More results from the turbo car

Took her out to the track this weekend. The only mods I've done sinse the bone stock lt1 484/540 to the wheels are 30lb injectors and more duct tape and string holding the 1le elbow together. Damn fedex didn't deliver the metal elbow in time for testing. The engine is 100% stock except injectors, and an MSD digital 6 ignition. I also added an MSD booster pump. Still stock PCM programming.

This time I decided to go ahead and crank the boost up. The dyno above was an aborted run because the boost flashed to 10 and I got out at 4700rpm. With the fuel upgrades, the math said she should be just right. Runs at 10psi reading the hypertech confirmed with as much accuracy as the stock 02s will provide that she was doing fine. So I cranked the boost up to 11ish. She actually seen 15 a couple times but only for a second or so. I had my boost controller adjusted wrong so it spiked.

She put down a best of 11.93 @ 128mph with a 2.2 60 foot time. The nittos were slipping all they way down the track. It slipped so bad that I was hitting the rev limiter about 40ish feet before the end of the track in 4th gear. Car is an M6 with a stock 3.42 rear.

The really funny run of the day was a 13.5 something at 117. I have a feeling that if I had some traction, I could have broke the 130mph barrier even with the slow 60 foots. Comith a rear end and slicks, I think she will go quick.

Anyway, this winter will bring a rebuilt and more efficient exhaust system though I am going to try to make more et with less boost. It still plumb full of bugs that need to be worked out. Hopefully by next summer everything will be tip top and I can go ahead and build a kit for those intersted. Anyway, I might be on borrowed time but I'm curious just how fast I can make her go on an basicly stock car with a turbo. More updates to come. :D

Do you have any pictures of your setup?

Maybe I'm missing something here, but 128 mph @11psi with a bone stock engine/programming and 30lb injectors is kind of hard to swallow.

I am running an FMU obviously. I bought it on eBay for 35 dollars. I was also on race gas. Like I said before, I don't have any pics of the setup yet. Because at some point I would like to turn this investment into a business, I don't think posting pics would be a good idea. Vortech doesn't tell people how to build their superchargers.

I have already posted the dyno charts so I might scan a couple of the more interesting time slips and post them. I couldn't really believe it either. On that pass, I gained 30mph between the 1/8th and the 1/4. I crossed the 1/8th at 98mph. You will see it on the slip.

To add to the above comment.. I do want to offer that I am willing to help anyone out with their own turbo setup. I've had several inquiries from people that have other turbo setups and wanted to know if I could sell the exhaust system seperately. The answer will be YES! I will sell the kit in peices. My goal with the kit is to give more bang for the buck than anything else out there.

Well, people can buy Vortech superchargers and disassemble them. It doesn't mean they have the skills or tooling to duplicate them.

If you don't want to post pictures of your setup than that's your decision. Could we at least get a basic description of manifold construction, turbo placement etc? Is it intercooled?

Do you have the wideband printout to correspond with the dyno sheets as well?

BTW, how are you running 30lb injectors with no tuning?

Sorry for being a skeptic, but if you aren't willing to post pictures, you have to expect it. ;)

Oh by all means, I understand the skeptisism (SP?). Driving home that day I wondered if the car hadn't been modified internally before I bought it. I bought it last jan with 36k miles. But I did dyno it in June with headers, FIPK, throttle body by-pass, and home made resonator delete plug. I dynoed 260ish/300ish. I found out later that the throttle cable was stretch really bad (had another 25% more room to open the throttle blades). That might acount for the low horsepower but other than that, it acted very much like a stock LT1.

The dyno charts I posted in the other thread were with 24lb injectors. The car actually drives just fine with the 30s. Throttle response is peppier and seems to have made the car "happier" if that makes sense. Two reasons I got away with it. 1 is that i have larger than stock diameter maf ends which will lean the car out a bit because the maf is calibrated for a certain air flow for a certain resistance on the wire. Larger maf ends will flow more air for the same resistance. 2 is that under part throttle, the computer will adjust your injector pulse for a rich or lean condition. Under full throttle (75%) plus, the computer flows fuel based on the preprogrammed maps and ingnores the 02s completely. At the same fuel pressure, the 30lb SVO injectors flow about 25% more fuel than the 24lb injectors. I read somewhere (Injuneer I think) that SVO rates their injector flow at 39.5 PSI vs 43.5. With the booster pump maintaining the pressure and taking the load off the stock pump and the FMU ramping fuel pressure, I figured that the fuel system will be good to about 14lbs of boost. Putting 30lb SVO injectors in an N/A car would not work because those fuel maps are calibrated for 24lb injectors. It all worked on paper and seems to be working in practice.

***Disclaiminer***
I do not claim to be an expert on these computers. Infact, they are my next big learning curve. Injuneer has an excellent article on them for anyone curious about them. Recommended reading.

I am sorry for being a little sticky on wanting to keep the details of the kit on the down low for now. If someone buys my kit and disassembles it, more power to them. They will deal with the patent problems. I spent a great deal of time even though I didn't spend a great deal of money building the kit. I would like the oppotunity offer the kit or it's components for sale.

Heh, another reason I want to wait to get some pics posted is I want to clean up a few things. I ran that 128mph pass on a 1LE elbow held together with sting, duct tape, and hose clamps! It is some quality engineering. The maf kept popping out of the induction tubing on the inlet side of the maf so I tied string to that pipe and the other side of the maf to hold it all together. It works tho it leaked like hell. When things are "pretty" I will be posting some pics.

I know tons of people would be interested in pics of the set up as well. And I think we can imagine what it'd look like with a decent elbow. I can understand wanting to keep the details to yourself though. Keep us posted.

Is this a twin or a single setup, or is that classified as well?

I'm 99% sure it's a single. I think I read it in another thread. I'd love to hear more about this. The torn elbow thing seems odd because I know with turbo cars and the smallest crack or boost leak throws things off in a big way. Weird this one still runs fine. I get a small leak and run 108BLMs with the car barely limping home. Guess some people have all the luck.

Keep up the good work! Can't wait!

That's funny about the elbow. I tried my stock LT1 elbow and fabricated a piece of wood to plug up that silencer hole on the bottom. Under just a little gas, the elbow blew up like a balloon! I tried taking it around the corner and it didn't work too good. That piece of junk.
After seeing this, I thought of using the vortech elbow. I found out that the elbow had a 3.5" inlet, perfect match with the MAF, which is also 3.5". The vortech elbow/maf thing ended up working out really well.
I may try some MAF ends one of these days, along with a solid intake pipe to the supercharger. Found out on my last dyno I am running rich from 4000 rpm on up. With the cold air around here lately, my motor is pumping out power like it never has before, car is getting really squirrly.

Nice results. I'd like to see some pictures. I'm sure it's not going to cost you any business. If there is a company out there capable of making a twin turbo kit, they would have by now if the thought there was a market. It's not like everybody is sitting around scratching their head with no idea how to fabricate a turbo kit. I'm sure they just don't see the point in making a $6000 twin turbo kit for a car worth only $8000.

Nice results. I'd like to see some pictures. I'm sure it's not going to cost you any business. If there is a company out there capable of making a twin turbo kit, they would have by now if the thought there was a market. It's not like everybody is sitting around scratching their head with no idea how to fabricate a turbo kit. I'm sure they just don't see the point in making a $6000 twin turbo kit for a car worth only $8000.

to add to some of you guy's disbelief ?'s yes this car is a prototype so far for him it in fact does have a hole in the elbow that was created while headed to the dyno for the first time with the new setup ( what an interesting time at Mcdonalds that was ) . and yes this car is bad a$$ for the mods that are done. before the turbo we raced several times and he was hanging with me so it was then determined that his car was pretty much stock at the time

I don't know that it's so much disbelief as it is wanting to believe. I know it can be done and really really hope this comes to be. I love turbo power and am interested in the kit but without knowing anything about it (besides it exsists) I'm hard pressed to put much interest in it. Hopefully it'll get through the prototyping stage and when it does, drop me an email or post some info here on the board. Good luck and hope to hear from you soon.

Don't expect much positive feedback since you are claiming to have the fastest and most powerful boosted stock engine Lt1 anywhere, yet don't feel like putting pictures up.

Is it THAT ghastly looking?

Does it really even run... or are you fishing for attention?

Originally posted by BigRed1
I don't know that it's so much disbelief as it is wanting to believe. I know it can be done and really really hope this comes to be. I love turbo power and am interested in the kit but without knowing anything about it (besides it exsists) I'm hard pressed to put much interest in it. Hopefully it'll get through the prototyping stage and when it does, drop me an email or post some info here on the board. Good luck and hope to hear from you soon.

Believe it man! It's here. Here is the slip from the 11.9 run...


Left: 1 (GN) Right (Z28)
0.00 Dial In 0.00
0.5865 Reaction 0.5527
1.5746 60 ft 2.2007
4.3386 330 ft 5.5672
6.6515 1/8 ET 8.0936
106.38 1/8 MPH 98.06
8.6158 1000 ET 10.1733
10.3110 1/4 ET 11.9340
133.41 1/4 MPH 128.24

I am the car on the right (Z28) racing a 10 second GN. I pulled the GN a little on the 2nd 1/2 (note the MPH gain). That GN is a bad futhermucker though. No 60 foot for me. The car had 245/50/16 NITTO drag radials and a new centerforce dual friction clutch. Both were slipping and caused the car to bounce the rev limiter at the end of the track in 4th gear.

The dynosheets I posted are good but I need to redyno. The high one (484/540 to the wheels) was aborted at 4700 rpm because I didn't want to test the completely stock fuel system at 10 lbs. Boost controller adjustment to 7 netted 463/473 to redline. After the dyno but before the run above, I put in 30lb injectors. I am still running stock programming.

I want to get the system finished and on the market. Then I will post more pics than you know what to do with. Oh, BTW - casually looking at the car driving down the interstate or parked somewhere, you would never know it were turbochargered. You can't hear it until it's too late! :D

Originally posted by Whistler
Don't expect much positive feedback since you are claiming to have the fastest and most powerful boosted stock engine Lt1 anywhere, yet don't feel like putting pictures up.


Positive feedback is nice but I'm looking for people interested in buying something that can do what I claim it can do.

Is it THAT ghastly looking?

Yes, the only thing holding the elbow together is duct tape, string, and hose clamps. It keeps blowing the weather pack out of the IAT sensor connector. The only thing holding that together is duct tape. The boost keeps finding a leak near the maf and keeps blowing it off. What's holding that together? You guessed it. Duct tape and string.

Does it really even run... or are you fishing for attention?

It runs, you have seen dynosheets and time slips. I fail to see how showing you photographs of the system will prove how strong it runs. I guess you could call Ms Cleo and ask her what she thinks. Let me put it to you another way, if you don't believe it does everything I've claimed it to do, how much are you willing to pay to find out? I've already proven it with dynosheets and timeslips. If you want more proof, come on down and bring your pocket book with you.

i know of someone that has some nice videos of your car running down the track. now that there car is not running anymore they might have time to give you the videos and let you somehow post them for everybody:D

That seems awful high for a bone stock motor. The stock cam is not even close to being optimal for the turbo, it results is slow spool times (even for a small turbo) due to its excessive overlap. How do i know? I had a turbo on a stock engine. When it was being tuned on Ed Wrights dyno in your home town of Tulsa his very first dyno run was promptly shut down due to audible detonation and that was only 8 psi. The best he netted after 18 pulls with an A/F ratio of 12.0 was 372RWHP and 486RWTQ. Stock injectors cannot even with an FMU support the kind of HP you claim on stock tuning, ask my friend who put 11 psi to his stock motor with stock timing stock injectors and FMU, and had a handfull of piston peices the very first time he went WOT. 100 extra Hp is asking alot of a stock setup, 250+ from only 10 psi and no tuning is just unbelievable. I would have to see it with my own eyes. I'd be happy to see those numbers with my new setup with my PT76 q-trim turbo, 3" to 3.5" downpipe and ATI's Twin's, CNC ported heads and a custom cam. But if i could see some proof besides some junior member from the same town as you, who for all intensive purposes could be you, i'd be real interested in the exhaust parts. Sorry to doubt ya, I'm no expert for sure, but i've put together 2 turbo cars and a Supercharged car, so i can say i know a little about the beast of Forced induction, its that this seems way to good to be true.

Bill

Originally posted by Whistler
Don't expect much positive feedback since you are claiming to have the fastest and most powerful boosted stock engine Lt1 anywhere, yet don't feel like putting pictures up.

Is it THAT ghastly looking?

Does it really even run... or are you fishing for attention?


Yes it does run (saw it in person), and Yes it's ghastly looking.

Fishing for attention well, that's up to him.

I say post the darn pictures who cares what it looks like.
It's progress in the works...

Originally posted by SMOKNZ
That seems awful high for a bone stock motor. The stock cam is not even close to being optimal for the turbo, it results is slow spool times (even for a small turbo) due to its excessive overlap. How do i know? I had a turbo on a stock engine. When it was being tuned on Ed Wrights dyno in your home town of Tulsa his very first dyno run was promptly shut down due to audible detonation and that was only 8 psi. The best he netted after 18 pulls with an A/F ratio of 12.0 was 372RWHP and 486RWTQ. Stock injectors cannot even with an FMU support the kind of HP you claim on stock tuning, ask my friend who put 11 psi to his stock motor with stock timing stock injectors and FMU, and had a handfull of piston peices the very first time he went WOT. 100 extra Hp is asking alot of a stock setup, 250+ from only 10 psi and no tuning is just unbelievable. I would have to see it with my own eyes. I'd be happy to see those numbers with my new setup with my PT76 q-trim turbo, 3" to 3.5" downpipe and ATI's Twin's, CNC ported heads and a custom cam. But if i could see some proof besides some junior member from the same town as you, who for all intensive purposes could be you, i'd be real interested in the exhaust parts. Sorry to doubt ya, I'm no expert for sure, but i've put together 2 turbo cars and a Supercharged car, so i can say i know a little about the beast of Forced induction, its that this seems way to good to be true.

