Sponsored

Bov and wastegate question

i4gains

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Threads
14
Messages
99
Reaction score
11
Location
Portland, OR
First Name
Chris
Vehicle(s)
Ingot Silver EB Mustang with PP
Just to be certain here, i was really interested in the hks bov, currently i have the vta set up, there are mods i could get before this but it sounds too cool lol. question is, i have a cobb tune ots, which dont worry i intend to email adam soon once i get my IC, do i need a diff tune for a new bov and also what is the difference between a bov and a turbosmart wastegate actuator ?

current mods: borla stype axle back, cobb ots tune, steeda base shifter bushing, clutch spring, plan on getting a shop to add a y pipe instead of resonator.

also bonus question, ill be getting an intercooler, and possibly either a bigger turbo or new wheels in january...tax return baby, are there any mods such as a bov that i should just have installed when i install another part on the build list such as an intercooler or a bigger turbo or a catch can etc?
Sponsored

 

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Just to be certain here, i was really interested in the hks bov, currently i have the vta set up, there are mods i could get before this but it sounds too cool lol. question is, i have a cobb tune ots, which dont worry i intend to email adam soon once i get my IC, do i need a diff tune for a new bov and also what is the difference between a bov and a turbosmart wastegate actuator ?

current mods: borla stype axle back, cobb ots tune, steeda base shifter bushing, clutch spring, plan on getting a shop to add a y pipe instead of resonator.

also bonus question, ill be getting an intercooler, and possibly either a bigger turbo or new wheels in january...tax return baby, are there any mods such as a bov that i should just have installed when i install another part on the build list such as an intercooler or a bigger turbo or a catch can etc?
Waste Gates control boost pressure. When your turbine is spun up to speed, it generates X amount of pressure, but your PCM determines what boost pressure your intake will actually see based on the torque demand (aka how much throttle you are giving the car and what boost pressure PCM determines is needed to meed that demand / request).

A Blow Off Valve serves a different purpose (three in the EB actually). It's purpose is to vent excessive pressure which occures once the turbine is spun up to speed but you let off the throttle. The throttle plate is now closed but the turbine is still spinning as it does not change speed nearly as rapidly as your throttle plate opens and closes.

By venting pressure it also allows the turbine to stay spun up to RPM, so when your back on the throttle, you have full boost available as opposed to having to wait for the turbine to spool up again (this is the second purpose of a BOV).

In the EB and likely other modern TDI engines, the BOV is also now used for continuous venting. When your at cruising speed and light load on the highway for example and your only generating less than 1 PSI boost, the turbine poses more of a loss than a benefit. By that I mean that the turbine drive side poses an exhaust restriction due to the impeller wheels, bearing surfaces and the energy it takes to compress the air. At low boost there's little to no benefit to the engine in compressing the air to 0.1~1 psi, so by venting the small amount of pressure your taking removing some of the exhaust restriction, which results in better fuel economy. Continuous venting is primarily done for fuel economy purposes, I'm not aware of any other reason for it.

Also note the stock ecoboost mustang does NOT have a BOV. It has a Diverter Valve (DV). It does the same thing as a BOV, however instead of venting the excess pressure to atmosphere (outside the intake system), it vents back into the intake tract on the filter side (before the compressor wheel). There's no difference in performance generally (other than the fact that the stock Diverter Valve is leaky, but a better designed diverter valve would negate any advantages of after market BOV's).

I would suggest you also consider the Boomba BOV. It's ECU controlled, which will maintain the continuous venting which aids fuel economy during cruising. It also gives the tuner more control over when the valve opens. There's nothing wrong with the turbo smart valve itself, but it's controlled by a pneumatic pressure switch, there's no intelligence to it and you can only set fixed trip points based on spring pressure tuning. It also voids the continuous venting which is strictly controlled by the ECU.

Some people don't like to hear the constant hissing of the BOV during continuous venting, which is much less intense and audible than an off throttle hiss mind you, so they advocate for the turbo smart, however if your going to Adam to get it tuned, I don't see why he could not remove that function if so desired, but you retain the option to put it back in if you decided to.

