Hi speed

iTrader: (3)

My plan is to keep my filter ( little breather ) attached to the rear cover and run a separator with my check valve to the IM. I think my Pcv valve is toast since I get some crazy blow by out of the rear cover at strange times and only for a second. My vacuum is still at 23-24 so I don't think it's blow by overwhelming the Pcv system. I have the UCM so seeing smoke coming from under the hood scared me the first time it happened.
Like KN my breather filter is not dripping , but oily. It been on there since I installed the SC ( 70k ),so I guess it time to change it out.

The issue I see with Bert's setup is the connection from the front valve cover to the vented catch can. It seems like the air would take the path of least resistance and not scavange blow by as effectively from both banks.

bTwix

How important is the metering aspect of the stock PCV valve?

"The valve is simple, but actually performs a complicated control function. An internal restrictor (generally a cone or ball) is held in "normal" (engine off, zero vacuum) position with a light spring, exposing the full size of the PCV opening to the intake manifold. With the engine running, the tapered end of the cone is drawn towards the opening in the PCV valve by manifold vacuum, restricting the opening proportionate to the level of engine vacuum vs. spring tension." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crankca...ilation_system

Don't worry about it, since we're tuning anyways? Would deleting stock PCV valve (replaced by external check valve + separator) potentially rob vacuum from brake booster (e.g. when foot off gas and on the brake)?

I hate cars

Cleared it out.

Yep, that's all you need. I've never really seen a vented separator on the FRESH air side before. Maybe I'm not familiar with the type of separator but if it's vented to atmosphere I don't see the point. Off topic but nice speakers you've got there. I love Dyns, for what I've spent on them I literally could have a turbo setup.
There should be no change in AF because to maintain idle speed, the ECU will open the throttle more so it evens out in the end. Even if the idle wasn't picked back up by the ECU, the AF would stay the same and the idle would be low. If our cars used a MAF where you're dealing with false air and expected false air, blocking off the PCV would cause those issues and hopefully long term fuel trim would come to the rescue. I guess this is one of the very few benefits of our speed density system.

I can't remember if it was you that installed an oil temp gauge but excessive oil temp is a dead giveaway of excessive blowby. If oil temps are normal, you have nothing to worry about. A long time ago when I was in the process of losing an engine, I couldn't keep the oil temp under 300F even with coolant at 160F. Make sure to fix it before it begins leaking oil. The last thing you want is to blow out a rear main seal.
Exactly. I don't see the reason for the fresh air plus a breather on the catch can. That separator looks an awful lot like a dry sump's oil reservoir which is made to breathe, hold oil, and will have an inlet on the bottom, outlet on the top... The more I look at it the more I'm convinced it is some kind of fluid reservoir.

I forgot to quote some of the others but excessive PCV flow won't hurt brake boost vacuum unless they're on the same nipple/block. Excessive flow will cause a high idle which will be compensated for by closing the throttle and vacuum will remain normal.

The best I can come up with for a good PCV system that will vent blowby under boost is basically the stock routing but with the stock PCV valve eliminated and a check valve in it's place, separator between the valve cover and IM (no vent), fresh air from the opposite valve cover into the pre-turbo.

An alternative is a filter for the fresh air side instead of the pre-turbo. Beware, if the engine were to pop a headgasket, you can send a ton of oil under high pressure through the fresh air side, I've done it before and covered the whole engine so that might determine where you want to send it.

Remember that with methanol injection, venting the crankcase is even more important. You're literally looking at <3,000 mile OCI with no PCV and meth injection.

There seem to be some concerns as to how much actual blowby crankcase flow there is under boost. It's going to vary with the type of rings used and a couple other factors but basically ring seal. Built engines can have a huge swing on how they're set up. I used Total Seal rings in my last build and for the first time ever, there's nothing. I've dyno'd it at 30psi and absolutely no vapors coming out of the breathers at over 600hp to the wheels. I used to have a little vapor just idling so the build has everything to do with it. A single 1" hose should be all you need. I would have no problem venting only one valve cover to fresh air. Different engines but same theories, my car which was factory turbo'd had only a single 1" hose from the valve cover to the pre-turbo inlet. It only made about 300hp where some of these TLs are at the 600 flywheel hp mark but blowby shouldn't increase that much over naturally aspirated.

