Remote mounted Turbo System
#41
Originally Posted by Hurleysurf24
What happens when you hit a speed bump? Or if theres a mattress that flies out at you on the highway? What happens is you just wasted all the money on that kit, Im sorry but I really see no use in this.
Props on the idea though
Props on the idea though
but.. seriously though.. how many mattress' do u see on the road everyday?
anywho.. nobody bought the kit yet for the car.. isnt it still a prototype being tested on domestic vehicles?
i dunno.. i think its a great idea!
ill probably look into it after the CL has a better aftermarket tranny out.. (cheaper then the bulletproof )
#42
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mrsteve
You'd have air coming in through the turbo air inlet, being compressed, then going to the S/C and being compressed again?
#43
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 40
Posts: 5,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scalbert
If the secondary compressor is a roots style blower, then it would work fine. The positive displacement blower simply moves the cubic inches available regardless of density, well somewhat...
#44
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Lots of haters/guessing peeps in this thread. That kit is excellent, there's caveats to every mod you make to a car... for you guessers. Whats the flow rate f12" from the exhaust outlet vs. the flow rate 4' away? how many CFM's? whats the air density?
What the time in ms difference between the exhaust gas flow at 12" vs. 4'? whats the pressure differential?
colder air is more dense than hot air. So would less flow neccessarily cause the turbo to spool slower?
whole lot of speculation, and not lot a of scientific facts to back the "lag" ideas... just ranting...
What the time in ms difference between the exhaust gas flow at 12" vs. 4'? whats the pressure differential?
colder air is more dense than hot air. So would less flow neccessarily cause the turbo to spool slower?
whole lot of speculation, and not lot a of scientific facts to back the "lag" ideas... just ranting...
I'll take up your challenge in providing the technical details in why this is far from optimal. Some assumptions will need to be made to calculate exhaust velocities as the catalytic converter and resonator are in the flow path which will both cool and slow the velocities. I'll get to these this evening when I have the time.
And yes, cooler exhuast will cause slower spooling. As the temperature decreases so does the pressure. It is the pressure differential across the turbine which causes it to spool faster/slower.
I've personally seen a camaro with that system installed. it is in no way a slouch. Or is the turbo spool time even an issue.
I have never heard a big single turbo supra guy complaing about lag. And thats were lag comes from. Oversized turbos and not enough exhaust gas flow to match. If a properly sized turbo it placed at the rear it'll work excellent. And there wont be any of this "lag" people think will happen. The time it takes the exhaust to go from the downpipe to the muffler would be measued in MS (miliseconds)
I have never heard a big single turbo supra guy complaing about lag. And thats were lag comes from. Oversized turbos and not enough exhaust gas flow to match. If a properly sized turbo it placed at the rear it'll work excellent. And there wont be any of this "lag" people think will happen. The time it takes the exhaust to go from the downpipe to the muffler would be measued in MS (miliseconds)
You may not hear of the big single turbo Suprs guys complaining as they are making good power. But looking at the plots from most they make squat for torque at 2500 RPM; less than even a 2.2CL makes. So their daily drive enjoyment is thrown out the window. That probably does not concern them as they are out to make big power and good trap speeds; not going light to light or fighting interstate traffic.
if you add all of the return pipe length together i bet it would come close to matching a stock dual intercooler pipe in length. So really the return pipe is a moot point. Now they need to put radiator fins on it so it disperses the heat more.
#45
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by car_lost
what do you think of this system?
#46
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a few minutes before going into meetings. The first and most obvious issues are some which have been mentioned.
The filter location is an obvious concern for damage and cleanliness. There is also the concern with water ingestion.
The turbo location is prone to damage. Granted, it may not be damaged on a hit but the oil lines which would be run could be damaged which then jeopardizes the engine as well. Then there is the issue with vacuum lines, etc. The kit will definitely require a oil scavenging pump; where is it mounted and is it susceptible?? Also, could a jar to the turbo its self cause bearing failure or wheel(s) touching the housing.
The kit will remove both mufflers, it will be loud in normal conditions.
The kit will either keep the resonator and catalytic converter in place or not. If so it will decrease the gas velocity (as mentioned will be covered later) further decreasing spool rate/increasing the boost threshold. If not the car will not be legal nor will it be bearable.
I suspect it will give a very peaky torque curve.