Bill

No problem, at least you are being cool in the presentation of your doubts. When I first started talking about doing this, most people never thought I would do it. When I did it, most people never thought it would put down much power. When it did, some people challanged that it would never make the numbers at the track. When it did that, I got flamed for it. :D All good though, I broke the record for the most Habinero wings eaten by a club member in one sitting too.

Here is some history from the other thread on the dyno. I guess I did lie about on part. On the dyno, I had an MSD Booster fuel pump (100 dollars from Internet Racers Supply). The intank pump is stock, the fuel lines are stock, the fuel filter is stock, the injectors are stock, the programming is stock, the fuel pressure regulator is stock however there is an FMU on it (bought the FMU off ebay for 35 bucks). I also have an MSD digital 6 Plus (175 off eBay), stock opti and coil (car is a 1997 30th Av Z28) and autolite 104s at stock plug gap. I am also using an MSD Boost Retard Box (just retard, no ignition enhancements) (eBay, 75 dollars). It also has the throttle body bypass mod, a cutout, a home made boost controller, and a 1LE elbow (what's left of it). Aside from the exhaust and induction modifications present as part of the turbocharger system, that is the limit of the modifications on I had on the dyno day.

I dynoed the car in June of 02. I don't have that dyno chart handy (lost in a move) but it made something to the effect of 260s/298 to the rear wheels. A few weeks later I figured out why my horsepower was so low; the throttle cable was stretched really bad. I adjusted it out and the car felt a lot better. Cruising around down with BBK shorties, a K&N FIPK, a home made resonator delete plug, throttle body bypass, and Autolight 104s, I could hang with or slightly pull stock and free mod LS1s. Nothing spectacular.

Anyway, back to the dyno, on the way down to Oklahoma City (about an hour and a half away) I couldn't get it to spool or boost to save my life. At the midway point, I yanked the elbow to discover a tear big enough to put my thumb through. I didn't have the obligitory duct tape with me but I did have some electrical tape. In the past the e-tape had been used to keep the IAT sensor from popping out of the elbow so we used it to seal the tear. When we got to OKC, I went to the speed shop, put in some 101 and bought a roll of duct tape. Before the pull we put on more e-tape and turned about 1/4in (thick) ball of duct tape onto the elbow. The tear is in the bellows so it was hard to get it perfect (Thanks Jason!).

The first pull the engine was still pretty cold. Having just built the boost controller, I didn't know how it would respond. The guys at powerhouse were nice enough to let me drive my own car on the dyno. Because of all the uncertainties, I thought it best that I operate the car. Good choice I realize now. Anyway, fire it up, run it up to 4th gear and nail it (M6). Boost still comes on slow at first but then really spools up and jumps from about 5 to 10psi damn quick. This is where I aborted the run. The dyno stopped at 4700 rpm where it made 484/540 to the rear wheels. A/F chart showed the car at 4700 rpm was 15:1. WAY LEAN!!! Got lucky. Turned the boost controller down to 7 (lucky guess, 3/4 turn on the bolt). Ran it up again to redline where it made 463/473 holding around 7 psi. A/F ratio was about 14:1 if I recall. It was lean but not as bad as the first.

Here is why I can get away with running 30lb SVO injectors on stock programming. I know very little about how the OBDII computers are coded but I've read a great deal about them and the following was the theory I based all my math on. Below 75% throttle, the computer reads the 02 sensors and trims the injector pulse accordingly. This is what people refer to as closed loop. There are also P/E (power enrichment), Lean Cruise, and Open loop modes. From what I've read, the lean cruise mode was never implemented in production. Lean cruise was designed to enhance fuel efficiency by running the engine slightly lean under low load conditions like cruising. I've also read that your car never really goes into open loop but I don't have any details on that. Beyond 75% throttle, the computer enters into P/E mode where it ignores the 02s and injects fuel based on pre programmed "maps" alone. For a given amount of air flow through the MAF, the injector will inject at a given pulse width reguardless of what the 02s say. On a N/A car, putting larger injectors in simply floods the car on stock programming. But on a forced induction car with stock injectors, you will run lean because the fuel maps and the maf are not calibrated for airflow beyond so many grams/sec. My bandaid is using the 02s to trim the fuel flow at part throttle and at fuel throttle, let the computer pulse the injectors for an N/A engine and stock fuel system when there are actually larger injectors and more fuel pressure present. I've got about 3 pages of math in my little notebook dedicated to testing this theory over and over again. While I'm sure it isn't perfect, it seems to be working quite well.

I'll give you the numbers are impressive and that if I were saying, my friends, sister's ex-boy friend, once worked for a guy that made 500hp with a turbocharged stock LT1, I'd probably wonder too. But this is sitting in my garage today, at home, hidding from the snow. You are more than welcome to come down and verify it yourself!

Also, giving me the benefit of the doubt , here are the dyno results from those pulls described above...

This is the first pull which was aborted...
http://www.tulsafbody.com/drew/Dyno1.jpg

This is the second pull at 7psi...
http://www.tulsafbody.com/drew/Dyno2.jpg

Note the difference in lowend torque between the two. The only explination I can come up with is the car was cold and the computer might have something to do with it?!

Someone said it right. If someone was going to make a turbo kit to sell, it would already have been done. You not posting photos because of that reason doesnt seem like very good justification to me. Maybe it is in your mind.

cmon... post some pics. what have ya got to lose? :-p

Originally posted by Guido
Someone said it right. If someone was going to make a turbo kit to sell, it would already have been done. You not posting photos because of that reason doesnt seem like very good justification to me. Maybe it is in your mind.

cmon... post some pics. what have ya got to lose? :-p

Well that's exactly my point! No one has done what I have done yet! If it had been done before, it wouldn't be so hard to believe. No one has yet been able to tell me what pics of the car up on a lift are going to prove about performance that my dyno charts and time slip aren't showing!

In my mind, I've got a huge investment of time and a lesser but still considerable investment of capital in this system. If it were just attention that I were after, I would just post a bunch of pics and let you tell me what you think of the system. My intention here is to let you guys know whats out on the horizon. It will be a well priced, high powered kit that can put down impressive number on a stock engine yet offer a degree of flexibility for upgraded engines or future engine upgrades.

Believe me, I'm getting used to the fire. A lot of the big converter/sticky tire guys are up in arms about it. Like I said, you will have the pics and a kit available to you shortly. But until my investment is protected, just bear with me on it's developement. Nothing will irritate me more than having a copy cat version of my system show up on someone elses website for sell. I am not willing to compete against my own engineering. It happens everyday...

lol

I can see your thought process.

I think we are all so used to the free exchange of info and photos on the website that when someone gets up in arms about it and doesnt want to, people want to call foul. Ill be the first to admit Im a bit skeptic as well but stranger things have happened that is for sure.

Either way, I want to see what it looks like froma curiosity standpoint.

Hardly anyone has done what I have done. I built my headers totally from sceatch as well. If someone were to duplicate it, would be no problems from me but then again Im not ready to market my setup either. Unless I can convince people to start ditching their motor mounts and stock k-members for motor plates and ditching AC. LOL

In any case, let us know when you get some photos. I want to see them strictly out of curiosity. I was going to tackle the project on a friend's 93 Z28 camaro but he ditched the LT1 and bought a buick V6 which has made its way into the car and Im instead building headers for a pair of twin stock GN turbos in his car rather than a single turbo LT1.

LOL

good luck

I've seen it, rode in it, watched it at the track.......it's not the Loch Ness monster....it's real. Hauls ass, stock cam and all. And, yes, it puts up those numbers dyno and ET:D

Originally posted by Guido
lol

I can see your thought process.

I think we are all so used to the free exchange of info and photos on the website that when someone gets up in arms about it and doesnt want to, people want to call foul. Ill be the first to admit Im a bit skeptic as well but stranger things have happened that is for sure.

Either way, I want to see what it looks like froma curiosity standpoint.

Hardly anyone has done what I have done. I built my headers totally from sceatch as well. If someone were to duplicate it, would be no problems from me but then again Im not ready to market my setup either. Unless I can convince people to start ditching their motor mounts and stock k-members for motor plates and ditching AC. LOL

In any case, let us know when you get some photos. I want to see them strictly out of curiosity. I was going to tackle the project on a friend's 93 Z28 camaro but he ditched the LT1 and bought a buick V6 which has made its way into the car and Im instead building headers for a pair of twin stock GN turbos in his car rather than a single turbo LT1.

LOL

good luck

Thanks for the sentiment. This kit represents the introduction to a possible career change for me. If nothing else, it will help augment an income being generated in an unstable career field (IT) in an even more unstable city (Tulsa). The IT market here sucks. I've been selling turbochargers to the DIY crowd on the side for a while. I am a firm believer in the DIY mentality. I didn't go into this thinking about making a business out of it but it out performed all my own expectations. So I thought I would put it out on the market to make a little extra on the side. In my experience selling to the DIY crowd, sometimes people don't want to mess with inventing their own wheel. Now I want to cater to both. Unfortunately, I had very little guidence to go off of from the information pool. So I had to come up with my own.

I'm not against the free flow of ideas and information, I just want a chance to refine what I have built and put it on the market. I did offer to help anyone designing their own kit so I guess that supports the boards intentions. But hell, I've been flamed by people I considered friends long before I ever decided to make a kit out of this. Like I said before, it went from "you aren't/can't do it" to "you did it but it isn't going to perform well" to "lets see you back those dyno numbers up on the track" to silence. Heh, guess I'm glad I didn't believe the hype eh?

I understand the curiousity. I am still looking for suppliers and tooling up to build kits. I want to do as much inhouse fabrication as possible to keep the costs down. Hey Guido, if for some reason you want to check it out first hand and happen to be down this way, get with me and I'll show it to you and buy you a beer while you are here!

There is always going to be someone who's first at something. Think about the first brave soul who looked at a lobster and said "Damn that looks like something I have to eat!!!" People probably laughed at him and thought he was a freak. I know there have been attempts at turbo'd F-Bodies here on the board and elsewhere. I look at it a little like the Mustang crowd. Superchargers and NOS were the usual choices (and for the majority still are) for power adders but slowly turbo kits came to be. Think it happened overnight? Think the very first mass produced kit was the only kit, never to be improved on? Turbo kits are more complex and have more components so they are less user friendly and usually more expensive. I can see people being skeptical but saying it's BS because we haven't seen pictures makes little sense to me (just my .02). I'm dying to see pictures as much as the next guy but if he's lying about the car don't you think he could scare up pictures as easy as he could a dyno jpg? A few people have seen this thing run, they've posted on this board, they said it's ghastly. I've checked out the Tulsa F-body website and saw there was a Byran with a white & orange 97 Z. I think I'll give him time to prove his claims and really hope they turn out. If they don't so be it, I won't be crushed and it won't be the end of the world. I read and try to learn all I can about the HP potential of our cars, seeing what works and what doesn't and never saw a car seem to make so much HP with so few mods. Does that mean it can't happen? No. Case & point, I have a friend with a GN that looks 99% stock on the outside/interior, a little "un"stock but not by much under the hood and it runs BOTTOM 9's (maybe even an 8 second 1/4 by now). There is not a lot of off the shelf mods done to this car, most are carefully thought out and optimized by the owner (who also know runs a business now because his car responded so well, a little like TByrne). The car is very unassuming and I'm sure plenty of people have told him "it's not possible" to make that kind of HP with a 6 cylinder street car, or for it to run so fast that he needs a chute yet he drives the car OFTEN, on the street to car meets. Let's just see how things work out. No need for eveyone to get up in arms, TurboSpeed seems to take all this with a great attitude, which I appreciate. I respect a lot of people on this board, especially the turbo crowd because it's such uncharted territory. I know HP is hard as hell to come by, but what better way than 8 jugs pumping a nice healthy turbo?!?!?! It's perfectly human to doubt, especially something that sounds too good to be true but it's also human to try. Good luck Bryan.

Originally posted by turboSpeed
I've been selling turbochargers to the DIY crowd on the side for a while. I am a firm believer in the DIY mentality.


So I'm curious, and please forgive me if you already posted it, but what size and kind of turbo's are you using? Did you build a log style header? Is this a big single, or twin turbo system?

I'm seriously considering selling my S-trim/aftercooler and building my own turbo system, so any tips you can pass along would be great. You can even email me privately if you so desire.

Mike

Hello. I am Jason, Turbospeed's friend. Yes I am a junior member who has jusst signed on to this board. I am here to attest to my friend's claims his car can and has run the numbers on the dyno and the track. We are in themiddle of setting up the design for multiple kits being made for various power gains. We are currently working on a kit for both LT1 and LS1's. We just want to make sure that everything turns out in the reliability factor as well as not having anyone copying off his design, or running across a big can of worms that we may not be aware of. Given time he will for sure produce more than enough information and pics about his setup. He just does not want anyone stealing his idea until he get a chance to work out all the bugs and make it presentable. Basically what he did was after he figured out what he wanted to do he built his kit out of rough parts in otherwise say not the best pipe and not the best hardware kits. He was merely putting it together to make sure his idea would work. As you will find out his work has payed off. So please be patient all you skeptics I understand what you are thinking for we have another person here in Oklahoma that is trying to build kits and that is one of the biggest reasons wh there are no pics yet. Thanks.:cool:

Any rough estimate as to the cost of one of these bad boys? Or at least what you have paid? Just very curious and interested!

