First of all he has a STOCK 2V BLOCK, and it probably has lasted this long because he doesn't make a ton of power down low where it puts the most strain on the engine.
Second, your video shows nothing about spooling vs rpm, all you see are the boost gauge and thats it
Third you have a 3V which is crazy different in so many ways such as head design, intake design, exhaust design, fuel system etc...
Fourth and final, don't bash his setup, if he likes it then ok. You come off all hurt because his "slow spooling twins" made more power on a stock engine then your 'built' engine.
Now that thats over, who the hell are you? You obviously have nothing to add here, so quit nutswinging and carry on. Oh, forgot this is the talk section, i try to keep all my topics tech related and talk to people with experience on the subject matter...
First of all he has a STOCK 2V BLOCK, and it probably has lasted this long because he doesn't make a ton of power down low where it puts the most strain on the engine.
Second, your video shows nothing about spooling vs rpm, all you see are the boost gauge and thats it.
Third you have a 3V which is crazy different in so many ways such as head design, intake design, exhaust design, fuel system etc.
Fourth and final, don't bash his setup, if he likes it then ok. You come off all hurt because his "slow spooling twins" made more power on a stock engine then your 'built' engine.
First - I am a sn95 mustang owner and posted because I enjoy other mustang owners achievements (or corvette) and felt that the bashing was not necessary for what the OP post was all about.
Second - Quit "nutswinging",How old are you that you have to resort to a childish attack. All I said was don't rip on him for his setup, and you respond back with this. You say you like to keep all your posts "tech" related, well bashing is not "tech" related. He posted to show us his new stuff not get a lecture on what he is doing wrong,
Third - Experience on the subject matter? I don't need a big E- Peen and don't need to flaunt my knowledge. But if you insist, I have dealt with turbos for 4 years now, and have helped build an engine pushing 65psi of boost (it was a diesel engine obviously) but have also dealt with gas turbo engines as well. I have been involved in the discussion, know information about and continue learning more about the subjects of;
- waste-gates
- non-wastegate
- blow-off Valves
- turbo compressor sizes
- turbo wheel sizes
- exhaust housing sizes
- sizing turbo to engine
- Pre-turbo Exhaust size
- Post-Turbo Exhaust size
- Header vs. Manifold
- Fuel Injector sizes and flow rates vs. turbo size
- Tuning
You get the point
*disclaimer*
I AM NOT AN EXPERT ON TURBOS OR ENGINES, that is not how I am trying to come off, I just told you since you asked.
*disclaimer*
No reason to get all excited about it. I was enjoying the debate between Lightblade and hotmustang331. There's a lot that can be gained from sitting back and listening to what they both have to say. All that happened here was constructive criticizm from one which resulting in a debate between both about turbo setups. I for one would like to see this debate continue so that I may learn more.
I'm with you Nate. The best way to learn is with either hands on training, or listening to people more knowledgable.
And then midnightdriver had to go and ruin everything for us.....geez.
Well I apologize to you guys, I didn't mean to ruin the thread I just felt that he was bashing not doing constructive criticism. Just know what its like, along with almost everyone on here, to put a bunch of work and time into you car. The have someone, come and talk your project down in a manner that I viewed as uncool.
I actually laughed out loud after reading this. I think I use to write papers in 5th grade where I put first, second, and third at the beginning of all my paragraphs hahhaha!
My question was rhetorical, I didnt know you were so sensitive,( well i thought you might be thats why i made the joke about being a nutswinger since it says your from nor cal lol) you came in saying dont bash his setup like its gonna hurt his feelings, but obviously you seem to be more upset about it for some reason....
Honestly made me think of this lol
YouTube - LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!‏
Anyways, I cant hang with that long list of bullets and your articulate grammer skills, you will win every argument you ever have with all that experience lol, im out.