I know like I always sound like a Redline salesman but it has just about the lowest if not THE lowest NOACK value out there. This will mean less oil vapors through the PCV system (and past the rings) which is always important but even more so if you're venting pre-turbo and you're worried about knocking down intercooler efficiency with a film of oil. It can also create a better ring seal, reducing blowby in the first place.

I've actually scavenged mine by dumping the vapors into an open downpipe. I'm tired, I hope this makes sense to me in the morning and hopefully to everyone else.

bTwix

Dyns are great. I opted for a simple 2.1 setup, but gets the job done. Front sound stage midbass could be a touch better, but otherwise no complaints.

On further investigation, the vented separator appears to be a baffled breather tank with drain ...

"The purpose of a breather tank is similar to a PCV setup except the breather tank simply stores the unwanted gases and blow-by rather than reintroducing them back into the intake stream."
- http://www.hondatuningmagazine.com/t...m/viewall.html
- http://www.z10eng.com/catalog/produc...products_id=35

You can see how liberts breather tank is tilted to the right, presumably resting on the drain plug at the bottom:


Right, which is similar to the setup above, ignoring the pre-turbo intake tube and the breather tank/catch can to store blow-by gases until IM can draw them out later when IM vacuum returns.

I have no idea if this is true, but adding a breather tank to your setup may prevent blow-by smoke coming from under the hood, since the breather tank would store a bunch of the blow-by until IM vacuum returns to draw it out.


So under high boost, when we're generating the most blow by, there's a slight vacuum in the pre-turbo intake, which could pull these stored blow by gases from the breather tank, into the pre-turbo intake instead of venting out the filter on top of the breather tank. The breather tank filter would serve as a fresh air source to clear the breather tank when under boost and the pre-turbo intake is seeing some slight vacuum. Perhaps this is why the breather tank has both filter on top and tube to the pre-turbo intake?



Even without any pre-turbo intake vacuum (e.g. not under boost), part of the blow-by pressure seen in the breather tank would flow into the pre-turbo intake tube, and part out the filter on top. I'm guessing most of it would go into the pre-turbo intake since it would be less restrictive than going through the filter on top but have no idea. Also, since the breather tank is baffled, and since some of the blow-by would be sent pre-turbo instead, the filter on top would see much less oil passing through it and not get saturated.

Our current setup is a -10an = 5/8" vent tube off each valve cover. So we'd need to delete the front vent tube and cap the -10 an fitting on the front valve cover, and then re-run a new -16an = 1" fitting from the rear valve cover to the breather tank and/or directly to pre-turbo intake, to get a single 1" hose. This seems like a bit of work, given what's already in place.

Seems like less work to add a check valve to the front valve cover vent tube that would allow blow-by out, but no fresh air in, so the rear valve cover would be the only fresh air source for the PCV airflow, so the entire crankcase was scavenged increasing the OCI and engine reliability in general.

The largest check valve boomba makes is 1/2" so I've ordered that and will see if Rodney can add it to the front valve cover vent line, here:


If I had to do it over again, on the fresh air side, would just upgrade the rear valve cover vent tube to a single 1" tube, to breather tank, to pre-turbo intake, to keep things simpler. I like that the breather tank should minimize oil seen in the turbo intake/throttle body and hold blow-by in reserve to be drawn back through the crankcase and directly into IM.

On the IM side, we'll delete the factory PCV valve and cover the opening (probably JB weld), and add the moroso oil separator and boomba check valve to ensure the crankcase doesn't see any boost, while retaining the overall PCV function.

bTwix

Is anyone using a turbo timer? What's your setup?

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

I have a small HKS stack installed in the bottom compartment in the center console. They don't make an adapter harness for the TL so I had to do the wiring by hand. (PITA)

bTwix

Nice, that's pretty slick. I've got a bunch of other stuff in that same compartment, so will have to figure out how to make it all fit.