Just remember, if it detonates just one time for whatever reason, ie bad gas, incorrect timing, too lean, on the stock LT1 pistons, it's all over. This applies to turbos too. :)

How long have you had the turbo on?
How many runs have you made down the track?
How long will your motor last?

I bet you it will not last as long as you think.

Ed

Jason was instrumental in the developement of the duct tape mod for the elbow. :D Seriously, what's been proven with the LT1 platform will be proven with the LS1 platform soon. But we will cross that burning bridge when we have his numbers.

Ed

The system has been on the car since early October. I'm aware of the detonation issue but I've addressed that to the fullest extent possible with an extremely efficient intercooler system and moderation on boost. I don't touch the boost controller unless she has good gas in her. If she blows due to detonation, it will be due to an issue beyond my control (ie bad gas). Because this system is capable of what it is, it takes an exersize in self-control to keep the boost turned down when it should be turned down. This is no different than deciding NOT to put in that slightly larger nitrous jet just before a big run.

I've made anywhere between 50 and 75 runs down the track in a series; most of them hotlapped. Boost ranged between 4-11 psi. I built the system to not blow anything up then I try to kill it.

How long a motor will last with this system is directly propersional to the amount of self control the user has. But the same can be said about nitrous kits too. Turbochargers are a hell of alot easier on the engine than nitrous kits are and having a 150 shot on a stock lt1 is common. This system is just as happy at 4psi as it has been at 11 and will be well beyond that. Turn the boost controller down when you are on pump gas (I run at 6-7psi on 93 on the street). It's as simple as that!

I've never heard of anyone questioning Holley when someone blows their engine trying to squeeze a little more out of a Nitrous Oxide Systems kit. Nor have I heard of anyone complaining about Procharger when they blow their engine after changing pullies. I am going to take it a step further and tell kit buyers what has and hasn't worked from my own experience with my car. It's ultimately up to the user to decide what he thinks a safe and sane amount of boost would be for a given days conditions.

Damn... 128 MPH with 2.2 60'

With a car set up for 1/4 mile, that would be knocking on the 9 second door. A bone stock LT1 making low 10 second power with stock fuel system would be a great bolt-on, so I can see you wanting to not show your "design".

Something somewhere doesn't add up.....so I still think you're full of crap, but it sounds great so hope I'm wrong.

If you aren't lying....hoorah and good for you :)
If you are lying....BOOO and BAD for you :mad:

LOL

Originally posted by Whistler
Damn... 128 MPH with 2.2 60'

With a car set up for 1/4 mile, that would be knocking on the 9 second door. A bone stock LT1 making low 10 second power with stock fuel system would be a great bolt-on, so I can see you wanting to not show your "design".

Something somewhere doesn't add up.....so I still think you're full of crap, but it sounds great so hope I'm wrong. What if the owner of the track here TIR was to vouch for the time?
The owner of where it dynoed does the same for the numbers?
He posts pics of the car maybe showing some of the set up but nothing he wants to duplicate for production?
Posts a clip of the car running?
Just like he said: he took jabs saying he couldn't do it and he did.
Then it was: it wouldn't make any power and it did
Then: it won't do it at the track and it did
Some will never believe it unless they actually see it. Or until you hear it!
Why the disbelief? Because he didn't buy it from a manufacturer and have the decals to prove it? Cars can't go that fast?
It doesn't disobey any laws of physics I know of.......just someone with an idea, that did the work and now has a car that hauls.
How long will it last? My LT1 doesn't have the date it will expire on it anywhere either...so? Forced induction is harder on parts but that usually applies to all attempts to increase power.
All I know is I don't want to ride in it again until he gets a cage and the passenger side brakes fixed.

Ron..its useless. God forbid anyone verifies his times, or everyone will think its a giant conspiracy. Any time someone does something that is good for power, and no one else has done it before, it gets claimed as fake. Hell, we ran 109 in a turbo civic hatch 4 years ago on 7 psi. Do you know how many people claimed BS on that? Everyone swore up and down it was 20 psi. Why? I think people under size their turbos or superchargers. Yeah, yeah, a D1 is capable of 850 FWHP, but thats it max. I don't want to push it to its limit to get the power I want, I want it to not have to work hard at all. Do you doubters realize how many 300 whp STOCk motor turbo hondas there are? If those motors pick up on average over 140 whp, why can't a camaro pick up a bit more? Old thinking is why. Hell, GMHTP had a turbo z28 that was a 383 and it had a 60-1 on it? Hello, we put that on 1.8l motors! No wonder it peaked at 440 rwhp @ 20psi! Turbospeed, please, get that setup tweaked and for sale! Once a few have sold, and people realize that it does make the power you say, it will sell awesome.

Hell, I only live about an hour from you, Id be really interested in seeing the car run when you go to the track sometime if it's still alive by summer. My car would be out by then and it would be a good evening I'm sure.
I'm not building my car up for drag racing, top speed is more my thing, but a turbo would work great for that......and two would be better :D
By then you should even have the kit going I would imagine. Keep working on it, we need all the minds we can get.....I'd love to see you make this happen.

Originally posted by turboSpeed
Like I said before, I don't have any pics of the setup yet. Because at some point I would like to turn this investment into a business, I don't think posting pics would be a good idea.

that doesnt make any sense to me...........you might as well post the pics......no one is going to buy a kit without pics......and anyone who does buy the kit, is going to post pics of it anyway.

its not like someone is going to copy it just from pics.


every other company out there has pics of their products....thats business.

To me, the results are just hard to believe.

At 463rwhp (200rwhp over stock), and 7lbs of boost, your STOCK engine is gaining about 30rwhp per pound of boost.

30rwhp per pound of boost on a stock engine (not-optimized cam, low flowing heads, etc) is a fuggin lot!!

And I know that RWHP numbers don't always equal out to trap speeds, but I don't think many people are trapping 128 mph in a full weight car with only 463rwhp.

The other thing that doesn't add up is that your car is a 97, and when you max out the maf sensor on an OBD2 car (which you are doing), it cuts your injector pulsewidth in half which would make the car run hella-lean, even with an FMU.

And I really don't understand why there are no pictures of what you did. If you end up selling the kits are you going to install them all yourself and put a padlock on the hood so no-one can ever see them? Posting a picture of the prototype could only help you make the decision on whether or not to produce them, and you could also get constructive criticism so things coud get changed to peoples likings (if any changes were needed) BEFORE production.

If you accomplished what you claim than congratulations. I suppose anything is possible, but everything just doesn't add up to me :confused:

Just a question..
Why would "maxing out the maf" cut the inj pw in half?

Originally posted by INTMD8
To me, the results are just hard to believe.

At 463rwhp (200rwhp over stock), and 7lbs of boost, your STOCK engine is gaining about 30rwhp per pound of boost.

30rwhp per pound of boost on a stock engine (not-optimized cam, low flowing heads, etc) is a fuggin lot!!

And I know that RWHP numbers don't always equal out to trap speeds, but I don't think many people are trapping 128 mph in a full weight car with only 463rwhp.

Never said the 11.9 at 128 pass was made at 7psi. Infact it was made around 11psi. An error in your thinking is generalizing the power out put to 30rwhp per pound of boost. CFM is horsepower. It take significantly more air to pressurize at 7psi than that it does at 5 or 3, etc. The air flow chart looks more like a bell than a linear rise in air flow. Also, I did take out the spare tire and back seats. I'm still over the weight of what my car weighed stock due to the addition of the turbo kit but it's closer. All other systems are intact.

The other thing that doesn't add up is that your car is a 97, and when you max out the maf sensor on an OBD2 car (which you are doing), it cuts your injector pulsewidth in half which would make the car run hella-lean, even with an FMU.

That's an old wives tale. The first thing you have to ask yourself is, why would GMs programmers cut the injector pulse in 1/2. Actually what happens is that when the MAF goes beyond it's calibrated air flow, the computer switches to speed density mode where it reads air tempurature and manifold pressure to adjust the injector pulse. Don't take my word for it, call Carol Supercharging and ask them.

And I really don't understand why there are no pictures of what you did. If you end up selling the kits are you going to install them all yourself and put a padlock on the hood so no-one can ever see them? Posting a picture of the prototype could only help you make the decision on whether or not to produce them, and you could also get constructive criticism so things coud get changed to peoples likings (if any changes were needed) BEFORE production.

You might have noticed above where I mentioned once the system is finished I would post more pics than you know what to do with. I am not posting anything now because I don't have any patent or copyright protection. Once I do, if a another producer decides to build a kit based on my designes, he/she does so under risk of violating my patents and copyrights. You will find most companies seek some form of protection for their products to protect their investments against a competitor copying them.

If you accomplished what you claim than congratulations. I suppose anything is possible, but everything just doesn't add up to me :confused:

I appreciate the complement. However noone has yet to tell me what pictures of the car sitting stationary in my garage are going to prove about the performance of the car that the dynosheets and time slips haven't already proven? I've got a couple huge catapiler turbochargers laying around that I want to build gas turbine jet engines out of, will posting pics of those turbochargers prove that my car went 128 in the 1/4? I mean I can take pics of all kinds of inert objects which is exactly what my car is when it's sitting in my garage but I fail to see how that proves how well it runs. Why should I take the risk of my competition using my designs to show you something that my dynosheets and time slips have already show. And what they have shown is performance. I don't see what is so hard to understand about that...

The reason your catching so much **** is because you won't share your information.

This board is based on sharing information. Everyone (up until you) comes on the board looking for, or offering information on what they are working on.

You come on the board making great claims about how much you can do with duct tape and whatever, but refuse to show anyone any pictures of anything. This is new for us, usually people come to the board wanting to share information, not tease us with tidbits.

If you want to pursue the sales of turbochargers, you should contact the board administrators and set up an advertising account.

If you are here to share information, do it.

So far, you've been of no benefit to anyone at all.

Just my opinion

I am no one to talk because I have not gotten any pics of my setup yet...but the numbers just dont add up. Just my opinion.

Well if you think about it he is sharing info. How would you like to be deciding on going forced induction and just as soon as you decide to go with that $5300. supercharger that the very next day somebody came out with a kit that made 2/3 more horsepower, better reliability, and costed half as much. You would be a little irritated to say the least. Furthermore what is wrong with someone telling about their good fortune of building something that most people would never attempt to build by themselves. I think that if you dont have anything good to say or any constructive critisicm then maybe you ought not say anything at all. He is not here to start a flame war neither am I. Furthermore if word gets out about the power he made and then pics are acquired then it is very possible that another company can take his idea and get the kit in production faster than he can. So give him time to get a patent on it. Until then enjoy the knowledge that someone has designed a system to be farely affordable and powerful as well. If we cant share our success then what good is success. It is understandable to be leary of such a new design that promises awful amounts of power. At the same time give the guy the benefit of the doubt. He has not given anyone a reason to disbelieve him. What is it insane to think that my 99 T/A with mid length headers, Thunder 224 cam, Ed wright programming, 150 shot of Nitrous, and a 3600 convertor went as much as 11.17 @121. Or that with the long tubes and Stage 2 heads with no programming for the head change that it went 11.65 @117 NA. If not then why is it so insane that somebody did their homework and designed helluva turbo system. Gee I wonder if the manufacturer that first designed fuel injection got dragged thru this same crap. Furthermore if for some reason you think this another post from the author go to the tulsafbody.com and ask who runs the green 99 T/A and how fast it went. You might mention if you do go there that the T/A that you ask about is the one that is now motorless.You will find out pretty quick that it is someone other than turbo speed and that I take racing and horsepower very seriously.

Originally posted by Brady_96Z
The reason your catching so much **** is because you won't share your information.

This board is based on sharing information. Everyone (up until you) comes on the board looking for, or offering information on what they are working on.

I highly doubt I am the first person that doesn't want to give a play by play of everything they do.

You come on the board making great claims about how much you can do with duct tape and whatever, but refuse to show anyone any pictures of anything. This is new for us, usually people come to the board wanting to share information, not tease us with tidbits.

Hmmm, seems I mentioned wanting to rid the system of duct tape, not bragging about what I could do with it. Just one of those things. Further, you have seen scanned copies of both dynosheets I have currently. I didn't think I had to provide detailed diagrams, schemetics, and pictures to share information. Infact the only thing I have told you is how to assemble my system.

If you want to pursue the sales of turbochargers, you should contact the board administrators and set up an advertising account.

As it currently stands, I'm not a company, I'm not selling anything, I'm sharing with everyone the results of my system. When I do become a business, start selling kits, then I will surely sponser boards that help me generate revenue.

If you are here to share information, do it.

So far, you've been of no benefit to anyone at all.

So I guess none of the other threads I've offered advice based on my own experiences don't count. I guess none of the people who have emailed me asking for help on their own turbo systems count either. I guess no-one on this board is allowed to exist here unless they post detailed information and specifications backed up with pictures of everything they've done. Sounds like a welcome place to me! However, I'll consider you in the minority based on what I've seen from others here.

Just my opinion

I guess you've expressed your opinion. Somehow you must feel that you, yourself, have benefitted this board with your post. Believe me, I took a lot from it.

Originally posted by pugs97_30th_Z
I am no one to talk because I have not gotten any pics of my setup yet...but the numbers just dont add up. Just my opinion.

Oh Come on Pugs, I thought you would be the last one to call bs on me?!

When the MAF sensor maxes your inj pulsewidth cuts in half. It's not a wives tale, it is reality. I've tuned enough forced induction LT1's firsthand to know it.


I still don't think 128 mph with a bone stock LT1 and 11 psi is possible (especially with your fuel system and tuning), but that's just my opinion.

What will pictures prove? If anything, it will prove that you have a 97 camaro with a home-fabricated turbo system. Any pictures at this point would just add some credibility to your claims.