I have the Boomba and think it's a great design overall. Performance wise (if going fast and sounding cool is all you care about) you can't go wrong with Turbosmart or Boomba, but the Boomba is ECU controlled, pneumatically powered (uses an electronic solenoid operated manifold block to controll weather the valve is opened by vacuum or held closed by boost, where the turbo smart just uses a traditional fixed pressure switch and essentially bypasses ECU function) so it maintains continuous venting function for better cruising fuel economy and no tuning of the trip points is required (ECU self tunes) by adjusting spring rate / shimming the spring.

As an engineer, I think it's a better overall solution due to the granularity of control the ECU facilitates. But you have to decided for yourself, if the slightly audible hissing you hear during continuous venting is something you don't have and Adam can't remove that feature you would be better off with the Turbosmart, otherwise there is a more factory architecture like design available in the Boomba.
 

TEXAS HEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2016
Threads
37
Messages
705
Reaction score
278
Location
TEXAS
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10
Waste Gates control boost pressure. When your turbine is spun up to speed, it generates X amount of pressure, but your PCM determines what boost pressure your intake will actually see based on the torque demand (aka how much throttle you are giving the car and what boost pressure PCM determines is needed to meed that demand / request).

A Blow Off Valve serves a different purpose (three in the EB actually). It's purpose is to vent excessive pressure which occures once the turbine is spun up to speed but you let off the throttle. The throttle plate is now closed but the turbine is still spinning as it does not change speed nearly as rapidly as your throttle plate opens and closes.

By venting pressure it also allows the turbine to stay spun up to RPM, so when your back on the throttle, you have full boost available as opposed to having to wait for the turbine to spool up again (this is the second purpose of a BOV).

In the EB and likely other modern TDI engines, the BOV is also now used for continuous venting. When your at cruising speed and light load on the highway for example and your only generating less than 1 PSI boost, the turbine poses more of a loss than a benefit. By that I mean that the turbine drive side poses an exhaust restriction due to the impeller wheels, bearing surfaces and the energy it takes to compress the air. At low boost there's little to no benefit to the engine in compressing the air to 0.1~1 psi, so by venting the small amount of pressure your taking removing some of the exhaust restriction, which results in better fuel economy. Continuous venting is primarily done for fuel economy purposes, I'm not aware of any other reason for it.

Also note the stock ecoboost mustang does NOT have a BOV. It has a Diverter Valve (DV). It does the same thing as a BOV, however instead of venting the excess pressure to atmosphere (outside the intake system), it vents back into the intake tract on the filter side (before the compressor wheel). There's no difference in performance generally (other than the fact that the stock Diverter Valve is leaky, but a better designed diverter valve would negate any advantages of after market BOV's).

I would suggest you also consider the Boomba BOV. It's ECU controlled, which will maintain the continuous venting which aids fuel economy during cruising. It also gives the tuner more control over when the valve opens. There's nothing wrong with the turbo smart valve itself, but it's controlled by a pneumatic pressure switch, there's no intelligence to it and you can only set fixed trip points based on spring pressure tuning. It also voids the continuous venting which is strictly controlled by the ECU.

Some people don't like to hear the constant hissing of the BOV during continuous venting, which is much less intense and audible than an off throttle hiss mind you, so they advocate for the turbo smart, however if your going to Adam to get it tuned, I don't see why he could not remove that function if so desired, but you retain the option to put it back in if you decided to.

I have the Boomba and think it's a great design overall. Performance wise (if going fast and sounding cool is all you care about) you can't go wrong with Turbosmart or Boomba, but the Boomba is ECU controlled, pneumatically powered (uses an electronic solenoid operated manifold block to controll weather the valve is opened by vacuum or held closed by boost, where the turbo smart just uses a traditional fixed pressure switch and essentially bypasses ECU function) so it maintains continuous venting function for better cruising fuel economy and no tuning of the trip points is required (ECU self tunes) by adjusting spring rate / shimming the spring.