There is more I am sure and as mentioned, it will work. But how well will need to be seen. And how much risk and inconvenience is willing to be accepted
The filter location is an obvious concern for damage and cleanliness. There is also the concern with water ingestion.
The turbo location is prone to damage. Granted, it may not be damaged on a hit but the oil lines which would be run could be damaged which then jeopardizes the engine as well. Then there is the issue with vacuum lines, etc. The kit will definitely require a oil scavenging pump; where is it mounted and is it susceptible?? Also, could a jar to the turbo its self cause bearing failure or wheel(s) touching the housing.
The kit will remove both mufflers, it will be loud in normal conditions.
The kit will either keep the resonator and catalytic converter in place or not. If so it will decrease the gas velocity (as mentioned will be covered later) further decreasing spool rate/increasing the boost threshold. If not the car will not be legal nor will it be bearable.
I suspect it will give a very peaky torque curve.
There is more I am sure and as mentioned, it will work. But how well will need to be seen. And how much risk and inconvenience is willing to be accepted
#47
Find beauty in dissonance
This kit looks like it would work well on trucks.
Lots of room in the back and underneath for the setup.
A lot of ground clearance.
Very easy to relocate the intake filter to a higher location.
V8 exhaust pressure.
Lots of room in the back and underneath for the setup.
A lot of ground clearance.
Very easy to relocate the intake filter to a higher location.
V8 exhaust pressure.
#48
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by scalbert
Calling that kit excellent is a big stretch. It might work in producing boost but will be far from ideal in making good all around power.
I'll take up your challenge in providing the technical details in why this is far from optimal. Some assumptions will need to be made to calculate exhaust velocities as the catalytic converter and resonator are in the flow path which will both cool and slow the velocities. I'll get to these this evening when I have the time.
And yes, cooler exhuast will cause slower spooling. As the temperature decreases so does the pressure. It is the pressure differential across the turbine which causes it to spool faster/slower.
However without real test benchmarks I wonder how close +/- you'll be.: cat design and flow, pipe bends that you don't know about, turbo specs...
really it'll be a guess...
The Camaro would not be as much of a slouch due to the larger displacement engine. I also noticed on the plot that the Camaro lost 500 revs on the dyno. I suspect that the torque was dropping off quickly due to being a small compressor.
You may not hear of the big single turbo Suprs guys complaining as they are making good power. But looking at the plots from most they make squat for torque at 2500 RPM; less than even a 2.2CL makes. So their daily drive enjoyment is thrown out the window. That probably does not concern them as they are out to make big power and good trap speeds; not going light to light or fighting interstate traffic.
You may not hear of the big single turbo Suprs guys complaining as they are making good power. But looking at the plots from most they make squat for torque at 2500 RPM; less than even a 2.2CL makes. So their daily drive enjoyment is thrown out the window. That probably does not concern them as they are out to make big power and good trap speeds; not going light to light or fighting interstate traffic.
Actually that would still do very little as the heat transferred to the inside of the pipe is very low unless the surface area were increased dramatically. The only way to increase the internal surface area would be through internal vanes or embossing the surface; both would be expensive and also hamper flow.
#49
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by scalbert
I have a few minutes before going into meetings. The first and most obvious issues are some which have been mentioned.
The filter location is an obvious concern for damage and cleanliness. There is also the concern with water ingestion.
The filter location is an obvious concern for damage and cleanliness. There is also the concern with water ingestion.
The turbo location is prone to damage. Granted, it may not be damaged on a hit but the oil lines which would be run could be damaged which then jeopardizes the engine as well. Then there is the issue with vacuum lines, etc. The kit will definitely require a oil scavenging pump; where is it mounted and is it susceptible?? Also, could a jar to the turbo its self cause bearing failure or wheel(s) touching the housing.
The kit will remove both mufflers, it will be loud in normal conditions.
The kit will either keep the resonator and catalytic converter in place or not. If so it will decrease the gas velocity (as mentioned will be covered later) further decreasing spool rate/increasing the boost threshold. If not the car will not be legal nor will it be bearable.
I suspect it will give a very peaky torque curve.
There is more I am sure and as mentioned, it will work. But how well will need to be seen. And how much risk and inconvenience is willing to be accepted
There is more I am sure and as mentioned, it will work. But how well will need to be seen. And how much risk and inconvenience is willing to be accepted
I really think the best comparsion would be equal boost comparison between a traditional style turbo setup and STS's (dyno comparison) However I don't know how one would consider the turbo's equally matched.