The proof game just goes on till people start asking for a motor tear downs looking for non-stock internals, secret NOS systems or all sorts of crazy stuff. In the end there is a point where you just have to trust that a person is telling the truth, because you will never be able to prove anything past a certain point.

In time you'll trust him or not, it's not a big deal. That goes for anybody in life.

Originally posted by got_hp?
that doesnt make any sense to me...........you might as well post the pics......no one is going to buy a kit without pics......and anyone who does buy the kit, is going to post pics of it anyway.

its not like someone is going to copy it just from pics.


every other company out there has pics of their products....thats business.




I not going to comment on the numbers or whether or not I believe the kit is real, but some of what you posted is seems like just talk because you want verification, or want to see pictures. Like the part you say about "every other company out there has of their products pics.... thats business".

Sure, most companies have pictures, but when MANY compaies have something in the prototype stages they dont share pictures either. Until it's READY FOR SALE . That's just commons sense and smart business. I don't know if the guy is telling the truth or not, but showing prototype pictures of something like this if you are going to make business out of is often stupid business, and I'll even say stupid period.


That leads to the next point you make about " it's not like someone is going to copy it just from pics".

Personally I am going to design a kit for peronal use on my daily driver, and maybe weekend car. I don't want to produce any , or sell them, but for someone that did, you can get a great deal of info and design info regerding the turbo header(which is the main part of the whole deal) just by looking at the kit. I know, because the setup I'm making for my cars I got from looking a pictures of setups over the net of guys who WILLINGLY did share their info . I just picked the pictures of the headers i liked. ALL I HAVE TO DO IS DUPLICATE IT!! (Or if you dont weld have a shop or welder do it. For some that might be difficult, but for those with the skills, and mandrel benders, u bends, welder etc. It's not that hard. Someone with decent skills can easially buy bends , or pipe,(if they have a bender) and build a header just from a picture and get it pretty close, or darn near the same. Or just take it to an expert chassis builder or welder who can do it with no problem. QUITE a few Mustang and Fbody guys have done it already.

The guys who's pictures i used don't mine, and they FREELY shared info, but they were not making a business out of it, so they didn't care. It was a free exchange of info. But showing pictures before it's ready can be bad for someone who wants to sell it. So IF the guy is telling the truth about the kit, I AIN'T MAD AT HIM. LOL. Just think about the situation. Now if someone does not show pictures, and they are trying to sell the kit AFTER IT"S READY to sell, and expect to get your money, then that's obsurd, but he said he will have picturs when it's ready. So those who want it will just have to wait. Im not trying to support the guy or his doubters, and I don't mean for this post to semm negative. But if this post is real, I can understand why he didn't give pictures yet. If he is lying about really building it , of course we know why there are no pictures, and if he is telling the truth, then I can understand why he wouldn't show a prototype until it's ready to go on the market.

The # seem high, but i have seen some strange things, so i'll just keep following the story and try not to jump to conclusions. Again this wasn't a negative post. I just can understand the picture issue. (Or lack of pictures)

wow, you guys type TOO much.

Give him a freaking break, just b/c you arent smart enough or dont have the resources to do somthing like this doesnt mean that somone else cant. So stop b*tching and whining about somthing that really doesnt effect your day to day life and get on with it, if he has it great (and in all honesty that is about what i would expect from a turboed stock motor, just no one else seems serious enough besides takling about how it cant be done, he went out there and did it.) Efficiency is where its at, seems this is a very efficient setup so it makes the power it should. Personally i would like to say awesome job, its about time somone did what some of us always knew could be done. Anyone who doesnt believe him, fine shouldnt be any skin off his back or anyone elses, you all take this internet thing WAAAAAY to seriously..

P

haha i was just thinking the same thing. they must have fingers of steel

no, just some of us type >100wpm ;)


anyway, doing the math.. I am pretty sure 11psi would make the numbers he claims.. but thats just off the top of my head.

I believe Turbospeed that he fabbed up a turbo system, and it's done and running. I just think the BS factor lies with a stock engine stock fuel system Lt1 making low 10 second power.

Wow, things really livened up! Thanks to all of you who understand and support my reasoning. To those that don't, sorry you can't make the connection.

Whistler - what do you think, maybe I made those dynosheets in Microsoft Paint? Or maybe you never read far enough into any of my posts that you didn't see where I said the A/F ratio was 15:1 on the 484 pull. It didn't blow because I got out of it in a hurry. Hense the numerous references to the "Aborted" dyno pull. I also mentioned that I did the testing on 101 unleaded. Not ever did I say I drive it around everyday making 10lbs of boost on a stock fuel system with stock programming. BUT, adding nothing more than 30lb SVO injectors and race gas, I did run plenty of passes at 10psi plus. I do drive around at 7psi on 93.

INTMD8 - That whole injector pulse thing is amazing isn't it? I guess those 30lb SVO injectors really made a difference since the system is outflowing the maf around 5 psi? The engine should have blown on that 13.5 @ 117mph pass I made, let alone the 11.9 at 128?! This is a classic example of, I've read something somewhere and because it is in print on the internet, it must be true! So.. why is it none of the supercharger guys running 7-8 psi on stock injectors and programming are blowing up? If you stop and think about it, you might find you will ask yourself, "What did GM hope to achive by cutting the injector pulse in 1/2 if the maf goes out of calibration?" Seems to me they would be running a risk of people leaning out and blowing their engines if they did that. That in turn generates warrentee claims that they might not have had to pay. Not a good business practice. I don't know what you seen where that would make you think that but rest assured, on my 1997 OBDII computer with stock programming, it keeps the injector pulse right where it's programmed to.

The question remains to everyone calling BS, "How much money are you willing to put down on a frivilous BS call?"

"INTMD8 - That whole injector pulse thing is amazing isn't it? I guess those 30lb SVO injectors really made a difference since the system is outflowing the maf around 5 psi? The engine should have blown on that 13.5 @ 117mph pass I made, let alone the 11.9 at 128?! This is a classic example of, I've read something somewhere and because it is in print on the internet, it must be true! So.. why is it none of the supercharger guys running 7-8 psi on stock injectors and programming are blowing up? If you stop and think about it, you might find you will ask yourself, "What did GM hope to achive by cutting the injector pulse in 1/2 if the maf goes out of calibration?" Seems to me they would be running a risk of people leaning out and blowing their engines if they did that. That in turn generates warrentee claims that they might not have had to pay. Not a good business practice. I don't know what you seen where that would make you think that but rest assured, on my 1997 OBDII computer with stock programming, it keeps the injector pulse right where it's programmed to. "

I dyno tune cars at Speed Inc. with the LT1/LS1 edit software and I have personally seen 4 obd2 forced induction cars that cut injector pulsewidth in half when the maf sensor maxes out.

I'm not saying your engine should have blown. Maybe with the 30lb injectors and FMU you have just enough.

Why are none of the supercharger guys running 7-8 psi on stock injectors and programming blowing up? Maybe you should do a little research, but I'm sure you can find more posts than you care to read about people cracking ring lands in low boost/stock engine applications.

I don't know what GM's reason was for cutting pulsewidth in half when the maf maxes. Maybe it's something they never considered. Or, maybe they figured a stock vehicle doesn't have a chance in hell of maxing out the maf, so if the maf did max out (bad sensor), they cut fuel back to keep from melting the cat's.

So anyway, good luck with your kit. I'm done with this topic until (or 'IF') more information is presented.

Ditto.

Let us know when the patent is done and the kits are for sale.

Originally posted by Whistler
Ditto.

Let us know when the patent is done and the kits are for sale.

and theres pics! or even btter, video!

I agree with INTMD8 in that the stock engine will NEVER max-out the MAF, so if the computer senses the max signal, there must be a sensor error so it'll cut fuel. This is not limited to LT-1 cars either. Grand Prix GTP's have the same issue. This may come as a shock, but GM didn't intend for people to modify their products.

Furthermore, atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. At atmospheric pressure, a bolt-on LT-1 will make 300 chp and about 250 rwph. If you were to double atmospheric pressure to 29.4 psi (equivalent of 14.7 psi of ambient temp. boost), the hp would double to 500 rwhp (which is roughly what is being claimed).

Therefore, to obtain 500 rwhp on a stock LT-1, you would need to run about 15# of boost with either a 100% efficient compressor or a 100% efficient intercooler.

But 500 rwhp with a ~75% efficient compressor and a <90% efficient intercooler with only 11# boost? By this same logic, 11# of boost on a stock LT-1 has a limit of 433 rwhp.

It doesn't add up.

Mike, you claim a bolt-on Lt1 would only have 250 rwhp? My car stock put down 260 rwhp BONE STOCK and while it may be a freak, its not special by any means. Another thing you must consider, A bolt-on Lt1 would have headers, which if designed correctly, his turbo manifold would reduce backpressure and increase flow. There are numberous LT header bolt-on cars with over 300 rwhp. So in effect, he's not really doubling the power output.

I also wanted to add, why is 15lbs of boost needed to get to 500 rwhp? What KIND of 15psi? 15 psi from a t3/4b, 15psi from a t88, 15psi from a t4-60-1? Boost is just a pressure, and can't you have more volume at the same pressure, with a bigger compressor?

Originally posted by brain

I also wanted to add, why is 15lbs of boost needed to get to 500 rwhp? What KIND of 15psi? 15 psi from a t3/4b, 15psi from a t88, 15psi from a t4-60-1? Boost is just a pressure, and can't you have more volume at the same pressure, with a bigger compressor?


exactly.

im no boost expert.......but PSI is not the only factor.......you also have to account for CFM at that particular PSI.

Power production is directly proportional to air density in the cylinder at BDC of the intake stroke. Air density is related to temperature and pressure ONLY. If motor A and motor B are identical and have the same intake air temperature and pressure, they will make the same power regardless of the method used to pressurize the air.

It's really just the basic laws of Thermodynamics.

However, if someone with a small turbocharger attempts to spin it fast to achieve a high amount of boost (or supply a high volume to too large of a motor), he will run the compressor out of it's efficiency range and heat the air significantly, cancelling out some of the power he hoped to gain. So, it would be beneficial in this case to switch to a larger compressor that will run efficiently at the higher boost (and flow) levels. Larger compressors will supply more air at the same boost because the temperature of the air is lower. You can, however, aftercool a small compressor's output and get the same results of a larger non-aftercooled compressor.

Flow ratings have largely to do with the ultimate capability of the compressor. For instance, if I install a 4000 cfm throttle body on my LT-1, will it make 4 times more power than my 1000 cfm unit. Don't think so. But, if I really needed that much flow, I'd gain from it.

Mike

A stock LT1 can only flow so much at any given boost level. It doesnt matter what you have feeding the boost in. At 15PSI, the LT1 will flow X amount of air. Given that the air is the same temperature of course. Just trying to simplify engineer's thermodynamics ;)

Argh, now I forgot what else I was gonna say, but I agree 100% with Intmd8 and engineermike :)

Originally posted by pugs97_30th_Z
A stock LT1 can only flow so much at any given boost level. It doesnt matter what you have feeding the boost in. At 15PSI, the LT1 will flow X amount of air.


at what CFM is the stock heads/intake/tb/maf combo maxed?

Actually, you are wrong...

I will offer some real world evidence... There are plenty of supercharged stock long blocks making that much horsepower despite the paracitic loss the supercharger draws off of it. And they are doing it at 10 lbs.

Second, simply doubling the pressure inside the intake manifold means little. Engines make horsepower by burning a certain amount of air with a certain amount of fuel. You are attemping to over simplify the process and your logic is flawed.

At 100% volumetic efficency a 349cid engine will flow 607.12 cubic feet of air per minute at 6000rpm. I don't know about your LT1 but getting 300rwhp out of full bolt on lt1 isn't uncommon. I'll meet you in the middle at 275rwhp which is roughly what they dyno stock. They generate peak power roughly around 5000 rpm which gives them a volumetric efficiency of about 78% at that RPM. That means that a stock LT1 is flowing about 450cfm at 75% VE and 6000rpm.

Because the engine is not 100% volumetrically efficient, the air pressure in the cylinders is less than ambient when the piston reaches the bottom of it's intake stroke. That means the air pressure in the cylinder is closer to 11.466psi @78%. If you were to ever install a boost/vaccum gauge on a naturally aspirated engine, you will notice that even at wide open throttle, there is vacuum in the manifold. Since the boost gauge references ambient pressure, in order to bring the boost it to 0, the turbocharger must push 3.234 lbs just to make the manifold pressure equal to ambient. Going beyond that to reach 10lbs, it is actually pushing 13.234 "lbs of boost" for a total air pressure of 10lbs over ambient. This more than doubles the air pressure inside the mainfold. Using your logic, that is a 115% increase in horsepower potential. If it were achived, that would be 591.25 horsepower to the rear wheels. See what happens when you try to over simplify things? :D

You didn't consider one thing in your equations... Density. By compressing air, you heat it. By heating the air you make it less dense. Ever notice your car runs better on cool dry days? A 75% efficient compressor will heat the air about 121 degrees over ambient. At 75 degrees that would bring the air at the compressor outlet to 196 degrees. Assuming a 90% efficient intercooler, that drops the air tempurature to 86.28 degrees. Now you have relatively dense air at high pressure flowing into the engine; something to the effect of 750 cfm

Another thing you forget is compression ratio. Last I heard, an increase in compression ratio results in an increase in horsepower. It seems to me that if an engine has, say, 10:1 compression N/A, if you introduce significantly more air into that cylinder, and compress it into the same volume, your compression ratio and horsepower will increase from that alone. (Remember I said these tests were made on race gas).