As an engineer, I think it's a better overall solution due to the granularity of control the ECU facilitates. But you have to decided for yourself, if the slightly audible hissing you hear during continuous venting is something you don't have and Adam can't remove that feature you would be better off with the Turbosmart, otherwise there is a more factory architecture like design available in the Boomba.
I'm soon to be testing the GFB Diverter Valve+ which is a redesign of the internals on the factory DV which does not VTA. It maintains the ECU functionality and full recirc aspect, however holds boost without leaking and when venting it only opens as much as it needs to vent, so quick response and quick recovery are its attributes. A very highly regarded upgrade in the VW community. Not to mention it's quite a bit cheaper.

http://www.gfb.com.au/products/blow...dv-t9358-suits-mercedes-ford-and-volvo-by-gfb
 

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I'm soon to be testing the GFB Diverter Valve+ which is a redesign of the internals on the factory DV which does not VTA. It maintains the ECU functionality and full recirc aspect, however holds boost without leaking and when venting it only opens as much as it needs to vent, so quick response and quick recovery are its attributes. A very highly regarded upgrade in the VW community. Not to mention it's quite a bit cheaper.

http://www.gfb.com.au/products/blow...dv-t9358-suits-mercedes-ford-and-volvo-by-gfb
Looks like a great alternative. It would be interesting to see back to back dyno runs with the DV vs the BOV to see if there's any notable advantage over the Boomba or if it's roughly equivalent. If I ever get sick of the BOV sound this looks like a great alternative that is silent but addresses on the factory deficiency.
 

TEXAS HEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2016
Threads
37
Messages
705
Reaction score
278
Location
TEXAS
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10
Looks like a great alternative. It would be interesting to see back to back dyno runs with the DV vs the BOV to see if there's any notable advantage over the Boomba or if it's roughly equivalent.
I would tend to think its functionality and performance benefit would be nearly identical, however I like the idea of it being full recirc and the "quicker" recovery between shifts being the selling points for me.
 

Sponsored

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I would tend to think its functionality and performance benefit would be nearly identical, however I like the idea of it being full recirc and the "quicker" recovery between shifts being the selling points for me.
That's what Boomba claims on their valve as well regarding recovery. The vent tube through the body is the same size as the ducting in the stock compressor tube so there's no restriction at least with the Boomba valve, not sure about turbo smart.

It would come down to how fast the solenoid manifold operates as both the Boomba and DV+ are ECU controlled.

The boomba actually uses a similar method, the "pilot" hole is just in a solenoid operated manifold block instead of in the valve head. Electronic solenoids are pretty quick, with response times for similar control valves are less then 2mS, far faster than a human can detect and orders of magnitude faster than we could modulate the throttle.

Typical human reaction time ranges between 10mS up to 100mS. See page 4 of a similar Mac Valve solenoid specs: http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/97890/docs/31catalog.pdf?t=1472051799573

I think this comes down to two things: Cost and Noise. Function and performance I think as you mentioned are probably identical. Do you want a lower cost silent solution or a higher cost noisy solution (some people really like the hiss, I personally like it...for the time being lol).
 

jbailer

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2015
Threads
43
Messages
3,273
Reaction score
1,290
Location
Maryland
First Name
Joe
Vehicle(s)
2015 EB Magnetic Premium PP 50AP
I don't think a dyno would be necessary for comparison. Power isn't really the question, it's how well the DV/BOV is sealing and how responsive it is. You could simply do some WOT pulls and log boost. Might be good to do multiple gears like 2-3 so you can see recovery as well.

I like the Boomba but don't want to hear the constant hiss (not sure how noticeable that is). The actual blow off wouldn't bother me at all. I looked at the GFB DV+ when it was mentioned earlier. That seems like an excellent choice for someone that doesn't want to hear the blow off, very well designed. For me, my factory DV seems to hold very well so not all of them are bad or leaky.
 