#50
Photography Nerd
I don't buy their reasoning for lack of turbo lag. Pressure is pressure. More tubing = more air to compress. I don't care what turbo they use, it's not going to perform as well as a turbo that is mounted closer to the engine.
That setup easily has 3 to 4 times as much plumbing to pressurize as a standard turbo setup.
That setup easily has 3 to 4 times as much plumbing to pressurize as a standard turbo setup.
#52
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by av6ent
As far as concern on water getting into filter underneath the car the K&N shield can be used. Its not like your riding on the lake .
The greater exposure to larger amounts of water will decrease the oil content quicker. Although this is not a huge concern as cleaning and oiling the filter is easy, it should known. Also, damage to the filter could occur more easily resulting in whatever else being ingested and damaging the compressor wheel and/or the engine.
That shield would be a welcome addition.
#53
563hp daily
Thread Starter
Thats what R&D will come into play analyzing pro and cons for each car and delivering
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
#54
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Really no worse than 90% of CAI installs I see. (i.e. without the splash guard)
Agreed, but for you to hit something up that high I'd be worried about other damage. Gas tank, headers, trans pan.
Agreed, but for you to hit something up that high I'd be worried about other damage. Gas tank, headers, trans pan.
Ya, that could get old real quick on a car like the CLS. But look at all the guys running around with that annoying drone exhaust sound? I'm assuming the majority of folks don't care. Guess I'm in the minority group, I'd hate any drone exhaust sound.
However the installs I have seen the cat is still in place.
I really think the best comparsion would be equal boost comparison between a traditional style turbo setup and STS's (dyno comparison) However I don't know how one would consider the turbo's equally matched.
#55
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SiGGy
However without real test benchmarks I wonder how close +/- you'll be.: cat design and flow, pipe bends that you don't know about, turbo specs...
really it'll be a guess...
really it'll be a guess...
Right, the manual CLS already has traction problems from a stop, hence utilizing power up top would be a good thing...
The turbo will probably be sized to give a nice mid-range punch. With the loss of exhaust velocity and decreased pressure, the turbo would have to be fairly small to delivery power in a useable manner. Even looking at the Camaro's dyno it appears the power drops off as the plot was clipped 500 RPM early. And this is with a larger engine which could certainly give more flow down low. If they size it to give torque at 4k revs, it maye run out of steam by 6k revs on the J-Series.
For instance, look at allmotor's previous turbo system compared to the current one. That shows what what a change in turbo's size can do. If they provide a turbo which keeps going to the 7k rev limit, I suspect the boost threshold will be too high for normal use.
#56
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02AV6
Thats what R&D will come into play analyzing pro and cons for each car and delivering
the results (assuming the demand is high).
the results (assuming the demand is high).
A bunch of, "if it were $2000 less I would buy it in a second". Or, "I'm in" until it actually becomes available.
That is the thing, it will still be costly and with some serious trade-offs.
#57
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by scalbert
But I don't think this kit will increase top end power too much. It will probably decrease the top end potential noticeably.
(if you have time) I look forward to your flow numbers. I'm curious to see the results.
Make sure you checkout the dyno's from popular hot rodding.
#58
563hp daily
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by scalbert
You know very well what the demand from the Acura/Honda crowd will be.
A bunch of, "if it were $2000 less I would buy it in a second".
A bunch of, "if it were $2000 less I would buy it in a second".
#59
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SiGGy
from what potential would it be decreased?
(if you have time) I look forward to your flow numbers. I'm curious to see the results.
Make sure you checkout the dyno's from popular hot rodding.
(if you have time) I look forward to your flow numbers. I'm curious to see the results.
Make sure you checkout the dyno's from popular hot rodding.
I'll work on the flow numbers tonight.
I saw the dyno and just as before, they stop the chart well before the fuel cut off.
#60
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by scalbert
You know very well what the demand from the Acura/Honda crowd will be.
A bunch of, "if it were $2000 less I would buy it in a second". Or, "I'm in" until it actually becomes available.
That is the thing, it will still be costly and with some serious trade-offs.
A bunch of, "if it were $2000 less I would buy it in a second". Or, "I'm in" until it actually becomes available.
That is the thing, it will still be costly and with some serious trade-offs.
ya, agreed. And for the money setup the turbo in a better fasion. I would think with the lack of need for custom headers, and the simple piping to the rear the cost would have been significantly cheaper $1500 less than a regular turbo setup. Maybe they are re-cooping R&D money spent?