Now lets take it a step further. If the engine makes 275 horsepower to the rear wheels and there is 12% loss in the M6 drive train, that means the engine is making about 308 to the fly wheel. Not too many will argue with that. That means it takes 33 horsepower to drive the drivetrain. Sinse it doesn't take any more horsepower to drive an M6 drive train with a 550 horsepower engine than a 308 horsepower engine, we will leave it at 33 horsepower. Given the above we can estimate that the turbocharger is adding about 66 percent more air to the engine. Burned well, that means a horsepower output of 513.33. Take from that the 33 horsepower the drive train requires and walla.. 480.33 horsepower.

But it still not that simple. The day I dynoed 484/540, the air was cooler, and the car was very lean. We are also not considering the compression increase from boost which results in power. This also doesn't account for the better exhaust system, or the better ignition system. All added up, it probably should have dynoed more. But what can you expect from a stock engine? :D

Your lack of faith is amusing. I guess you assume I get my rocks off by making things up and posting them on this board. But the question still remains; how much are you willing to spend to prove I'm wrong? Enjoy!

PS - Happy New Years everyone and be safe tonight!

I will not bet money because you will not (and can not, practically) prove to me that what you are saying is true. Unless you're willing to come run it at State Capitol Dragway in Baton Rouge and completely disassemble the engine afterwards, don't offer up a bet.


Let's see here. . .

You would not need to make 3.234 lb of boost to reach ambient pressure in the manifold. You would need 3.234 lb of boost to reach ambient pressure in the cylinder. I'll bet that a stock LT-1 at full throttle develops less than -1 psi in the intake (not -3.234). So, your logic is flawed. The 3.234 psi positive pressure never actually makes it into the cylinder.

Next, a 75% efficient compressor (at 11 psi dp) heats the air 135 (of which 92 degrees was adiabatic, and 43 was due to inefficiencies in the compressor), for a discharge temp. of 210 (not 120 and 196, respectively as you said). Time to pull out your Thermo book. . . Or maybe you used the wrong units. . . You know you have to convert to Rankine degrees, then to Enthalpy before doing these calc's, huh?

I would check the rest of your math, but I really don't have time to play TA right now, and besides, I think you get my point. I have a party to go to.

During my next reply, I will be hung over.

Mike

Nice posts engineermike and turbospeed!

Some other guys post made me think about another common argument: Superchargers vs turbos. This first came up a few years ago and I am still sticking to my original response to that one. If turbos were so good, then why haven't NHRA funny cars and top fuel gone with them? They are running blowers, not turbos! And, they will never run turbos from what I hear.

And it doesn't matter which one you use to force air into your street motor, intercooling will help by decreasing the inlet air temperature and thus increasing the air density making more horsepower. This is what turbospeed was trying to say, on a cold night your car will make lots more power if it uses forced induction. With the increased power however, you need to compensate with more fuel. If you don't, you may be leaning out the motor and increasing combustion temperatures which causes detonation.

Another big factor in the power making capability is the camshaft and cylinder head design, this hasn't even been mentioned yet. These will basically regulate how much air is let into the cylinder, whether its NA or blown.

Anyway, Happy New Year. And engineermike, I hope my hangover isn't as bad as yours! :eek:

I will not bet money because you will not (and can not, practically) prove to me that what you are saying is true. Unless you're willing to come run it at State Capitol Dragway in Baton Rouge and completely disassemble the engine afterwards, don't offer up a bet.

You say his times are BS and the dyno must have lied, even though other people wrote saying they saw it with their own eyes? Hell one guy even wrote about a ride in the damned thing, yet you still think it's all made up because your equations backed up by big words will never allow it to happen. Sounds a little like scientists with thick note pads trying to tell Chuck Yeager he was on a suicide mission because it was proven that sound barrier could not be broken. People on the ground thought the sonic boom was ol' Chucks demise, yet he was up there probably laughing in his helmet at those amazingly smart scientists. You don't have to believe... And no offense but if you think TurboSpeed is going to hop in the car, drive down to X dragway, tear down his set up all just to prove he's right, your not quite as smart as you like to think you are. Just an opinion and I don't mean to speak for TurboSpeed. I hope your not too hung over if you read this, but I do hope you had a great party and a nice New Year.

Originally posted by EDS Z28
Nice posts engineermike and turbospeed!

Some other guys post made me think about another common argument: Superchargers vs turbos. This first came up a few years ago and I am still sticking to my original response to that one. If turbos were so good, then why haven't NHRA funny cars and top fuel gone with them? They are running blowers, not turbos! And, they will never run turbos from what I hear.



First of all they are not legal. And not needed. The cars are already making 6000- 7000+ hp. What would they need a turbo for? They have even done things to SLOW the cars down in the last few years. The NHRA officials and the DRIVERS THEMSELVES have even said the cars were getting to fast. Your response has no basis. Turbos are not needed , and I don't even think desired, nor are they being considered, in the TOP fuel (nitrometh) classes. Just because someone does not make something legal in a class or does not want to use it, does not mean the reason is because it's not as good.

But as far as classes where they are legal , look what the top runners are using. How many blown cars or nitrous cars do you see winning in PRO STREET, or PRO 5.0 now. The turbos, have taken over. Don't get me wrong ,supercharges and nitrous are awsome, but turbos are superior in terms of potential, and also engine reliablility to the others.

Ive read this forum for years,but never registered.But I did register just to reply to this one post.I was at the track,and was watching turbospeeds frustration after duct-taping the the plastic elbow to the point that it looked like a boa that just swallowed a large house cat.Then the clamps werent holding the intake tube to the elbow,then thats where the string came in.Ive been going to the Tulsa track for years,and when I had heard about his car,I was one of those non believers too.One thing is a fact.He did run the 128 mph.He made pass after pass,trying to get it to hook up with not too much luck,but was always running 122+ mph.Granted I havent seen the inside of his engine,I have seen the outside, and it is as he has says.Unless my eyes are bs,n me,guys,all this is stand up and straight.And my hats off to ts,cause he did all the construction,fitting and work himself.

I dont think alot of people are doubting that these are correct dyno's or that he is pullling 129 mph - 1/4....Those number can be easily obtained, just hard to beleive they can be with a stock car. My buddy's fully forged Blown 4v Cobra put out 540hp/440 tq to the wheels. He went 10.90's at 127mph. On the other hand my friends lt1 car blown with a cam, went 12.0's at 119 mph putting out 454rwhp. I am not calling bs yet, but if this is for real I will be one happy customer.
SCott

Originally posted by EDS Z28
Nice posts engineermike and turbospeed!

Some other guys post made me think about another common argument: Superchargers vs turbos. This first came up a few years ago and I am still sticking to my original response to that one. If turbos were so good, then why haven't NHRA funny cars and top fuel gone with them? They are running blowers, not turbos! And, they will never run turbos from what I hear.



tubros were outlawed in top fuel years ago
why? because they were completely blowing away the competition.

by design, a turbo will create more power than a supercharger.

but years and years and years of them just using superchargers has led to much more advances in them.

if they had been spending all this time working on turbos in top fuel, the power levels would be insane.

I was at Route 66 that night when Kenny Bernstein went 330 mph. His car was probably making over 6500 hp - that is plenty enough insane. If turbos would push the cars much faster than that, the biggest problem, other than stopping, would be how to prevent the driver's retinas from being pulled off when the chute is popped.

As to the turbospeed car, I think most LT1 people around here are used to the fact that the power level needed to go 129 usually requires a better than stock fuel system and engine rebuilds are usually a spontaneous effect of going that fast on stock internals for any length of time. I also think it would take quite a bit of boost to overcome the limitations of the stock heads, cam, & valvetrain. Don't see how you could get away with stock springs, though, especially stockers with a few miles on them. Sems like the boost would play hell with the intakes.

Sounds like there are plenty of witnesses, though, so I guess we'll have to wait & see.

Originally posted by Rpm280
First of all they are not legal. And not needed. The cars are already making 6000- 7000+ hp. What would they need a turbo for? They have even done things to SLOW the cars down in the last few years. The NHRA officials and the DRIVERS THEMSELVES have even said the cars were getting to fast. Your response has no basis. Turbos are not needed , and I don't even think desired, nor are they being considered, in the TOP fuel (nitrometh) classes. Just because someone does not make something legal in a class or does not want to use it, does not mean the reason is because it's not as good.

But as far as classes where they are legal , look what the top runners are using. How many blown cars or nitrous cars do you see winning in PRO STREET, or PRO 5.0 now. The turbos, have taken over. Don't get me wrong ,supercharges and nitrous are awsome, but turbos are superior in terms of potential, and also engine reliablility to the others.

Who gives a **** if they are legal or not. Just like you said, the cars are making 6000-7000 hp, so a turbo is not needed. Well, a turbo would not be able to support this much horsepower my friend, otherwise they would have incorporated them a long time ago, don't you think. The supercharger remains the king, and will be king for a long, long, time. Just because turbos are supporting much lower horsepower in street cars doesn't mean it could feed a funny car or top fueler. Your comparing fish with sharks. :p

BIGRED1, I didn't say that his times or dyno numbers were bull. The whole point of what I'm saying is that I doubt that the internals are stock.

About Chuck Yeager's supersonic flight: I guarantee you that more than half of the government's scientists and engineers agreed that it could be done, and done safely, otherwise they would not have built the plane or allowed him to fly it.

I just choose not to blindly accept everything that people tell me.

I know that TurboSpeed is not going to drive his car down here, run it, and tear it apart. That's why I said he "can not practically prove to me" that what he is saying is true, so don't offer up bets.


About the Turbo vs. Supercharger debate:

Turbo's have more ultimate torque potential and superchargers have more ultimate hp potential. Many drag cars are quicker with turbochargers because the motor spends alot of time below peak hp rpm.

Mike

Originally posted by engineermike
BIGRED1, I didn't say that his times or dyno numbers were bull. The whole point of what I'm saying is that I doubt that the internals are stock.

About Chuck Yeager's supersonic flight: I guarantee you that more than half of the government's scientists and engineers agreed that it could be done, and done safely, otherwise they would not have built the plane or allowed him to fly it.

I just choose not to blindly accept everything that people tell me.

I know that TurboSpeed is not going to drive his car down here, run it, and tear it apart. That's why I said he "can not practically prove to me" that what he is saying is true, so don't offer up bets.



At one point is was thought that the stresses of going of 67 miles per hours were too much for the human body to handle. You are right, I'm not going to drive it to Louisiana to prove to you that my engine is internally stock. But I'm not the one calling somebody a liar either. You can come up here and I'll tear it down. It's not a bet, in racing circles it's called a tear down fee. I don't have to bet you my car has a stock LT1 minus the mods listed in previous posts. I know what the car is. You can come up, I'll demonstrate my cars performance, then tear it down. Tear down fee, 10 thousand dollars. Anything less is a waste of my time. But if you are confident enough to flame someone whom you have never met, with whom you have had no previous interactions with, you have no risk then do you? Seems to me you stand to loose credability either way. If you don't like being called out, perhaps you should consider taking people at their word especially when they have nothing to gain by lying to you.

BTW, as previously stated, my calculations are based on 10lbs not 11lbs of boost.

About the Turbo vs. Supercharger debate:

Turbo's have more ultimate torque potential and superchargers have more ultimate hp potential. Many drag cars are quicker with turbochargers because the motor spends alot of time below peak hp rpm.

Mike

How do you figure this? First of all, it's not superchargers vs turbochargers, it's centrifugal compressors vs positive displacement compressors. Turbochargers as well as all superchargers commonly used on 4th gen Camaros are of the centrifugal variety. How you drive the same compressor does not change it's efficiency. It is also known that positive displacement superchargers are significantly less efficient that the centrifugal types. Less efficiency means less density which means less horsepower and torque.

NHRA banned turbochargers for the same reason they limit the CID of the engines; to keep the cars slower. They can't use the power they are making now which is why they have I believe 6 clutch discs designed to slip during the first 2.8 seconds on the run. Beyond simple efficiency, they stand to gain 600+ horsepower by using turbochargers vs superchargers simply by taking the load off the crank. If you've ever seen them run under the lights, you will see there is plenty of exhaust energy to spin the turbochargers.

The same compressor on a turbocharger will make more peak horsepower than on a supercharger because there is no drag on the crank. Turbo lag can be all but nullified on a well designed system especially on a 5.7lt engine.

Originally posted by engineermike


About the Turbo vs. Supercharger debate:

Turbo's have more ultimate torque potential and superchargers have more ultimate hp potential. Many drag cars are quicker with turbochargers because the motor spends alot of time below peak hp rpm.

Mike

ok, i'm no enginneer or huge math guru

BUT ;)

that doesn't make sense above for a few reasons to me. 1) is that hp is just a mathematical equation driven from torque at a certain RPM. So if turbos are going to create more torque they will in turn (because of the formula) make more horsepower. 2) you have to lose horsepower from driving the blower, you lose VERY little from driving a turbo.

but thats just my humble opinion ;)

Originally posted by EDS Z28
Who gives a **** if they are legal or not. Just like you said, the cars are making 6000-7000 hp, so a turbo is not needed. Well, a turbo would not be able to support this much horsepower my friend, otherwise they would have incorporated them a long time ago, don't you think. The supercharger remains the king, and will be king for a long, long, time. Just because turbos are supporting much lower horsepower in street cars doesn't mean it could feed a funny car or top fueler. Your comparing fish with sharks. :p


like i said.......if turbos had been allowed the whole time, they would have spent just as much time advancing the capabilities of turbos, and they would be supporting way more power.


building boost exponentially is better than boost linearly

Originally posted by got_hp?



building boost exponentially is better than boost linearly

LOL...maybe, but not for traction hehehe

TurboSpeed, if we're going by dirt track rules, let's make it a claimer fee. I'll pay you $500 and you give me your motor.