Where back presusre becomes an issue for overall power is after the turbo(s), not between the engine and the turbo, once the cars at target boost and the wastegate is fully open theres almost no back pressure here sense the pressurized exhuast coming out of the engine is just going right out the wastegate. This is the number one reason why boost drops off a little bit in the upper rpms since there is alot less back pressure now so it reads less but you still make power, this is also why dumping the wastegate to amtosphere is more efficient than routing it back to the downpipe and you can pick up a little power this way.
I agree that backpressure after turbo has HUGE effects on power, but the power loss is mainly caused by sound wave pulses that bounce back and impact the impeller wheel.
So there is little to no backpressure once at full boost, because its going out of the wastegate?Thats the problem, lack of understanding of how the system works...the waste gate is dynamic..its not just full open once you hit target boost. T-76GTS Backpressure test data
The above link shows different back pressure tests of a 76GTS...they only played with exhaust post turbo through. OP trapped the same MPH with 2PSI less boost after opening up the exhaust some. There was about 50HP left if he added the 2PSI back...so thats roughly what it gained him.
My setup made 604rwhp at 14psi with a.96 ar housing. I went to a .68 housing and still made 605rwhp at 14psi and increased spool around 200-300 rpms. And my entire power/tq curve was higher through out the rpm range. This was with no changes to the wg spring or boost controller. At relatively low boost levels ie 10-20psi turbine flow is more importnat for efficiencey and spool. Its when you start running 20-30+psi where a turbine with not enough flow can hurt peak power. On a v8 at the 15psi theres really no power loss. You can get away with the larger exhuast housings since you have 2 turbos so spool isnt hurt as much but those larger housings arent gaining you any peak power over say a .81 or .68 housing.
I used to run .68 housings on my 57MM setup...caused the car to float exhaust the valves over 5700RPM @ just 8PSI. Now no issues up to 14PSI.
Your car has VVT and has VERY well flowing intake ports but with still low flowing exhaust ports...so your not going to be effected nearly as much as the 2Vs. My reply was to a question on a 2V about how im making the power. Was this on the same dyno and same day? Have grapghs?
Boost at the manifold is just a measure of restriction and is almost completely centerd around how well the engine can take in and push out air. So yes the manifold, heads cams, engine dispalcement and exhuast does come into play. But the biggest factor here is the engine. I think you are a little confused and seems like your trying to say on someone else setup it would read more boost to explain the power, but this its just not the case. It would more rely on engine mods like heads/cams work, compression, stroke etc.
almost everything effects the "boost" numbers... the key is FLOW.
Your never going to have a 1:1 ratio unless you have a 6" diameter downpipe dumped to atmosphere right after the turbo. Besides 1:2 is ideal bp, your turbine does need some back pressure.
Hows your boost curve look? It will tell you alot about how the setup is working if you have dyno graphs to post up, also what are the specs on the motor?
1:2 is the max you want to run. 1:1.5 is considered good. Please go to the turboforums and read. Here is a quote from the tech section of myturbodiesel.com "As a rule of thumb, you don’t want more than a 1:1.5 ratio of boost to backpressure. For example, if you are making 10psi of boost you don't want more than 15-18 psi of backpressure. If so, then the turbine side could benefit from more air flow and you’ll make more horsepower for every pound of boost you run."
Edit i see on your vid i says stage 1 cams so thats the reason you only see 14ish boost and make more power. But your setup has way too big of piping and no back pressure and spools so ridiculous slow. You dont even hit full boost till jsut before you let out. A twin turbo setup should make full boost way down low in the rpm range. I have an eboost2 as well love it!
Actually I went from small piping (2.5) to 3ich and gained almost 1000RPM of spoolup. I used to only hit 11.9PSI on the dyno @ 6100RPMs...now I get that closer to 5200RPMs....so there goes that theory. Post turbo piping cannot be too free flowing....make it as big as you can.
Found your graphs. You have almost no power band/spool its like you dont get full spooled till 5000 rpms no boost curve though. Looks alot like a centi supercharger graph. Very weak for a twin trubo setup to say the least.
http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/808244-twin-turbo-mustang-dyno-results-yep-its-me-d.html
So your saying your car is setup for the track? Is it stick or auto? Ever run it down the 1320?