OP
OP
i4gains

i4gains

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Threads
14
Messages
99
Reaction score
11
Location
Portland, OR
First Name
Chris
Vehicle(s)
Ingot Silver EB Mustang with PP
Waste Gates control boost pressure. When your turbine is spun up to speed, it generates X amount of pressure, but your PCM determines what boost pressure your intake will actually see based on the torque demand (aka how much throttle you are giving the car and what boost pressure PCM determines is needed to meed that demand / request).

A Blow Off Valve serves a different purpose (three in the EB actually). It's purpose is to vent excessive pressure which occures once the turbine is spun up to speed but you let off the throttle. The throttle plate is now closed but the turbine is still spinning as it does not change speed nearly as rapidly as your throttle plate opens and closes.

By venting pressure it also allows the turbine to stay spun up to RPM, so when your back on the throttle, you have full boost available as opposed to having to wait for the turbine to spool up again (this is the second purpose of a BOV).

In the EB and likely other modern TDI engines, the BOV is also now used for continuous venting. When your at cruising speed and light load on the highway for example and your only generating less than 1 PSI boost, the turbine poses more of a loss than a benefit. By that I mean that the turbine drive side poses an exhaust restriction due to the impeller wheels, bearing surfaces and the energy it takes to compress the air. At low boost there's little to no benefit to the engine in compressing the air to 0.1~1 psi, so by venting the small amount of pressure your taking removing some of the exhaust restriction, which results in better fuel economy. Continuous venting is primarily done for fuel economy purposes, I'm not aware of any other reason for it.

Also note the stock ecoboost mustang does NOT have a BOV. It has a Diverter Valve (DV). It does the same thing as a BOV, however instead of venting the excess pressure to atmosphere (outside the intake system), it vents back into the intake tract on the filter side (before the compressor wheel). There's no difference in performance generally (other than the fact that the stock Diverter Valve is leaky, but a better designed diverter valve would negate any advantages of after market BOV's).

I would suggest you also consider the Boomba BOV. It's ECU controlled, which will maintain the continuous venting which aids fuel economy during cruising. It also gives the tuner more control over when the valve opens. There's nothing wrong with the turbo smart valve itself, but it's controlled by a pneumatic pressure switch, there's no intelligence to it and you can only set fixed trip points based on spring pressure tuning. It also voids the continuous venting which is strictly controlled by the ECU.

Some people don't like to hear the constant hissing of the BOV during continuous venting, which is much less intense and audible than an off throttle hiss mind you, so they advocate for the turbo smart, however if your going to Adam to get it tuned, I don't see why he could not remove that function if so desired, but you retain the option to put it back in if you decided to.

I have the Boomba and think it's a great design overall. Performance wise (if going fast and sounding cool is all you care about) you can't go wrong with Turbosmart or Boomba, but the Boomba is ECU controlled, pneumatically powered (uses an electronic solenoid operated manifold block to controll weather the valve is opened by vacuum or held closed by boost, where the turbo smart just uses a traditional fixed pressure switch and essentially bypasses ECU function) so it maintains continuous venting function for better cruising fuel economy and no tuning of the trip points is required (ECU self tunes) by adjusting spring rate / shimming the spring.

As an engineer, I think it's a better overall solution due to the granularity of control the ECU facilitates. But you have to decided for yourself, if the slightly audible hissing you hear during continuous venting is something you don't have and Adam can't remove that feature you would be better off with the Turbosmart, otherwise there is a more factory architecture like design available in the Boomba.
Well, you've sold me on the Boomba lol, i like simple, easy and compatible and thats seems to be what boomba would provide. I greatly appreciate your help! One last thing, the turbosmart is the best wastegate currently?
 

EnFOURcer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Threads
0
Messages
137
Reaction score
45
Location
United States
Website
www.turbosmartusa.com
Vehicle(s)
2015 Ecostang, 2015 5.0, 2007 GT500, 2014 Tremor
Waiting for dyno results ;-)

If the OEM's control strategies and methodologies were the best (from a performance standpoint), a whole industry would not exist.
 