If we're comparing centrifugal compressors to PD compressors, then I'll be the first to agree that the adiabatic efficiency of the centrifugal is far greater than PD. As part of my senior design project, I measured the efficiency of a B&M 144 PD blower and found it to be a lowly 38%, compared to 70+% for centrifugals. I'm sure, though, that the larger PD blowers have higher efficiencies, but I doubt they get up as high as 70%.

As far as losing hp to drive the blower -- that's not entirely true. It does take hp to drive any compressor, however, that hp is put back into the crankshaft in the form of positive cylinder pressure on the intake stroke. This positive pressure helps drive the crank. But, on a turbocharged motor, there is positive pressure in the cylinder during the exhaust stroke also (at least as much as on the intake side). So, if you're running 10 psi boost, then there is at least 10 psi in the cylinder on the exhaust stroke working against the crankshaft.

Mike

89ProchargedROC, the equation for hp includes rpm. A turbocharged engine will make a larger peak torque number in the mid-range because it will make full boost at a very low rpm. The '86-'87 Buick 3.8 turbo motors made peak torque at 2000 rpm since they would build 12 psi by this time. At 2000 rpm, a centrifugal supercharger is doing little or nothing.

However, at, say, 6000 rpm, a centrifugal is making full boost. And, as I stated above, parasitic crankshaft losses are a moot point. A centrifugal supercharged motor benefits from better exhaust scavenging since it's not working against the high header pressures in a turbo motor.

Don't get me wrong, if it weren't for the complicated plumbing associated with a Turbocharger, I'd prefer that over my Vortech T-trim. If you set up a turbo and a supercharger to both run 12 # of boost, the turbo will make 12 from one end of the strip to the other and the supercharger will only see 12 psi for a few moments inbetween. My T-trim makes 9 psi peak, but spends alot of time at 7 - 8 psi.

Mike

Originally posted by engineermike
A centrifugal supercharged motor benefits from better exhaust scavenging since it's not working against the high header pressures in a turbo motor.



from what i understand.....the issues with exhaust pressure can be almost made non-existant by properly matching the exhaust turbine and to the engine/setup.

LOL...maybe, but not for traction hehehe


bwahaha.....traction....whats that?

Mike, I am curious. What internals do you claim he must have? Lower C/R pistons? Different Cam? Ported heads? Where does it stop? If he takes the heads off, and they are stock, then would you claim the cam? Ok, he removes the cam and its stock, then what, it must be a stroker? I know for a fact my friends stock internal (NO HEADS/CAMS) 96 Slowbra put down 499.6 on an s-trim w/15psi, non-intercooled. He eventually cracked the block, but it did it. Those cars make about 230 rwhp stock. Guess he's a liar too, huh? I don't see why its so hard to believe, unless you are just dissapointed in the performance of your car. I don't blame you, because after we cracked the block in that cobra, we put in a 94 5.0 stroker motor. A4 block, ported canfields, forged everything, huge intercooler, ATI D1, etc. etc. Guess how much power? A whopping 590 rwhp. Woo hoo. All that money and work for 90 rwhp? It should be making 750 at least, but the D1 is just too small. I think you would pick up a good bit of power if you switch to a YS-trim. Isn't that a bit bigger than a t-trim?

The post that spans two years (and it really feels like it). It just keeps going and going. Might wanna lock this one and post more on the set-up later. This post is getting less and less productive. And I didn't hear anyone say this was about dirt tracking, but then again I may have missed it. I think if it was torn down, and everything looked stock, we'd still have people say it's impossible. We'd have to measure the track to see if it's a true 1/4 mile, recalibrate the dyno, check for hidden nitrous set-ups, see if the car was acid dipped for lighter weight, check the backyard for an exact look-a-like of TurboSpeeds car hidden under a tarp, guarded by ill tempered sea bass, motion detectors and furbie with fazers set on stun. The truth is out there... It may not be exactly as we imagined it, but it's far from impossible.

got_hp,

the exhaust backpressure on a turbo motor IS ALWAYS greater than the intake boost level. It is physically impossible to produce 10 psi boost with <10 psi exhaust backpressure. Most turbo-knowledgable sources (David Vizard, for one) say that actual backpressure is roughly double the boost level. For instance, it will take 20 psi exhaust header pressure to produce 10 psi boost. You can minimize this by properly matching the turbine to the motor, but, at best, backpressure will be more than the boost level.

Big Red,

You're right about the productivity of the thread, so I'll stick to the science (as I have been) and leave the mud-slinging to others.

brain,

I may gain peak horsepower with the YS, but I'd sacrifice some low-rpm boost. And since I am only running a 2800 stall, I need all the low-end I can get, hence the small cam. I carefully analyzed the compressor maps on Vortech's website before selecting the T-trim.

Mike

Then why do I see that turbo's are getting more horsepower capabilities than superchargers lately...

A long time ago, I always noticed that boost for boost, the supercharger yielded higher horsepower than turbo.

I do understand that you get full boost sooner with a turbo than a supercharger so the turbo will leave you with a faster feeling that supercharger, but when you are racing, you are almost always under full boost??

I remember I saw on my crapxton 5psi from 4000rpm up to 6000...

Originally posted by engineermike
got_hp,

the exhaust backpressure on a turbo motor IS ALWAYS greater than the intake boost level. It is physically impossible to produce 10 psi boost with <10 psi exhaust backpressure. Most turbo-knowledgable sources (David Vizard, for one) say that actual backpressure is roughly double the boost level. For instance, it will take 20 psi exhaust header pressure to produce 10 psi boost. You can minimize this by properly matching the turbine to the motor, but, at best, backpressure will be more than the boost level.

Wrong again. You considering the pressure in the cylinder to be linear. It is not...
To quote Hugh MacInnes...

Many People think this exhaust-gas energy is not free becaue the turine wheel causes back pressure on the engine exhaust system. This is true to a certain extent, but when the exhaust valve first opens, the flow through it is critical. Critical flow occurs when the cylinder pressure is more than twice the exhaust-manifold pressure. As long as this condition exists, back pressure will not affect flow.

When an engine is running at wide-open throttle with a well-matched high-efficiency turbocharger, intake manifold pressure will be considerably higher than exhaust manifold pressure. This intake manigold pressure will drive the piston down during the intake stroke, reversing the process of the engine driving the gases out during the exhaust stroke.

During the overlap perioud when both valves are open, the higher intake-manifold pressure forces residual gases out of the clearance volume, scavenging the cylinder. Intake-manifold pressure as much as 10 psi higher than exhaust manifold pressures have been measured on engines running at about 900hp. Good scavenging can account for as mch as 15% more power than from the increase in manifold pressure of the naturally aspirated engine.

I guess I am thankful I didn't have your instructors while in pursuit of my engineering degree. I've never known someone calling themselves an engineer to have such of an "it can't be done" attitude. I guess that's the difference between success and failure.


Big Red,

You're right about the productivity of the thread, so I'll stick to the science (as I have been) and leave the mud-slinging to others.


The science has proven this correct several times. Less we forget the scientific method. Also, if I recall, you were the one on here saying I'm lying about this. Without refreshing my memory by reading my first post, I believe I was posting the results of further testing of the car. Yes, in fact it was you who started the mud slinging.

Oh and btw, in dirt track circles, if you called BS on someone, then told them you were going to give them 500 dollars for their engine, they would either laugh at you or knock that "engineers" hat off your head. In the two years I raced on dirt tracks, you didn't call BS on someone unless you damn well could back it up. I've found you greatly amusing which is why I offered you a tear down. Come on up, unless you don't want to loose any more credability than you already have.

Amusing as it has been, I've lost interest as it has become repetitive. You are going to just keep repeating your fuzzy and incomplete mathematics that prove nothing. There are a few of you that want to call me a liar and I guess that's your right but I also have the right to overlook you. I can see that those interested in following how this system progresses are getting tired of the flamers and my responses to them. The supercharger vs turbocharger debate is an issue worthy of it's own thread. So I have some more testing to do on some bug fixes. As I get results, I'll let those interested know how things came out!

I was gonna post, but turbospeed took care of it :)

Originally posted by JordonMusser
I was gonna post, but turbospeed took care of it :)

so i was right?.......having a properly matched exhaust turbine helps negate the backprese issue?

Am I the only one here who has heard of Claimer rules in dirt track? People build cheap or stock engines because another racer can "claim" their engine at a very low price.

I agree with almost everything that Hugh writes. When you reach critical flow (i.e. supersonic), backpressure will not affect flow. BUT, flow is only critical when the exhaust valve first opens (as he states). Later in the exhaust stroke (after the high cylinder pressures have "blown down") flow is no longer critical, so backpressure limits the exhaust flow from the cylinder.

And to bring in my own expert, David Vizard writes:

". . . take a typical situation where, under full throttle conditions, exhaust backpressure is twice the intake pressure."

"For a turbo engine boosted at 10 psi, the exhaust pressure when that much boost exists is going to be about 20 psi."

"It is possible with enough development to get the intake-to-exhaust pressure ratios near unity. . ."

The article is actually about turbo camshaft selection so I had to pull out bits and pieces. It is published in "How to Build and Modify Chevrolet Small-Block Camshafts and ValveTrains".


I never said that anyone was a liar. Only that there may be some things at work here that people don't realize. For instance, my friend traded in a "stock" '99 Trans Am to a dealer. Even though the car looked and sounded completely stock, it had an MTI 221/221 cam in it. Someone will buy this car and, mod for mod, it will always make 30 more hp than everyone elses. I'm sure he's swearing to everyone that "it only has bolt on's".

Also, Turbospeed mentioned that he had race gas in it. I know that certain race fuels have very high energy (Btu/lbm) as compared to regular C12 or C16. These fuels can be worth as much as 10% more power than ordinary race fuel. That would bring down the 460 rwhp to a more believable 420.

There are a hundred such possibilities that could be at work. That doesn't make anyone a liar, but it makes things more believable.

Mike

Originally posted by engineermike
There are a hundred such possibilities that could be at work. That doesn't make anyone a liar, but it makes things more believable.


agreed!

gothp-
well, your statement is very broad, of course a properly matched exhaust turbine will help with exhaust backpressure.

Originally posted by got_hp?
like i said.......if turbos had been allowed the whole time, they would have spent just as much time advancing the capabilities of turbos, and they would be supporting way more power.


building boost exponentially is better than boost linearly

In your dreams dood! The turbo would have to be so big, it would be impratical to mount it to the exhaust. Even if it was big enough to mount to the exhaust, it would probably melt do to the extreme exhaust temperatures of very high horsepower and nitromethane fuel.

Originally posted by EDS Z28
In your dreams dood! The turbo would have to be so big, it would be impratical to mount it to the exhaust. Even if it was big enough to mount to the exhaust, it would probably melt do to the extreme exhaust temperatures of very high horsepower and nitromethane fuel.

you'd need 2 actually.....Garrett makes a 140mm wheel capable of about 3000hp. Use 2 and you're in Top fuel territory

obviously we'll never know cuz they were banned years ago and no one is going to develop them with money out of their pocket "for fun"

Originally posted by EDS Z28
In your dreams dood! The turbo would have to be so big, it would be impratical to mount it to the exhaust. Even if it was big enough to mount to the exhaust, it would probably melt do to the extreme exhaust temperatures of very high horsepower and nitromethane fuel.



I would go back into your other post, but I would have tooooo much to correct. I seems you really have No clue, and If you would read, you would see that they Have already been used in TOP FUEL.

Also what centrifugal or roots blown cars do you know winning in PRO 5.0 or PRO STREET. As far as TOP FUEL, like we said the cars are already TOOO D...... fast as it is . And they have been doing things to slow them down, or keep them SANE for the last few years. So why would they want a turbo. From what i hear , when turbos were used in TOP FUEL, they were supreme.

Every time I come to catch up on this thread, I feel like I've just sat thru a physics lecture with two duelling professors :eek: ;)

I think for the street a supercharger is better since less boost is at lower rpms giving you less wheelspin than a turbo... The supercharger is more progressive and you can get more horsepower where you need it (the few 600rpms that you are always shifting in)

Back to the original topic...

I think there has to be some kind of forged pistons in order not to break...

But one thing i believe and it is that without detonation it would take awhile for the stock pistons to break... if a lot of race gas was used and that full 11psi where at work, well.. definetly it is worth it.. .and you had a very generoud dyno, because with all the mods I got, I only managed 392 with 4.5 psi...

The thing is that it is not impossible, but very unlickely.. I think the point here was the dyno.. It gave you some generous numbers, althought the mph do add up to those HP numbers...

But I would love to see more test of your setup so I can start saving money for it :)


Anyways, the dyno I went to is known here to give very low numbers, so maybe that is why I got them so low.

Wasn't this locked earlier :confused: :confused: :confused:

Russ, Tom, please lock it again :)


I think it's possible, but the thing has to be tuned - GNAT'S ASS perfect. 128 mph is impressive to say the least.

I was just pissed off that he came on here posting about how fast it was, but didn't want to share info. I posted literally hundreds of pictures of my twin kit last year when I was putting it together. I guess we have different goals= I was here to help, he's here to sell. :) LOL

best o'luck!
...Brady

Brady. I agree.

When I post the results of my setup, I tell everything about the combination, and try to help everyone out the best I can when they have questions about their buildups.

I'm switching to turbos myself, and I'm sure I'll need some help from other people who have allready done so.


I really think that when Turbospeed posted his dyno and track times, he knew that this thread was going to be flame bait, because he never had any intentions of going into detail about his setup, or helping anyone else out with theirs.

Most people on this messageboard are here to help each other and to learn from it.

Most vendors would not give results on a kit they weren't ready to produce, or at least give some information on.

JMHO

Totally true!!!

Originally posted by INTMD8
Brady. I agree.