Is there a smaller timer control panel? I've got to fit my remote radar and turbo timer control in the upper compartment.

Also, those are nice pedals. TL-S? Are they a direct replacement for 04 TL?

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

Thanks. The control panel, as far as I know, is the smallest that you can get. It's just a display module, with the "brain" box hidden behind the dash. I'm not sure if it's clear from the picture or not, but the turbo timer display is just the top part. The bottom is another display with the same dimensions for my boost controller.

I don't recall who I bought the pedals from anymore, but they're not TL-S. I do really like them, but I tend to drive barefoot a lot in the summer due to wearing sandals and the rubber nubs combined with the increased force of the twin-disc clutch can get uncomfortable pretty quickly.

bTwix

Cool, did you get a HKS type 1 or type 0?

Looks like type 1 has more features and a blue back light to match TL style?

However, my remote radar is red, so maybe get type 0 to match red backlight? Do you use the extra features of type 1 much?

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

Mine is a type 1. I occasionally use additional features, but mainly just because they're there. I definitely don't rely on any of them. The main reason for getting the type 1 is that the display then matches my boost controller.

bTwix

Cool. Do you have any install pics of the wiring harness? Where did you tap into the key switch wiring?

I'll probably get a HKS type 0 so the red backlight matches my remote radar/laser:
http://www.hks-power.co.jp/en/produc...mer/index.html

I hate cars

Preluber or an additional small electric waterpump if water cooled. Much better than a turbo timer.

bTwix

Interesting. That would also continue to work if you had to pull over and stop your engine immediately, not that it ever happened to me.

Any particular brand you'd recommend? Our turbo is oil cooled, so electric water pump not an option.

This one came up on the NSX boards:
- https://www.cantonracingproducts.com...&category=2415
- http://www.accusump.com/accusump_tech.html

I hate cars

I'm way out of date on this stuff, I bought and installed a Preluber back in the '90s and that was the end of it other than a couple water pumps that pump water through the turbo for however long you want after shutdown.

I actually used the "Preluber" brand. It's an oil pump and brain triggered by ignition cycles. Turn the key on and you have 40-50psi oil pressure within a second or two and before startup. Turn the key off and it continues to pump oil for however long you set it. I'm sure by now they have much more advanced electronics. You can probably see the advantages a preluber has besides just turbo life. The crankshaft and rods are fully floating before you turn the engine over, during an oil change you can pump every drop out of the engine and then use the preluber to pressurize the system before starting.

The water pumps work very well on water cooled turbos. Generally if you shut the car down without letting it idle for a while, the water inside boils and pretty much goes away. Keep it circulating for a while and it cools the turbo much quicker and much cooler than is possible by just letting it idle.

I'm definitely going to read your links now, hopefully see what's new out there.

I hate cars

Just saw that those are accumulators. I tried the Moroso version once with minimal luck. Not a whole lot of oil, very short supply time and you don't get the prelube effects. I'm sure they can and maybe some do have a solenoid to provide some prelube effects but again, the volume is used up quickly. Not so much a problem when used as a preluber but as post lube it's an issue. Better than nothing but if you have the money I would do the other two mentioned.

Here's one similar to what I have. I'll continue looking for the exact one:

http://www.rpmindustries.org/web/Eng.../pre-lube.html

It gets some strange looks when you turn the key and hear this thing loading down. Sounds a little like a very large external fuel pump.

I hate cars

Here's another example. Never used this brand but it looks really heavy duty. The diesel industry is way more advanced in turbo technology. That's where I go for almost everything from intercooler hose, clamps, etc. If that thing is made for diesel use, it will probably be bulletproof on our cars.

http://www.paragonproducts.net/produ...ack_pumps.html

bTwix

Related thread: http://www.powerstroke.org/forum/6-0...ettings-2.html

Maybe something like this:
http://www.varnaproducts.com/EP-4_Pump.php

bTwix

Maybe I'll just try laying off the boost for the last few min of a drive, and see how the turbo holds up. Sounds like a good quality synthetic oil and taking the last mile easy should do the trick.