#61
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by 02AV6
Thats what R&D will come into play analyzing pro and cons for each car and delivering
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
I'd be interested in seeing what an application for a FWD car would look like...
#62
Three Wheelin'
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by 02AV6
Thats what R&D will come into play analyzing pro and cons for each car and delivering
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
the results (assuming the demand is high).
Steve, here is more detailed article I found on Hot Rodding magazine illustrating the STS installation and the gains based on Camaro SS from 313whp (stock) to 463whp/511wtq (7psi).
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Regardless, I'd still prefer the MP90 with my low CR
did you change the blower body from a 62 to a 90? That's a great idea and one that I tantalized about before taking on a whole new direction. Where did you get the M90 blower, from eaton directly?
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...erchargers.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M62.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M90.asp
links for those who want to edumacate yourselves. You'll find the m62, which is used by comptech for our supercharger application is the same diminsions as the m90, but the m90 huffs more air down the throat of our motors.
#63
563hp daily
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ThinJim
did you change the blower body from a 62 to a 90? That's a great idea and one that I tantalized about before taking on a whole new direction. Where did you get the M90 blower, from eaton directly?
Scalbert is my Hope System
#64
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 36,474
Received 249 Likes
on
175 Posts
Originally Posted by ThinJim
did you change the blower body from a 62 to a 90? That's a great idea and one that I tantalized about before taking on a whole new direction. Where did you get the M90 blower, from eaton directly?
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...erchargers.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M62.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M90.asp
links for those who want to edumacate yourselves. You'll find the m62, which is used by comptech for our supercharger application is the same diminsions as the m90, but the m90 huffs more air down the throat of our motors.
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...erchargers.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M62.asp
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/prod...argers/M90.asp
links for those who want to edumacate yourselves. You'll find the m62, which is used by comptech for our supercharger application is the same diminsions as the m90, but the m90 huffs more air down the throat of our motors.
They are the same length but the MP90 is slightly wider and taller than the MP62. I wonder how different the mounting points are? Seeing as the length is identical, no modifications would need to be made to the shaft or the throttle body side of the blower. But would it bolt directly up?
#65
563hp daily
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ThinJim
m62, which is used by comptech for our supercharger application is the same diminsions as the m90, but the m90 huffs more air down the throat of our motors.
Here is the drawing showing both:
#66
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02AV6
The dimensions are also different but it can be fixed. Most important inlet/outlet ports have to be modified/replaced
The other item which would need to be fabricated is the blower discharge. This would also be fairly easy for a good fabricator and could be done out of plate and sheet metal in a couple of hours. So maybe another $300 to do it.
The other question is if there is 0.525 inches clearance in the body and the fan shroud. I know it was tight with the TL but what about the AV6?? Regardless, that is something with certainly could be made to work.
However, this does not include the cost of the blower body its self. You could probably get the body, with your jack shaft installed, for about $1000 from Magnuson. In the end it would probably run upwards of $2000 to move to the MP90. About the only one I know of who could fully utilize this is you.
#67
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on topic now. Sorry about not getting onto the number last night SiGGy, I had to get the numbers together for a budgetary MES proposal. I'll try and get back on it tonight. But if you want to know some general ideas on gas flow velocities, they are most likely in the 250 ft/sec range on the exhaust side, and upwards of 350 - 400 ft/sec on the intake side.
How much heat transfer will actually occur between the turbo and the intake manifold in a fraction of a second?? The answer would be little to none. Especially when considering that the thin walled intake tubing with insulating air around it is a terrible transfer element. A cast iron tube would be more beneficial but certainly heavy.
Anyway, I did get to check some reference material and we now have even more conflicting material. According to Corky Bell one of the primary concerns in building the exhaust manifold for a turbo vehicle is heat retention. This conflicts with their claim.
In the end I suspect that what we have is a simple compromise. Yes, it will produce boost and increase power but most likely what an OEM set up would do. Give a nice mid-range punch which gives a great feel. But it runs out of steam as the revs climb making it less ideal for racing. The compromises with price is that there is less flexibility in the power range than a more costly and traditionally styled turbo system such as allmotor's. His will make more power over a wider range but costs more. About the only comparable power adder that is similar in price is the Comptech SC. I suspect this turbo may make more torque in the mid range but not down low or on the top end. Just speculation though.
