Originally Posted by slowboost
Dsmtuners will forever be retarded dumbfucks and I will give you my address if you want to prove me wrong either vehicle wise or physically.
Originally Posted by slowboost
Dsmtuners will forever be retarded dumbfucks and I will give you my address if you want to prove me wrong either vehicle wise or physically.
Department of redundancy department.
Get a grip, internet toughguy. I have been trying not to pick a fight from my very first post in which I "respectfully disagreed" with 4drwhore. Then, he thought he would be clever and demean one of my sources by calling the site "dsmtards," despite the fact that I have read posts by several of the nabr guys he knows on dsmtuners. I suppose that makes them dsmtards as well?
The only evidence I brought from DSMtuners was in my original post, in which I recalled reading a thread by a moderator (most of whom are assumed to be credible sources), who attributed his turbo's failure to the removal of his water lines a couple of weeks before. The rest of what I had to offer comes from intellect and knowledge of physics/cars. I have never claimed my point to be fact, but merely my opinion/argument. Knowing your personal experiences is very worthwhile, though.
Now that you've stated that your 16g has run on your truck for 4 years, that is probably the best evidence to be offered yet. In fact, it helps open my mind to your opinion--maybe I am wrong. It proves that one person has not had trouble without running coolant lines on his 16g, for 4 years at least, and perhaps that is representative of all turbos. Evidence like that is more useful than you expecting me/turboteg/the original poster to blindly follow what you say is God's truth about turbo cooling.
Now, getting back to the original question--and hopefully we can discuss it in a way that does not revert back to gradeschool...
Would it not be better to run both coolant lines and a turbotimer on one's car? Running just a big intercooler can sometimes suffice for preventing preignition, but is it not better to have a big intercooler and water injection as a safeguard?
My point is, some of us vent our bovs, and some of us run 91 octane in our cars, and they run like that--but is that what is best for the longevity of the car? It seems to me that it is generally unnecessary to do these things if the alternatives are available to us, and leaving coolant lines hooked up to daily driver turbos is no exception.