| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bowtie6872
Master of Boredom
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 9236
Location: heaven can wait
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
what turbos did the 2.2. mopars have..
garrnet t ?
or the ford 2.3
what was on the sledgehammer dual what |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bowtie6872 wrote: | what turbos did the 2.2. mopars have..
garrnet t ?
or the ford 2.3
what was on the sledgehammer dual what |
you'll probably have better luck with http://www.google.com
The 2.3's came with two different types, one was an IHI RLB. The other was, I forget - Garrett? they're tiny and only good for baby power.
WTF is a sledgehammer? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1fast72nova
Rat Rod
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 871
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am NXS...
http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/saab-turbos-sbc-166878.html
| Quote: | You can calculate if those turbos are going to work rather easily, if not too precisely.
Two simple ways to do this.
Donor engine rated Hp
divided by the number of turbos on it.
multiplied by the number of turbos you will run
equals the estimated Hp you will support.
SO
donor motor rated at 280 Hp
divided by 1 turbo equals 280 Hp
times the number of turbos you will run (2)
equals 560 Hp
this is assuming that the fuel types in both engines are the same (gasoline to gasoline or diesel to diesel).. not that you can't use a diesel turbo on a gas engine, just that this method leave a little to be desired.
a slightly more accurate way if you are mixing and matching is:
Donor motor one size, 2.0 liter times Redline RPM (6000 rpm?) = 12,000
divided by the number of turbos (1) = 12,000
Receiver motor size, 5.0 liter times redline rpm (5000 rpm) = 25,000
divided by the number of turbos (2) = 12,500
12,000/12,500 = .96 or 96% chance of being correctly sized.
keep in mind that this is assuming your target boost pressure is approx the same for the receiver as what the donor motor was expected to handle.
and is a very rough way of determining if the turbo will work. If both of these calculation say the turbos will work, they will work. they may not be the best fit but they will fit and make the horsepower that step one says +/- your engines efficiency vs the donor motors efficiency. |
_________________
online auctions free classifieds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spidergearsman
Moderates you!
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 15244
Location: Lead East
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vnt turbo seemed like a cool idea on the 2.2 dodge
the big ball bearing model on the gnx was kick ass
_________________
 
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 1fast72nova wrote: | I am NXS...
http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/saab-turbos-sbc-166878.html
| Quote: | You can calculate if those turbos are going to work rather easily, if not too precisely.
Two simple ways to do this.
Donor engine rated Hp
divided by the number of turbos on it.
multiplied by the number of turbos you will run
equals the estimated Hp you will support.
SO
donor motor rated at 280 Hp
divided by 1 turbo equals 280 Hp
times the number of turbos you will run (2)
equals 560 Hp
this is assuming that the fuel types in both engines are the same (gasoline to gasoline or diesel to diesel).. not that you can't use a diesel turbo on a gas engine, just that this method leave a little to be desired.
a slightly more accurate way if you are mixing and matching is:
Donor motor one size, 2.0 liter times Redline RPM (6000 rpm?) = 12,000
divided by the number of turbos (1) = 12,000
Receiver motor size, 5.0 liter times redline rpm (5000 rpm) = 25,000
divided by the number of turbos (2) = 12,500
12,000/12,500 = .96 or 96% chance of being correctly sized.
keep in mind that this is assuming your target boost pressure is approx the same for the receiver as what the donor motor was expected to handle.
and is a very rough way of determining if the turbo will work. If both of these calculation say the turbos will work, they will work. they may not be the best fit but they will fit and make the horsepower that step one says +/- your engines efficiency vs the donor motors efficiency. |
|
I wouldn't trust that method too much. A turbo whose exhaust side is built for a 2.0 liter engine, isnt' going to like being supplied with 2.5 liters of exhaust flow, it'll run out on the top end quickly.
I'd highly recommend reading on the turbo forums and not listening to whomever posted that information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1fast72nova
Rat Rod
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 871
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I posted that information and started to add that most auto manufactures err on the side of drivability with little concern for top end performance... which yields smaller than "recommended" turbos for what most of us would do. But they also err on the side of caution as far as boost is concerned also so the turbos can generally handle more boost than what they come from the factory preset at.
If you don't have a turbo map but know the donor car specs it is (imo) the best and fastest way.
when I figured the application in that thread using my method I figured a 5% chance of being too large, when I took the time to fond a map and run a quick plot on it I found this:
http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=41337
_________________
online auctions free classifieds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 1fast72nova wrote: | I posted that information and started to add that most auto manufactures err on the side of drivability with little concern for top end performance... which yields smaller than "recommended" turbos for what most of us would do. But they also err on the side of caution as far as boost is concerned also so the turbos can generally handle more boost than what they come from the factory preset at.
|
"boost" is irrelevant. you can't say "this turbo is good for 30psi but the other turbo is good for 37" - that's problem number one with the above methodology for turbo selection. It's all about pounds per minute of airflow at a given pressure ratio, nothing more. one turbo might make 7psi on an engine and triple the horsepower of another that is making 35psi on the same engine
| Quote: |
If you don't have a turbo map but know the donor car specs it is (imo) the best and fastest way. |
Sure, but how many junkyard turbo engines have you built using that method?