My view on this is that if someone were to sacrifice their mufflers in the sake of gaining power; first, why not get a different car. But more importantly, why not just spend more and do it correctly making a powerful yet civilized vehicle. But that is me and other people have their own take.
How much heat transfer will actually occur between the turbo and the intake manifold in a fraction of a second?? The answer would be little to none. Especially when considering that the thin walled intake tubing with insulating air around it is a terrible transfer element. A cast iron tube would be more beneficial but certainly heavy.
Anyway, I did get to check some reference material and we now have even more conflicting material. According to Corky Bell one of the primary concerns in building the exhaust manifold for a turbo vehicle is heat retention. This conflicts with their claim.
In the end I suspect that what we have is a simple compromise. Yes, it will produce boost and increase power but most likely what an OEM set up would do. Give a nice mid-range punch which gives a great feel. But it runs out of steam as the revs climb making it less ideal for racing. The compromises with price is that there is less flexibility in the power range than a more costly and traditionally styled turbo system such as allmotor's. His will make more power over a wider range but costs more. About the only comparable power adder that is similar in price is the Comptech SC. I suspect this turbo may make more torque in the mid range but not down low or on the top end. Just speculation though.
My view on this is that if someone were to sacrifice their mufflers in the sake of gaining power; first, why not get a different car. But more importantly, why not just spend more and do it correctly making a powerful yet civilized vehicle. But that is me and other people have their own take.
#68
TQ > MPG
Would make a great sleeper system though.
Lets say for the sake of argument that a J32 responds as well to this type of turbo as that LS1 in the PHR article. Assuming 220whp the same % gain would put the J32 at 295whp. Thats about what a CT SC/headers puts down. In this graph it looks like it puts down ~420rwhp at 5 psi, so no I'm not comparing it to the higher boost number. And it doesnt appear that the tq curve, nor the hp curve takes any astronomical dives, but they do stop short of redline, so thats debateable.
I think the fact that it doesnt make full boost until 3k may be a benefit to a fwd setup like the CL-S. Even at stock hp levels the drivetrain cant really handle the amount of tq the J32 produces, and I know I dont have any experience with the CT SC, but its gotta make launching 10x harder when you have full boost nearly off idle.
I think a proper turbo setup in the engine probably is more practical, and thats what I would do if I was to ever want to make my CL-S fast.
Lets say for the sake of argument that a J32 responds as well to this type of turbo as that LS1 in the PHR article. Assuming 220whp the same % gain would put the J32 at 295whp. Thats about what a CT SC/headers puts down. In this graph it looks like it puts down ~420rwhp at 5 psi, so no I'm not comparing it to the higher boost number. And it doesnt appear that the tq curve, nor the hp curve takes any astronomical dives, but they do stop short of redline, so thats debateable.
I think the fact that it doesnt make full boost until 3k may be a benefit to a fwd setup like the CL-S. Even at stock hp levels the drivetrain cant really handle the amount of tq the J32 produces, and I know I dont have any experience with the CT SC, but its gotta make launching 10x harder when you have full boost nearly off idle.
I think a proper turbo setup in the engine probably is more practical, and thats what I would do if I was to ever want to make my CL-S fast.
#69
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by scalbert
Back on topic now. Sorry about not getting onto the number last night SiGGy, I had to get the numbers together for a budgetary MES proposal. I'll try and get back on it tonight. But if you want to know some general ideas on gas flow velocities, they are most likely in the 250 ft/sec range on the exhaust side, and upwards of 350 - 400 ft/sec on the intake side.
How much heat transfer will actually occur between the turbo and the intake manifold in a fraction of a second?? The answer would be little to none. Especially when considering that the thin walled intake tubing with insulating air around it is a terrible transfer element. A cast iron tube would be more beneficial but certainly heavy.
Anyway, I did get to check some reference material and we now have even more conflicting material. According to Corky Bell one of the primary concerns in building the exhaust manifold for a turbo vehicle is heat retention. This conflicts with their claim.
In the end I suspect that what we have is a simple compromise. Yes, it will produce boost and increase power but most likely what an OEM set up would do. Give a nice mid-range punch which gives a great feel. But it runs out of steam as the revs climb making it less ideal for racing. The compromises with price is that there is less flexibility in the power range than a more costly and traditionally styled turbo system such as allmotor's. His will make more power over a wider range but costs more. About the only comparable power adder that is similar in price is the Comptech SC. I suspect this turbo may make more torque in the mid range but not down low or on the top end. Just speculation though.