When I post the results of my setup, I tell everything about the combination, and try to help everyone out the best I can when they have questions about their buildups.

I'm switching to turbos myself, and I'm sure I'll need some help from other people who have allready done so.


I really think that when Turbospeed posted his dyno and track times, he knew that this thread was going to be flame bait, because he never had any intentions of going into detail about his setup, or helping anyone else out with theirs.

Most people on this messageboard are here to help each other and to learn from it.

Most vendors would not give results on a kit they weren't ready to produce, or at least give some information on.

JMHO

I guess I didn't expect this thread to be flame bait because I few of the boards I spend time on have so many flamers. I posted the results of my testing, did not promise any more, any less. I've responded to several individuals who have emailed me asking for help or advice on their own turbo kits.

You flamer types love playing the "this board is a here to help board" card alot. Holding you to your own reasoning, what/who are you helping by flaming me all the time. Changing Doc Holiday's quote slightly... "Your hypocracy knows no bounds".

So far this thread has went from "here is the latest results from my car", to "I want to know every detail of your kit including pictures, specifications, date of birth, mother's madien name, shoe size, and pets name", to "I bet it doesn't even exist", to "That's impossible on an internally stock LT1, and you can't prove it - UNLESS you post pics of the car sitting stationary on a lift somewhere", and now has come full circle again.

Brady, based on your comments, I'm guessing you have never been self employed. However, I am glad what ever company you work for can survive while giving it's competition the bread and butter of it's product/market. I would think they don't because if they did, it might be hard for them to pay you the salary that financed that turbo car you built.

INTMD8, Since you seem to follow the lead of every new person that flames me in this thread, here again is a perfectly reasonable response. Most companies do infact drop hints here and there about upcoming products. The maker of your favorite car does it. Hell, Mazda is running an ad campain for their new 6 whatever that gives/shows almost no details other than to let you know what is on the horizon. What do you think all the concept car shows are about?? Ferrari was dropping cues, hints, and tidbits into the world about it's new F60 for over a year now.

I can't understand why it is so hard for some of you to grasp this concept other than you hope to flame me into telling you how to build my kit. Welp, sorry, it's not going to happen. I'll post details when I am good, well, and ready and not before. As I have said before, I'm happy to help people work through the problems on their own designs but I'm not going to give you a play by play build sheet on mine.

Mazda is a company that produces cars and has done so for many years.

If an individual came on this board and said.

"Hi, I've never made a car before, but I just made one and it has superior performance compared to anything like it"

But then went on to say that he didn't know when or if he was going to produce it, couldn't go into detail about it, and couldn't show any pictures of it.

What would you think?

This board IS here to help, and learn.

And no, I'm not helping anyone out in this thread, but I'm not the one that posted results to a "secret" setup.

If anyone ever has any questions, I'll gladly help them the best I can.

What does Mazda's being a large company in business for years of to do with anything? They are protecting their product, why can't I. I love how you guys call me a vendor when it's convienent and an individual when it's not! The flamers also tend to ignore the number of times I've offered AND given help to other people. Since when does it only qualify as help when you are detailing exactly what you have done to your car? I've held far truer to the said nature of this board than any of you thus far in that not only have I taken the time to answer questions and offer advice, I've taken the time to respond to all these pointless flames. The justification that it's not a waste of my time is based on what those who have supported me here have said both here and in email. Let me ask you something... What if you could buy a product that does what I say it can for around 3500 dollars, maybe less?

All good though, this has been a burning weekend. Not only have I gotten flamed for my cars results, I got flamed for eating the most habinaro flavored wings and wings soked in Dave's insanity sauce for 2 days. Though the flaming was a little different in nature!

All I was saying is that Mazda is an established company, and if they are showing pictures of their car driving down the road, it's within reason to think that the car is what it claims to be and will be able to be purchased shortly.

If you had a commercial of your LT1 turbo kit and you drove your 30th past the camera smoking the tires and the blowoff valve popping on the shifts, I would think the same of your setup ;)


"What if you could buy a product that does what I say it can for around 3500 dollars, maybe less?"

I think that would kick ass. Maybe if I had a shred of information about your kit I would hold off on buying Charged Air Systems setup.


Lets just say theoretically, you said-

It's a single turbo kit with a front mount intercooler,stepped log type stainless manifold, passenger side header, 2.5in crossover tube and 3 inch downpipe.

Or if you said-

It's a single turbo kit with tuned length 1- 3/4 drivers side header, 1-3/4 passenger side header with 2.75 crossover pipe, 4 inch downpipe and dual (ati style) intercoolers.


What I'm getting at is you can give a general description of the kit to generate some interest, with no chances of anyone else copying your idea.

Well the problem with my current setup is that it is going to undergo some drastic changes before it's marketed. However a general discription of what I plan to test with next is...

It will use a single T-Series turbocharger but has not been built from T04 parts which greatly increases the strength and longevity. I have not detirmed which turbocharger I will use in the final product yet. It will use tuned headers and y-pipe. No damn logs. Sizes and descriptions are currently unavailable as I have not started any calculations on it. It uses a large front mount air to air intercooler. It is and will be designed to leave the car looking completely stock to the casual observer. You can't even hear the turbo until you are into it.

I'm way ahead of you on the video. I've got a couple passes of me coming by the big end of the track. About 2/3 track you can hear the turbo coming at you like an F16.

That was what I was expecting as far as setup is concerned...

I agree with TS in one thing for certein... People in this board tend to flame a lot on new upcoming things...

Look at what happened with DTE and the billet optispark... fair??? dont think so...

If it's going to undergo some drastic changes before production, I don't see why keeping it a secret is such a big deal. Not that I really care enough to find out the details. . .

I can vouch for INTMD8. He'll tell anyone all the details about his 634 rwhp set-up.

Thanks, James.

Mike

Originally posted by engineermike
If it's going to undergo some drastic changes before production, I don't see why keeping it a secret is such a big deal. Not that I really care enough to find out the details. . .

I can vouch for INTMD8. He'll tell anyone all the details about his 634 rwhp set-up.

Thanks, James.

Mike

If you don't care enough to find out the details, why are you still on my nuts about it? I've given all the details about my system I am going to give. Get over it, get a life, have a beer, find a hobby that you CAN do since everything I've heard you say thus far is how you CAN'T do something. It's not a secret, I just haven't published what you want me to publish; an instruction manual. Even INTMD8 seems satisfied to wait until I get some more work done. My Lord son, why don't you attempt to engineer a fire extinguisher or is that going to start an arguement about Dry Chemical vs C02? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by turboSpeed
Well the problem with my current setup is that it is going to undergo some drastic changes before it's marketed. However a general discription of what I plan to test with next is...

It will use a single T-Series turbocharger but has not been built from T04 parts which greatly increases the strength and longevity. I have not detirmed which turbocharger I will use in the final product yet. It will use tuned headers and y-pipe. No damn logs. Sizes and descriptions are currently unavailable as I have not started any calculations on it. It uses a large front mount air to air intercooler. It is and will be designed to leave the car looking completely stock to the casual observer. You can't even hear the turbo until you are into it.

I'm way ahead of you on the video. I've got a couple passes of me coming by the big end of the track. About 2/3 track you can hear the turbo coming at you like an F16.


Sounds good ;) I'm interested to see how you will fit tuned headers in with a single turbo. Any idea when you might have the setup ready for sale?

Why are you doing drastic changes from your current prototype? Did you run into some problems, or did you just have some different ideas?

Originally posted by INTMD8
Sounds good ;) I'm interested to see how you will fit tuned headers in with a single turbo. Any idea when you might have the setup ready for sale?

Why are you doing drastic changes from your current prototype? Did you run into some problems, or did you just have some different ideas?

Better efficiency more than anything. I see a great deal to be gained by putting on a better exhaust system and adding a larger A/R turbine to maintain good spool and give better topend. Plus everything on the kit is press bent aluminized steel. In addition to better exhaust design, switching to mandrel bent stuff will net some results. The induction side will be remade as is with mandrel bent aluminum tubing. I am also going to redo the end tanks on the intercooler using 1/8in AL instead of the thin sheet stuff it's currently made from.

Basicly the kit was put together to trying to meet a spouse made deadline. I have a friend at an exhaust shop and we hung out up there for over 12 hours bending pipe on a Sunday trying to get her functioning. I'm still fighting demons in the PCV system and the induction plumbing. I still need to build a better air filter system and do a few other tweaks. I am hoping to have it ready to sell in a few months barring any craziness.

TurboSpeed, I support you and your decision. Curious though, I know you mentioned that you were using a T72 originally. Can you elaborate a bit more on the specs of it? Also, what about the nature of the car? At what rpms did you see full boost, etc. If you posted that before, I may have missed it. Do you datalog when making a pass, or just old school style, reading plugs and what not? Isn't the weight of a T72 a good bit, for the manifold to support it? I have heard of brackets for other cars, to keep stress off the manifold, did you incorporate anything similar, or is it not necessary? Do you plan for the kit to be a true bolt-on, or will it be necessary to remove a/c, or abs or what not? Thanks for any info you can share!

Oh c'mon we all know a halon fire extinguishing system is the way to go LOL!!!!!!!:D


Turbospeed - In any case good to hear your getting stuff done, hopefully I get to see it this summer or at least see it run???....any objections????? Keep up the good work, you know we all need some more available quality kits.

Originally posted by INTMD8


If you had a commercial of your LT1 turbo kit and you drove your 30th past the camera smoking the tires and the blowoff valve popping on the shifts, I would think the same of your setup ;)

well that is coming cause i did the filming and you guys will chit when you finally see it on video

Turbospeed, now THAT was an uncalled-for flame! I HAVE NEVER BEEN "ON YOUR NUTS" ABOUT REVEALING DETAILS ABOUT YOUR SET-UP. As I said, I really don't care and have never cared WHAT your set-up is. Your entire post insults me for something that I haven't done. You have mistaken me for someone else.

I was merely pointing out your flawed logic for choosing not to reveal the details because someone might steal them AND there will be drastic changes before production.

In light of this, your whole paragraph insulting me was a bit extreme I think!

Mike

Holy flame fest batman!
Whassup Bryan, Ken, Jason, Jeff, Ron, gears(never met you in person)... and anyone else that I might have missed.
Bryan you should have known that posting something as astronomical as your dyno on a stock lt1 would get you nothing but flames from every doubter in the world on this board. There's no lie about his #'s guys. I have seen it run, I've seen the set up, I have PICTURES of the set up. Will I post them? Not a chance. Speed doesn't want them posted, so until he does they're staying in my personal stash. How's that sound? Flame me if you like, but it will get you nowhere. There's enough people here locally that have seen how hard his car runs and would be more than willing to show their support in this thread. We've got track owners, auto shop managers, hardcore racers, ALL of them. Even a lowly PC tech like myself :)
It really doesn't amaze me how everyone can immediately throw BS flags on something like this. Hell, I can't imagine what SW went through when he went 9.80's in a Supra that had never had the head off the car? Is that so crazy? No, not really. Is it crazy that speed's car runs 10 second mph's on a stock headed/cammed/tuned/internals motor with boost? Sounds crazy, but it's not. We need to get videos from both end of the track so people can see how bad your car really does spin. He's got em roasting well passed the 1/8th mile mark. If I had to take a guess on what's going to break first, I'm going to call the rear end. Poor thing's getting hammered going that fast ;)
Bryan let me know if you need a hand with anything in the future. Be it turning a wrench or holding something together while you duct tape it(;)), I'm there. Even though my car is a filthy pig after being out at your house this weekend.

Signing off!

Originally posted by engineermike
Turbospeed, now THAT was an uncalled-for flame! I HAVE NEVER BEEN "ON YOUR NUTS" ABOUT REVEALING DETAILS ABOUT YOUR SET-UP. As I said, I really don't care and have never cared WHAT your set-up is. Your entire post insults me for something that I haven't done. You have mistaken me for someone else.

I was merely pointing out your flawed logic for choosing not to reveal the details because someone might steal them AND there will be drastic changes before production.

In light of this, your whole paragraph insulting me was a bit extreme I think!

Mike

Oh please, you guys ahve done nothing but bust his balls about posting pictures and details about his setup. Maybe not you 100% specifically, but you're definitely part of the group that immediately called BS and are basically calling him a liar about his set up. Guilty by association my friend. I think it was perfectly cool of him to finally let someone have it. You all have grilled him since page 1.

I NEVER asked for specifications, pictures, details, etc.

I NEVER called him a liar (see my previous posts).

Guilt by association? I'm glad you're a PC Tech and not a Judge!

Mike

Not called him a liar, just doubted him in every way you possibly could. Real different. Besides, who are you to judge who I should be? I wish I were a judge, I think I'd try to pass laws to put dip****s in jail :cry:

Originally posted by engineermike
Turbospeed, now THAT was an uncalled-for flame! I HAVE NEVER BEEN "ON YOUR NUTS" ABOUT REVEALING DETAILS ABOUT YOUR SET-UP. As I said, I really don't care and have never cared WHAT your set-up is. Your entire post insults me for something that I haven't done. You have mistaken me for someone else.

I was merely pointing out your flawed logic for choosing not to reveal the details because someone might steal them AND there will be drastic changes before production.

In light of this, your whole paragraph insulting me was a bit extreme I think!

Mike

Here is a simple solution... Walk away. You have said you don't believe a number of things about my system. If you don't believe I am telling the truth, that generally means you believe I am lying. Webster says a liar is a person who lies. Therefore, for you say I am not telling the truth means you are calling me a liar reguardless of how you worded it. Want proof? Read the last SEVERAL pages.