I bet it cant even make full boost in first gear.
You dont have enough motor to spool that setup which is sad since its twin turbos.
That looks like a setup you would see 400+ cube motors or that run 200 shots of no2 down low to get the turbo's spooled.
The lack of back pressure after the turbo's as your piping is so big and free flowing, that combined with .96 ar is why your setup spools so so slow. At your boost/power level a turbine housing swap will not effect peak power at all. I would swap both turbine housings to .68 ar. You will make the same peak power but also increase power band and spool and the car will be alot faster.
Some info of turbine housing
TurboByGarrett.com - Turbo Tech102
Turbine A/R - Turbine performance is greatly affected by changing the A/R of the housing, as it is used to adjust the flow capacity of the turbine. Using a smaller A/R will increase the exhaust gas velocity into the turbine wheel. This provides increased turbine power at lower engine speeds, resulting in a quicker boost rise. However, a small A/R also causes the flow to enter the wheel more tangentially, which reduces the ultimate flow capacity of the turbine wheel. This will tend to increase exhaust backpressure and hence reduce the engine's ability to "breathe" effectively at high RPM, adversely affecting peak engine power.
Ok....lets actually read what you quoted lol. It backs up what I am saying...may not happen in 100% of the cases depending on the setup, but it IS one of the reasons for why my 2V with heads that flow 160CFM is making more power than a built 3V with heads that flow around 230CFM intake.
You have twin 61s correct? A 61mm with .68 will easily flow to 500-600hp before you seen any loss in performance from any back pressure. With two turbo's were talkin 800-900hp with that housing size.
Yes and no, high rpm is normally where the weak link will let go which is the stock rods, plus he doesnt run that boost, it says he normal keeps it down to 9psi so thats just a run for a dyno pull he did.
I made 30+ 3rd-4th gear pulls at mostly 12.5PSI a few months ago...some @ 9PSI and some @ 14PSI. 95K miles. 14PSI wasnt just for the dyno...I street tuned it in on 14PSI and then have ran it several times since.
this setup he made would perform just as bad on a 3v.
Constructive criticism, personnaly i would set the car on fire if it performed that bad with a twin setup
Thanks
BTW to the op its not all about peak numbers its about power under the curve. This is how a turbo graph should look full spool/boost low in the rpm range and hp/tq that holds up top.
Whos graph is this? Hmm how much did all the extra power help you at the track? 3 tenths faster than mine..but wait I had a 2.0 60 vs your 1.8....all that ET was simply from my purposfully weak launch and resulting 60'. Very little was from power under the curve.
To the op sorry to gunk up your thread, that new manifold and tb/elbow should peform nicely. I love to see custom turbo setups, it just seems to me your leaving alot on the table right now.
Thanks...the system will perform as planned once I throw in the built motor. Its designed for 1000+RWHP...im simply running it as is to do things noone else has done. Before I buy the motor, I wanted to prove that the whole "stock motors blow past 450RWHP" theory was not accurate. I run around @ 509RWHP and thats my lowest setpoint.
Hey All I asked is how he was making that much HP on a stock engine over a built one, I did not need a lesson on a turbo from hotmustang331,Plus I just started to get into my turbos power band around 15lbs of boost b/c it was unable to hold 12.5lbs and always dropped below that after hitting peak boost @ 4000+rpm. Good luck with the eddy intake im leaving the thread alone enjoy.
What size throttle body is that? I assume 90mm as I didn't notice it mentioned.
We'll have to see that car when we goto the Texas mile in October! I'll even do a friendly call out at SAR if you are interested in running a slow GT
LOL we have been meaning to meet up at the track for years...yes that would be great to make it happen! Although I still have lots to do before I feel its safe to run at the track...I always drive to the track haha so next time I want to be able to beat on it. (built rear and magnum T-56 are on my list)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?