I hate cars

That's all you really have to do. Drive nice for the last mile or so and the idle time really isn't necessary. Like you said, synthetics help tremendously as well. None of that preluber stuff is necessary, it's a luxury. I tend to be OCD but there are thousands of people that use nothing and their turbos are fine. I've been without a preluber at various times and gone years of just driving nice for the last mile or so and never had an issue. I've had turbo failures but never from lubrication or coking. It's a joke around the GN community, the windows roll up so slowly that we wait to shut the engine off after we roll the windows up and it gives plenty cool down.

When I was a 17yr old kid and had some people chasing me, I was in boost hard for several minutes. When I got to where I was going and popped the hood, the turbo was bright orange along with the headers and part of the downpipe. The headers and downpipe cooled pretty quickly. The turbo glowed for nearly 10 minutes. So the moral of the story is adjust your "easy" driving time according to how hard you last ran the car.

And again, I sound like a salesman but use Redline or Motul grp V ester oils. They have a substantially higher heat tolerance which will really come in handy inside of a turbo bearing at shutdown.

bTwix

Yes, you convinced me to use Redline about 1,000 posts back. I ordered a case of Redline 5w30 (HTHS 3.8) and then saw your post suggesting Redline 10w40 (HTHS 4.7) would be even better.

So will probably use the 5w30 for my wife's car and get a case of Redline 10w40 for the TL.

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...7#post12108587
http://atl.acurazine.com/forums/show...5#post12832705
http://atl.acurazine.com/forums/show...2#post12832872

bTwix

Do you use the auto timer feature, or just manual when you've been running it hard?

I hate cars

A bit off topic, but this is probably the best place to ask. Would anyone be interested in a 4.2l or 4.6l J series? Cost will be at least $2k more than your typical forged J32 but you're talking incredible potential when turbocharged.

gwiffer

iTrader: (7)

^How? Custom crankshaft w/ larger stroke?

There was some speculation on v.6.p that even with aftermarket sleeves bored out to their limit, the j32a3 block could only support 3.7L. That was with the 3.7L crankshaft, though.

A NA 4.6L would be cool for a daily-driver...how much coin total?

spade0698

Ugh....yeah. Rodney still has my car torn apart plus, I wanted to do something different anyway. let me know

AckTL05

iTrader: (18)

From what I learned over time, you get better HP/BOOST to Ltr ratio with foreign cars. Just from using comptech S/C on base engine to 3.6 for instance. When we did that, it actually killed performance of the engine and S/C was worthless. It was significantly slower. You will have to boost a lot more PSI if you go 3.6 or 4+, from if you boosted a 3.2 or 3.5.

A good comparison would be push the same PSI on this set up with a TYPE-S and then with a Base. Its why all these out of the box turbo cars sti/evo/srt-4 are fast on a 2.0/2.5 ltr engine..Most honda guys would rather just use forge rods/pistons and take precautions with there engine and boost it rather then make the engine bigger which requires more air/boost to make the same results..

4+ LTR engine..so much for saving some kind of gas..Its crackhead price here in NJ right now at $4.45 a gallon for 93..Highest its ever been.

I hate cars

Whoa... There's a lot wrong here. Foreign cars tend to use smaller, more highly tuned engines. Typically higher hp higher up in the rev range. Domestics typically use larger engines, a little more laid back that make power all over the tach. Different styles for different needs. With that said, my Domestic at 158hp/l says otherwise. Or if we go by flywheel hp as manufacturers do, it's 190hp/l. The downside is when you go to mod it. The TL sucks when it comes to mods, short of a turbo. The factory has done a good job and there's not a whole lot left when NA. A new Vette will gain 50-80whp from just a cam swap. A TL will be lucky to see 10hp. Same goes for other mods.

