tell me how many you have replaced? I have replaced Hexon, Vargas, RB, and Pure, although Pure was for N55, never Daw and Franken but had good experience for Audi/VW Franken turbos. That’s from the brand name that I recall. Actually have not had any experience with EBay, Amazon or Alibaba turbo and honestly never ever had installed any new of these. Only removed broken to install something else. Or installed second hand to remove it shortly after because it failed. Now you will say, oh there you go, your claim is automatically invalid because these weren’t new, but me knowing that they have been installed on a vehicle for a short time and had already failed, what do you expect me to think? Accept what manufacturer says that wasn’t installed properly, wasn’t primed or something. Or that the tune was the issue? Sorry, but I have serious trouble believing that was the reason on street car with off the shelf map that isn’t reaching manufacturer suggested PSI rating, on a car that to my personal opinion is driven gently compared to me tracking my own cars. This is why on my own personal n54s that I track, on one I stayed with oem, and on the other I went single turbo. Neither of these manufacturers don’t have back to back testing with other turbos to support their claims that their turbos are superior but yet you believe their claims and expect these tests from a mechanic, ok? Nice! This discussion reminds me of thread on Ghassan, when two cars came to shop, one on tow truck from 5-6 hours away, both with plethora of issues. From mismatch transmission, to mismatch ECU, missing parts…When I wrote on the forums that guy is scamming, passing used engines as rebuilt, people attacked me in support of Ghassan although never had any experience themselves. Guy made a name and some records settings, no doubt, but there are also a lot of court cases against him. People will read these threads and they will decide what to believe in. If you disagree with me, that’s perfectly alright, other might appreciate my post, especially those whom had issues with aftermarket turbos haha!

[iqraceworks]

Hello wall of text that has nothing to do with aftermarket turbo reliability...........🥴

[AWD Addict]

Originally Posted by AWD Addict

there's no statistically sound way to prove that, or refute it.

So let's not have this discussion and we can all leave our flame suits in the drawer.

[CarAbuser]

RBs are probably the only aftermarket turbo I'd consider because of their reliability. If you ran the RBs at the same power the stockers were being run at I'd put money on the RBs lasting longer.

[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by CarAbuser

RBs are probably the only aftermarket turbo I'd consider because of their reliability. If you ran the RBs at the same power the stockers were being run at I'd put money on the RBs lasting longer.

Exactly.....no way they couldn't last longer than stockers assuming the exact same test environment. The RB's have bigger bushings and thrust plates.....those are the main things that fail. Also larger oil channels in the thrust plates...another improvement over the stock turbos.

I really don't see how you can argue against physics....

[CarAbuser]

Originally Posted by iqraceworks

Exactly.....no way they couldn't last longer than stockers assuming the exact same test environment. The RB's have bigger bushings and thrust plates.....those are the main things that fail. Also larger oil channels in the thrust plates...another improvement over the stock turbos.

I really don't see how you can argue against physics....

Well most aftermarket turbos are crap and will fail way before stock turbos. I think that's just because there's so many poor quality options out there like VTT and the chinesium options.

RBs really are the exception to the rule.

[iqraceworks]

Originally Posted by CarAbuser

Well most aftermarket turbos are crap and will fail way before stock turbos. I think that's just because there's so many poor quality options out there like VTT and the chinesium options.

RBs really are the exception to the rule.

Yep...I completely agree. You can't really have a blanket statement like "stock turbos are more reliable than aftermarket turbos"..... Unless you specifically call out which aftermarket turbos you're talking about. Yes, most are cheap china junk. RB's are top notch, I've heard Pures are very high quality also, but I have no first hand experience. All the others (DAW, VIV, CTS, etc....) Are just rebranded china junk.