My view on this is that if someone were to sacrifice their mufflers in the sake of gaining power; first, why not get a different car. But more importantly, why not just spend more and do it correctly making a powerful yet civilized vehicle. But that is me and other people have their own take.
How much heat transfer will actually occur between the turbo and the intake manifold in a fraction of a second?? The answer would be little to none. Especially when considering that the thin walled intake tubing with insulating air around it is a terrible transfer element. A cast iron tube would be more beneficial but certainly heavy.
Anyway, I did get to check some reference material and we now have even more conflicting material. According to Corky Bell one of the primary concerns in building the exhaust manifold for a turbo vehicle is heat retention. This conflicts with their claim.
In the end I suspect that what we have is a simple compromise. Yes, it will produce boost and increase power but most likely what an OEM set up would do. Give a nice mid-range punch which gives a great feel. But it runs out of steam as the revs climb making it less ideal for racing. The compromises with price is that there is less flexibility in the power range than a more costly and traditionally styled turbo system such as allmotor's. His will make more power over a wider range but costs more. About the only comparable power adder that is similar in price is the Comptech SC. I suspect this turbo may make more torque in the mid range but not down low or on the top end. Just speculation though.
My view on this is that if someone were to sacrifice their mufflers in the sake of gaining power; first, why not get a different car. But more importantly, why not just spend more and do it correctly making a powerful yet civilized vehicle. But that is me and other people have their own take.
NP, I just enjoy the conversation. everyone is busy this time of the year. I'm way behind on my stuff to do...
#71
563hp daily
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by scalbert
The other question is if there is 0.525 inches clearance in the body and the fan shroud. I know it was tight with the TL but what about the AV6?? Regardless, that is something with certainly could be made to work.
Originally Posted by scalbert
In the end it would probably run upwards of $2000 to move to the MP90. About the only one I know of who could fully utilize this is you.
(sometime next year)
#72
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02AV6
Well, what a hell I'll do it
(sometime next year)
(sometime next year)
#74
'Big Daddy Diggler'
Scalbert, any reason why the LS1 guys are praising this setup. Its a lot cheaper than the usual twin turbo kit, and seems more problem free then a head/cam/boltons job. Let me know. I am currently debating which way to go on my LS1.
#75
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure it is much less expensive than a twin turbo set up. I am also fairly sure the overall gains are less as there is a trade off. I am also pretty confident that it is louder than the other TT kits. I think this dictates why some like it...
It costs less and makes decent gains but the same may not apply to the J-Series; we'll have to see though.
The LT1/LS1 engine makes good torque down low and doesn't spin that high to begin with. A nice jump in torque from boost over a few thousand RPM would be well received. If the sound level is acceptable as well as the other risks, and with the price being where it is, it is obvious why many are attracted to it.
However, a SB without mufflers sounds fine. A J-Series without mufflers does not.
IMO, the J-Series implementation is different in many ways which is why I don't not think it will be as succesful.
It costs less and makes decent gains but the same may not apply to the J-Series; we'll have to see though.
The LT1/LS1 engine makes good torque down low and doesn't spin that high to begin with. A nice jump in torque from boost over a few thousand RPM would be well received. If the sound level is acceptable as well as the other risks, and with the price being where it is, it is obvious why many are attracted to it.
However, a SB without mufflers sounds fine. A J-Series without mufflers does not.
IMO, the J-Series implementation is different in many ways which is why I don't not think it will be as succesful.
#76
Safety Car
Bottom line it is not going to make as much power as a conventional-mounted system - even if it does the low-end range will be awful. You have to have a very quick-spooling turbo to get max boost < 3K RPMs and then forget about the top-end.
#77
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Orlando (UCF) and Ft. Lauderdale
Age: 39
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yea and that small turbo is going to be a gt25 or ko3sport size which is going to yield maybee 25 horespower increase if its tuned perfectly to the car if its mounted in that position
#78
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Orlando (UCF) and Ft. Lauderdale
Age: 39
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you guys are forgetting that people do drop there cars, and im sure if someone is buying this they do have the mod bug and will probably allready be dropped so that can pose a problem to placement as well
#79
drop em like its hot
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: West Harlem, NY
Age: 41
Posts: 2,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i'd be interested in seeing it on the CL but i would probably rather go with a conventional turbo. now if the price of a custom turbo manifold wasn't $3K for the J32A2....