A larger engine does not require more pressure to make more power, it requires a larger volume of air. The roots or screw style supercharger are positive displacement. They displace a fixed amount of air with every revolution. Take a supercharger off of one engine and throw it on a larger engine, boost will go down. You will have to go with a larger crankshaft pulley or smaller supercharger pulley to spin it faster to displace a larger volume of air. The problem with the TL's supercharger is it's already too small for a 3.2L. When you spin it faster, it makes a whole lot of super heated air. At some point you hit a stalemate where it might make enough boost on the larger engine but the air is so hot, you don't gain or you even lose hp.

A turbo is a centrifugal compressor. It's a varible volume, independent of engine rpm. Take a turbo off of one engine and put it on a larger engine with the same wastegate setting and boost remains the same because the turbo will spin faster to flow a larger volume of air and retain the same psi.

As an engine gets larger, pumping losses and friction go up. If you double an engine's size and keep everything else identical, it will not make double the hp. However, big engine cars like the ZR1 and even the regular LS2 make very ogod hp/l and also have great power all over the tach.

Boost doesn't care how large an engine is. If you "lost" power with the supercharger, the supercharger was severely undersized for the engine's displacement or your tune is way off. If the supercharger is undersized as the Comptech one is on a J32, throwing it on a J35 will hardly make more power than the J32. Size it right and it's going to make more power on the larger engine. There are tons of supercharged/turbo 5.7l to 8.0 engines out there to show otherwise.

You don't have to "boost" any more, not a single lb more from a small engine to a big engine. The large engine will start with more hp and will continue to make more power as you add boost, even low boost.
You're way out in left field here. Look at the boost level an Evo runs from the factory. Look at the boost level of Bert's 500+rwhp TL, more than double the HP of a stock evo with less boost. Why? Because Bert has a bigger engine. Bigger is always better. If 15psi puts a J32 at 500whp, 15lbs will put a J46 at 750whp.

Not too many turbo guys are worried about mpg. A larger engine will barely make a dent in mpg. Going from a 3.2l to a 4.6l in the same car will be 1-2mpg at most. I'm kind of surprised you attacked the idea like that and using mpg as an argument. 4.6l is not that big. It's a stock Mustang engine size. Smaller than many other stock engines. The weight of the engine and car will remain the same, mpg will be very similar.

The advantage to a larger engine besides more free power is drivability. At the same hp you require less boost, you can go with smaller cams, more power on a given octane, a safer tune, quicker turbo spool, and more power off boost power and power down low.

I hate cars

It's incredibly labor intensive. The stock cylinders (not just sleeves) get machined completely out of the block. Looking at the available routes, 4.2l is definitely doable with the J37 crank. 4.6l is a possibility but I can't promise anything. Even with a J32 crank, this work would be very promising because you end up with a much larger bore, unshrouding the valves, allowing the engine to breathe better along with other benefits. Of course, I had turbocharging in mind. I was throwing this idea around a couple years ago and lost interest but I kind of want to try it.

Even if you do nothing else, stock everything bolted up top, you will gain a lot of low end torque with a small gain in top end power.

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

In order to get 4.2L out of a J32 block with a J37 crank, you would need roughly a 96mm bore versus the stock 89mm. That puts each piston over 1/4" larger and leaves little room left between cylinder walls. Even with an 89mm bore, there's only 0.35" between cylinders. That would mean that you would be left with 0.075" between each cylinder. I assume then that you're talking about a closed deck block? How would you keep the thing cool?

Getting 4.2L out of a J32 crank would require ~102mm pistons, putting each piston well into the neighboring cylinder.

I'd be curious to know exactly how you intend on building such a beast?

EDIT: If you're ever interested in experimenting with it, I've got a couple of spare blocks that you could dick around with.
EDIT #2: Another thought occurs. Using a 3.2L crank may even push your cylinder walls out so far that you would need to weld up water passages in the head. Though it's possible that you could just machine out new ones a hundred-thou out.

I hate cars

I'll elaborate when I get home but two cylinders on each bank will be slightly offset bored. The new cylinders/sleeves will start out with a lot of extra material. The heads hopefully won't be a problem, thats the only thing that would stop it. Headgaskets will likely be custom copper. A spare block to work with would be awsome.

