Not really as this reference (Also a copy paste you have made) points out.
http://www.isiaz.com/turbochargerrestrictors/
Quote:
77. A mathematical exercise on slowing rally fanatics down…
So how much potential decrease in cross sectional area might you expect with these turbo restrictors? Follow along with this example.
a. Math donor car is a standard Eagle Talon, Mitsubishi Eclipse / Galant VR4, or Plymouth Laser. Model is 2.0 Liter AWD turbo – stock from the factory with a Mitsubishi 14B (TD05H housing) turbo.
b. Stock diameter of inlet housing is 44mm.
Area = (pi)(radius)˛ = (pi)(diameter)˛/4 = 0.78539 (diameter)˛
Area = (0.78539)(44mm)˛
Area = (0.78539)(1936mm˛)
Area = 1520.5 millimeters squared for stock turbo
c. Now we’re going to run PGT class with an Eclipse. Installing a 32mm restrictor, we get the following numbers.
Area = (pi)(radius)˛ = (pi)(diameter)˛/4 = 0.78539 (diameter)˛
Area = (0.78539)(32mm)˛
Area = (0.78539)(1024mm˛)
Area = 804.24 millimeters squared for restricted turbo
d. How bad is the bad news?
(New cross section) / (Stock cross section) = percentage reduction in area
(804.2) / (1520.5) = 52.9% reduction in airflow!
|
What they are refering to is intake restriction not exhaust gas flow.
Your amazing 44mm cross pipe (why would it be 12mm larger in diametre then that standard piping??) does not ADD flow what so ever. All it does it balance the gases. Some people believe this to be a pointless.
If your going to pass something off as your own at least use it in the correct context.