TEXAS HEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2016
Threads
37
Messages
705
Reaction score
278
Location
TEXAS
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10
Waiting for dyno results ;-)

If the OEM's control strategies and methodologies were the best (from a performance standpoint), a whole industry would not exist.
Idk if the OEM's control strategies intentionally bleed or vent manifold pressure via the BPV/DV as a means to control boost or even to vent an overboost situation? Perhaps someone can say specifically if it does or not?

However, the actuation of the valve being computer controlled does appeal to me because electronic actuation is usually faster than mechanical. That recovery time between shifts in a manual car is important to me. For me, the fact that the GFB DV+ will hold pressure better than the factory valve, it does not require any splicing of hoses, no additional solenoids and/or resisters, makes it the best solution for a potentially leaky stock DV, not to mention it cost less.
 

Sponsored

EnFOURcer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Threads
0
Messages
137
Reaction score
45
Location
United States
Website
www.turbosmartusa.com
Vehicle(s)
2015 Ecostang, 2015 5.0, 2007 GT500, 2014 Tremor
However, the actuation of the valve being computer controlled does appeal to me because electronic actuation is usually faster than mechanical. That recovery time between shifts in a manual car is important to me. For me, the fact that the GFB DV+ will hold pressure better than the factory valve, it does not require any splicing of hoses, no additional solenoids and/or resisters, makes it the best solution for a potentially leaky stock DV, not to mention it cost less.
The only situation where the ECU controlling the valve would truly be beneficial (from a performance standpoint) would be where the only strategy operating it is TPS based. And by the way, their TB control strategies are also awful. This car would be SOOO much better with a cable throttle - lol

Why does the car run so much better when tuned?
 
Last edited:

PewterCam

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Threads
14
Messages
815
Reaction score
237
Location
Chicago Suburbs
Vehicle(s)
2001 Z28 Camaro and 2015 Ecoboost Mustang
My experience After going to a TS mechanical valve... the car feels much better. It builds boost like a normal turbo car and feels more linear. I'm not going back to any electronic valve on my car after feeling the difference.


One example of the stock valves operation and a situation the Boomba or any other electronic valve will not change... The stock valve stays open at steady cruise because the wastegate can't keep the turbo from building boost with every little throttle opening. With the valve open there is no boost and No boost at steady cruise means better mileage. From a performance standpoint this means the stock valve will be open as you roll into the throttle and won't build boost as quickly.
 

MakStang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
1,678
Reaction score
265
Location
Greece
Website
www.cellentis.uk
First Name
Makis
Vehicle(s)
A 2017 miraculous little beast
Holly thread revival!

[MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION] in the link below, which Boomba BOV are you talking about? I would be interested in trying it out. http://www.boombaracing.com/forced-induction-12/

1. 2015 + Ford Mustang Ecoboost Boost Operated Blow Off Valve
2. 2015 + Ford Mustang Ecoboost Boost Operated Bypass Valve (Full Recirculation)
3. Universal Blow Off Valve
 

PonyFresh

Active Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Threads
7
Messages
36
Reaction score
1
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
2017 Mustang Ecobooost
Holly thread revival!

[MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION] in the link below, which Boomba BOV are you talking about? I would be interested in trying it out. http://www.boombaracing.com/forced-induction-12/

1. 2015 + Ford Mustang Ecoboost Boost Operated Blow Off Valve
2. 2015 + Ford Mustang Ecoboost Boost Operated Bypass Valve (Full Recirculation)
3. Universal Blow Off Valve
Should be either 1 or 2.

After reading through the thread I think the comparison is clear:
Electrical: better MPG when cruising since no boost built, but some noise due to continuous venting
Mechanical: more restrictive exhaust when cruising which leads to less MPG, but better recovery speed

Please correct me if I'm wrong
 

MakStang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
1,678
Reaction score
265
Location
Greece
Website
www.cellentis.uk
First Name
Makis
Vehicle(s)
A 2017 miraculous little beast
Yeah, after reading through their website I came to the same conclusion. However I will use the DV+ instead. Seems to do the same job but a lot cheaper. And if I want sound (which I do!), I will simply disconnect the recirculation hose (currently using a Boomba Racing BOV adapter for that).
Sponsored

 
 




Top