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

Gotcha. A bit like what VW does in some of their engines. I wonder what it would to for the side loading of the pistons.

I hate cars

It should be ok. My engine (any Buick 3.8 pre '88) is off center, nearly double what the J would be and during teardown theres really not a noticeable difference. My father used an on center block for his 1,000hp build because in theory there's the wear like you mentioned and in theory the on center is stronger. In reality I've seen off center 1,500-1,800hp V6s hold up just fine. Very good catch. I don't want to share everything on here. I wasn't planning on mentioning the offset boring but you're too quick lol. I know I can trust you so I'll be glad to answer anything via PM and of course 99% of other questions in here.

flexer

IF the cost ended up being another 2k more than a standard forged out build I think a lot of people would be interested. I know the way they are getting CRAZY power out of the GTR's is punching there 3.8L out to 4.1L. With the extra displacement they are making another 100 whp at equal boost levels. For most of the guys on this forum that are 3.2L or 3.5L.....to jump to something over 4.0L I think is going to BLOW THERE MINDS on the power end of things. Assuming a good breathing cam the motor should make around 350 hp, or 310whp no problem. And the torque.....oh the torque on the low end is going to be STUPID. It will basically be the same displacement as the audi V8's but in a 6 banger. :-)

Interested to see what you come up with I Hate Cars

JR

I hate cars

If it happens it will be a very low production run. My friend that has a full cnc facility, also an engineer who has done this same thing to a couple other engines is selling most of his machinery and getting into a different field. This is my last chance to do this and I've been throwing around the idea for quite some time. Im talking a production run of 2-3 before they shut the doors. The good thing is after the specialty work is done, a rebuild of one of these larger engines is standard and can be done by anyone.

KN_TL

iTrader: (3)

I PM'd Paul but he hasn't responded so I contacted M-Factory.

Apparently Paul's run is in production now and they could produce another run now at the same 10 units with a cost of $7,200 plus shipping.

However, Patrick said they will be very noisy and may not be suitable for a daily driver. He also mentioned it using a large tooth module which I assume will incur more cost.

bmeyer

iTrader: (3)

Thanks for investigating that more, KN!

I realize they would be noisy, but it is just 3rd and 4th. That seems acceptable to me considering how many people have shelled out the same gears. Once they get chewed up, they start going through the other gears and busting them all to hell as well. It cost me ~$2k to drop new gears in my car not to mention all of the downtime and hassle. Anyone else interested in pitching in for a batch?

KN_TL

iTrader: (3)

It is possible that Paul will have some left from his run but he just hasn't responded to my PM. Maybe he'll see this and respond here.

Rodney was also working on a set for kikazz who was financing it for him but when his ride went up a pole, so did the money. Never heard anything after that.

I hate cars

Loud, yes, but straight cut gears sound so nice! I also wonder how much of the problem is shaft flex.

fraiolim07

Very off topic here gents, sorry, but this was a topic a few pages back, and if IHC answered his PMs this could be avoided...

IHC, you mentioned in another thread that you finally found a way to increase the line pressure in the auto, and I didn't notice anywhere in this thread where you mentioned how. Does it have to do with a stiffer spring in the pressure regulator like you and flexer were discussing? If you're willing to share I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Sorry to get off topic guys.

I hate cars

It's not done with the spring, I'm still testing the mod. As I said in the other thread, I'm done sharing auto trans information, it always backfires and it's not worth the hassle to put out fires all day every day. I'll never make a mistake like that again. I get 20+ PMs a day and I don't get paid for this stuff.

I'm not trying to be a jerk but 4 years of this stuff is burning me out. Besides, I've had several ideas stolen and profits made (not from this board). If anything comes of this, it will be in the form of a product I'm selling.

fraiolim07

I understand. Make sure you post on AZ somewhere when you do get it finalized and want to sell it, I'm very interested in a tougher option for the auto.

And I'd be willing to donate a little to the cause if your testing costs anything. Don't have much at the moment but should have some to give soon