I'll add this, i think your method is "OK" but could really use a paragraph about exhaust sizing, and airflow of the exhaust, which is relevant to displacement of both engines, and max RPM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| spidergearsman wrote: | vnt turbo seemed like a cool idea on the 2.2 dodge
the big ball bearing model on the gnx was kick ass |
Big??? the GNX turbo was a teeny tiny thing!! it's one of the first things you toss when you are building a big power Buick turbo six...! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1fast72nova
Rat Rod
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 871
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dieselgeek wrote: | It's all about pounds per minute of airflow at a given pressure ratio, nothing more.
Sure, but how many junkyard turbo engines have you built using that method?
I'll add this, i think your method is "OK" |
Only ok? if you don't have a map persay, how else are you going to know? a pair of calipers ;p
I've only built one junkyard motor that way and it ran awesome for about 1 day... and I melted the pistons down.... cost me less than $250 from carb to pan and put it on an oversized gocart as a joke, but man, we thrashed that thing for a while 
and it is all about lbs/min of air flow... it takes x lbs/min to make x horsepower (within the bounds of the efficiency of the engine)...
and hence exhaust flow is equal in that regard also... please note i said fuel to fuel...
if a factory installed turbo is making 300 hp at 7 lbs boost it is flowing is flowing approx 30 lbs/min at 7 psi.. and if you are shooting for 600 hp at 7 lbs and have an engine making 400 hp na then you know these should put you in the ball park.
being that you need approx 60 lbs/min to make 600 hp
and at 400 hp need a theoretical 7.5 lbs boost to make 600 hp
30 lbs/min *2 (turbos) = 60 lbs/min @ 7 psi....
Now if you disagree maybe you can show me an example (using a turbo map) in which my turbo sizing method doesn't work.
Don't just disagree, disagree with a map and example....
_________________
online auctions free classifieds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1fast72nova wrote: | | dieselgeek wrote: | It's all about pounds per minute of airflow at a given pressure ratio, nothing more.
Sure, but how many junkyard turbo engines have you built using that method?
I'll add this, i think your method is "OK" |
Only ok? if you don't have a map persay, how else are you going to know? a pair of calipers ;p
I've only built one junkyard motor that way and it ran awesome for about 1 day... and I melted the pistons down.... cost me less than $250 from carb to pan and put it on an oversized gocart as a joke, but man, we thrashed that thing for a while
and it is all about lbs/min of air flow... it takes x lbs/min to make x horsepower (within the bounds of the efficiency of the engine)...
and hence exhaust flow is equal in that regard also... please note i said fuel to fuel...
if a factory installed turbo is making 300 hp at 7 lbs boost it is flowing is flowing approx 30 lbs/min at 7 psi.. and if you are shooting for 600 hp at 7 lbs and have an engine making 400 hp na then you know these should put you in the ball park.
being that you need approx 60 lbs/min to make 600 hp
and at 400 hp need a theoretical 7.5 lbs boost to make 600 hp
30 lbs/min *2 (turbos) = 60 lbs/min @ 7 psi....
Now if you disagree maybe you can show me an example (using a turbo map) in which my turbo sizing method doesn't work.
Don't just disagree, disagree with a map and example.... |
I agree with you on the compressor side.
What about the exhaust side? you're only hitting half the necessary points in turbo selection, right?
I guess the equation is fine for a "one day" runner. If you melted the pistons, that means li8kely there wasn't enough fuel in the mix, which means you weren't even making any real power... were you using a wideband O2 sensor or anything to figure out the tune? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1fast72nova
Rat Rod
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 871
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
as far as the exhaust, yes.... but if it's fuel to fuel it will be very close using the RPM method.
now if you're trying to use a diesel turbo hehe...
_________________
online auctions free classifieds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bowtie6872
Master of Boredom
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 9236
Location: heaven can wait
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="dieselgeekWTF is a sledgehammer?[/quote]
the callaway dual turbo vette.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dieselgeek
banned
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bowtie6872 wrote: | | the callaway dual turbo vette.. |
you asked about finding turbos in a junkyard and included a Callaway vette? Well, in case you find on, it'll be a 60mm Garrett... ROFL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1fast72nova
Rat Rod
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 871
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spidergearsman
Moderates you!
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 15244
Location: Lead East
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dieselgeek wrote: | | spidergearsman wrote: | vnt turbo seemed like a cool idea on the 2.2 dodge
the big ball bearing model on the gnx was kick ass |
Big??? the GNX turbo was a teeny tiny thing!! it's one of the first things you toss when you are building a big power Buick turbo six...! |
sorry , it was the creamic wheel
the gn in 86 was the biggest turbo on a stocker
pretty good
but people are smarter now
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