It doesn't matter that you think my logic is flawed. I don't, I am the one deciding on that course of action and it's not open to debate. I've given you the benefit of explaining my position. Your unprovoked badgering insults me. If you don't like what I have to say.. Fine. That's your right. If you want to flame me for it.. I guess that's every American's God given right. You want to get irritated for a dose of your own medician? Don't talk the talk unless you can walk the walk.

If I've mistaken you for someone else, perhaps you shouldn't let people post under your name. I'm on here to learn, to help, and to post the results of my system. I've learned, I've helped, and I've posted. When I do get to selling it as a product, then I will support the board as a advertiser. Contrary to the previous several pages, you've recently said you don't care about the system. I challange you to prove it by not putting up one more derogatory post in any of these threads. You've been offered multiple forms of proof, as well as valid explinations of my rational. If you don't accept it for what it is, then go somewhere else. I for one am tired of seeing now 8 pages of nothingness when I'm looking to do nothing more than post the results of my car...

Brain - It's a t72 but uses a larger shaft, bearing and center section, and heavier thicker turbine. The idea behind it is to not use weaker T04 parts which are prone to breakage under extreme conditions. It's similar to the Turbonetic's Tuff Turbo option but it doesn't use a stagared piston ring but does have a tougher turbine. The kit will require neither relocating your ABS nor your AC. It is going to be designed for very easy installation. The only modificaiton required will be to the traction control system to clear plumbing and to the front facia and bumper support to clearnence the intercooler. I did all the modifications in my own garage using common hand and power tools. Don't worry, the mods to the facia are easy and clean.

Nov194 - No objections at all. I'll even give you a ride in it if you want!

Travis - We need to turbocharge that Grand Am!!! Then you can play with Tiago. :D

Turbospeed, if the cashier at McDonald's short-changes you, do you call her a thief? No. What I said was:

Originally posted by engineermike
I never said that anyone was a liar. Only that there may be some things at work here that people don't realize. For instance, my friend traded in a "stock" '99 Trans Am to a dealer. Even though the car looked and sounded completely stock, it had an MTI 221/221 cam in it. Someone will buy this car and, mod for mod, it will always make 30 more hp than everyone elses. I'm sure he's swearing to everyone that "it only has bolt on's".

Also, Turbospeed mentioned that he had race gas in it. I know that certain race fuels have very high energy (Btu/lbm) as compared to regular C12 or C16. These fuels can be worth as much as 10% more power than ordinary race fuel. That would bring down the 460 rwhp to a more believable 420.

There are a hundred such possibilities that could be at work. That doesn't make anyone a liar, but it makes things more believable.

Mike


Originally posted by Turbospeed
Your unprovoked badgering insults me.

I beg to differ, my badgering WAS provoked.

Also, I challenge you to find in any of my posts where I asked you anything about your set-up.

Mike

Rest the discussion... He answered what we needed to know...

You could post a video of the 1/4 run though? that wouldn't reveal anything..

Anyways...

My question... What is the price range on all this? I checked with a guy that had a TT installed... a lot of installation things and a lot of money went by...

Thanks

Originally posted by engineermike
Turbospeed, if the cashier at McDonald's short-changes you, do you call her a thief? No. What I said was:

Shouldn't I be asking you tihs question? In anycase, no, normally when a cashier at McDonald's short changes you, he/she apologizes and corrects the mistake. Are you apologizing and correcting your mistakes?






I beg to differ, my badgering WAS provoked.

Did I PM you some time and ask you to come into this thread and flame a bit. If so, show me... Here is your first post in this thread...


I agree with INTMD8 in that the stock engine will NEVER max-out the MAF, so if the computer senses the max signal, there must be a sensor error so it'll cut fuel. This is not limited to LT-1 cars either. Grand Prix GTP's have the same issue. This may come as a shock, but GM didn't intend for people to modify their products.

Furthermore, atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. At atmospheric pressure, a bolt-on LT-1 will make 300 chp and about 250 rwph. If you were to double atmospheric pressure to 29.4 psi (equivalent of 14.7 psi of ambient temp. boost), the hp would double to 500 rwhp (which is roughly what is being claimed).

Therefore, to obtain 500 rwhp on a stock LT-1, you would need to run about 15# of boost with either a 100% efficient compressor or a 100% efficient intercooler.

But 500 rwhp with a ~75% efficient compressor and a <90% efficient intercooler with only 11# boost? By this same logic, 11# of boost on a stock LT-1 has a limit of 433 rwhp.

It doesn't add up.


You were just joining the band wagon of flames going on at that time. Previous to this post, I didn't know you exsisted. Everyone else has given up or decided to give me chance and take me at face value.


Also, I challenge you to find in any of my posts where I asked you anything about your set-up.

Mike

You were flaming everything I said. It went from flaming my numbers, to flaming the engine, to flaming my desision not to post too much on it. I think you've pretty much burned everything up. At what are you going to just let us carry on a casual conversation?

Originally posted by The Highlander
Rest the discussion... He answered what we needed to know...

You could post a video of the 1/4 run though? that wouldn't reveal anything..

Anyways...

My question... What is the price range on all this? I checked with a guy that had a TT installed... a lot of installation things and a lot of money went by...

Thanks

It wasn't so much money as it was a great deal of time I've put into the system. As it sets, I really haven't changed much. If I can negotiate good prices with my vendors and keep production costs low, I am hoping for to tell the kit in the 3500 dollar price range for the base kit with numerous upgrades available.

As soon as I can get the camcorder over to a friend house, I will put the videos online.

My point was: to doubt someone is NOT to call them a liar. If someone short-changes you, you don't have to call him a thief.

And apparently, everything that I have posted has been some sort of a flame!!!?!? Most of it was good technical discussion. I never resorted to name-calling or telling anyone to find a new hobby. If I'm guilting of flaming someone, then you and your buddies are at least as guilty. At first, I was happy to see someone applying engineering principles to modifying cars. I didn't realize my technical challenges would be viewed upon as flames.

HeII, I even AGREED with you on some points! I guess AGREEING was some sort of reverse-flaming psychology, huh?

Mike

Awesome.. 3500 is nice. Question is.. what would be the upgrades?

This will include intercooler right?

My buddies weren't coexed here to defend me. Most of them just happen to be members of this board. I met the vast majority of my friends through an F-Body club when I first moved to Tulsa from St Louis. I'm all about good natured technical discussion. But I've been slammed from one side of this board to the other. All you did was join the flaming. So I treated you as such.

If you are interested in good natured, technical discussion and can accept the fact that I feel I have a great deal to risk by publishing too much too soon, then we are fine. Good natured discussion means giving me the benefit of the doubt enough to admit it's possible and explore the possibilities. It doesn't mean revisiting old thermodynamics lecture notes trying to find some way to make the equations add up to failure rather than success. It means allowing me the time to get my sh!t together on the system and make it into a installable kit.

If this is to much too ask, then grant me one simple request. Let others do the above in peace.

Originally posted by The Highlander
Awesome.. 3500 is nice. Question is.. what would be the upgrades?

This will include intercooler right?

This will include an intecooler yes. To not use an intercooler is to not use a condom and that could lead to a nasty knock... :D

I gotta figure out what the peices of the final kit will be before I can figure out what upgrades will be available. The upgrade structure will most likely not follow the typical stage I, stage II thing. More along the lines of adding nice to have items that allow you to make more power for a given application.

When did you move from St. Louis?

$3500 is almost unbelievable. If you can get it done for that price, you're either getting stuff for a damn good price, or you're not making any cash.

Got a few questions that I will e-mail you about. I can understand why you don't want to post specifics.

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread. It's been about 6 pages of "nu-uh and uh-huh" posts. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by mongse_1

$3500 is almost unbelievable. If you can get it done for that price, you're either getting stuff for a damn good price, or you're not making any cash.



shutup!.....let him keep it cheap!

Originally posted by got_hp?
shutup!.....let him keep it cheap!

:D


Mongoose - I sent a response to your email. I'll respond here on the board later. It's been a tough morning and I'm going to Hooters for lunch...

This kit sounds really cool. I hope it can be made to fit in the engine compartment of my 3rd gen lt1. If so I will be interested in the future. It does sound unbelievable, but then so did 9 second street cars a few years ago. Nice job, keep us posted.
Kory

I dont know why but I just read through every page. I am now two years older and read a lot of information I do not understand.

With that being said. I think it is fine he wants to protect his investment. He has obviously put a lot of time into it. When it is done and marketed, it is done and marketed. Right now is just a period of gaining interest. Typical business practice.

Some things dont match up? O well. To the simple minded guy who switched out of engineering ;), all that crap doesnt matter. Show me the performance aspects and the mods it took to achieve them.

Do you really think someone is going to be able to sell a turbo kit that is suppose to give these kind of results and winds up only yielding 400 rwhp and 120 mph traps? Probably still a yes but at that point there will be a lot more people questioning what kind of business owner makes such outrageous claims and fails to deliver. That equates to a loss in business. Would someone purposely sabotage something they plan on selling? I doubt it. The #s may be puffed a little but they will have to be semi-accurate if he wants to be able to keep selling kits.

When all is said and done, I believe a DETAILED (down to the last small tweak) list be made with the results it produced. Then sell the kit and everyone is happy. They know exactly what they can expect. Like I said before, I could care less about the math and engineering aspects really. My question is does it work and do what it is suppose to?

If and when this kit is proven to deliver these #s once offered, then you can count me in. Especially for $3,500. :) Turbo :drool:

damn I can't believe I missed this party ;)

I just wanna vouch for Bryan (turbospeed) as well, Ive known him for a while and have seen the car run , its for real.

:D

Originally posted by Tiago
damn I can't believe I missed this party ;)

I just wanna vouch for Bryan (turbospeed) as well, Ive known him for a while and have seen the car run , its for real.

:D

Jsut what Tiago did with his car and boost, that I have followed along from the begining, I believe turbospeed 100%, because Tiago is doing some very similar gains.... Just on a much different motor.

Originally posted by MustangEater82
Jsut what Tiago did with his car and boost, that I have followed along from the begining, I believe turbospeed 100%, because Tiago is doing some very similar gains.... Just on a much different motor.

My lord, this thing made 10 pages!

Tiago's setup has a ton of potential, just ask him where he got his turbocharger ;)

Seriously, with some tuning, and a boost increase, I bet he would hurt some feelings. I think Tiago has and will continue to set standards in the sixxx community. Guess it helps to be an ME student eh Tiago! BTW, when I got home from Road House, those beers started kicken in with a few others once I got home! Heh, I couldn't even remember the code to my garage door when I tried to use it just before I went to bed! :D

Oh yeah, I made a new best time. With a badly slipping clutch but on better tires (275/50/15 nittos) I ran a best of 11.84 @126. Ironicly this was the softest launch of the day. Every run I made, when I got back to the pits, the clutch was stinking. I hurt transmission but that was unrelated to the turbo. It keeps popping out of 1st and 2nd really bad. Think I bent the fork or slider which is preventing it from fully engaging the gear. Rebuild and reclutch time. I might also pop for a diff cover from the ol 10 bolt. :D

what 60ft time?

Originally posted by got_hp?
what 60ft time?

Not sure, they weren't giving slips out sunday. If I had to guess I would say something in the 2.3 range maybe slower. Atleast this time I could make it to the end of the track before bouncing the rev limiter. At our track here in Tulsa, the score boards are 20 or so feet beyond the finish line and I never could make it that far out without bouncing the rev limiter but atleast I made it to the finish line this time.

I think it pulled a best in this condition because I didn't do a burnout, just drove to the line. I launched easy so the clutch held better than it previously had.

One thing to bear in mind is that I've got a stock 10 bolt without even so much as a diff cover. I'm trying to keep that alive until I put something else in. Before, running 245/50/16 nittos, I would just spin down the track so it didn't seem to push the clutch that hard. The 275/50/15s with their 60mm extra total width and larger sidewall is hooking the car significantly better with especially with a good amount of heat.

Great times. Can't wait to see the final product.:bow:

Originally posted by PNYKILR
Great times. Can't wait to see the final product.:bow:

No way man, I think I owe you the :bow: ! Love those pics on your site! I wish I could build a 396 but I can't get the compression low enough and still keep the pistons. :D

i only read the first couple of pages.. but it was enough to know there will be a lot of people chewing on thier feet when the time comes.. i would also like to extend the offer to anyone who wants to challenge bryans claims to come on down.. i will match bryns $10k if the set up isnt everything he says it is..

oh.. im not a new member either.. i havent been to this board in a long time and couldnt remember my old password.. dont have that z anymore anyway...

Originally posted by RoadRageGN
i only read the first couple of pages.. but it was enough to know there will be a lot of people chewing on thier feet when the time comes.. i would also like to extend the offer to anyone who wants to challenge bryans claims to come on down.. i will match bryns $10k if the set up isnt everything he says it is..

Hey Matt, you gonna just skip the 11s and go straight to the 10s eh? :D If anyone wants to do this, they better hurry up because I am going to swap out the tranny to an A3 for a bit until some of these manufactures make some good hard parts for the T56.

Originally posted by turboSpeed
No way man, I think I owe you the :bow: ! Love those pics on your site! I wish I could build a 396 but I can't get the compression low enough and still keep the pistons. :D

Thanks. I'm not one to come on here and dought someone. You had goals and met them, plain and simple. If I had the extra cash when building this new motor, I would have done a custome turbo. That will be for next year, since now I have good parts, as long as the bank account agrees.:metal: ;) . I wish you the best of luck, as you have already acompished more than most thought you would have.

im hoping for 11's by the end of summer.. not really shooting for 10's anytime soon.. i would like to know about turbo pricing tho...

Good, now that you had your beer and racing this weekend BRING ME MY PARTS!!!

Originally posted by Ronster97
Good, now that you had your beer and racing this weekend BRING ME MY PARTS!!!

Hooters for lunch tomorrow?

ttt:D

Originally posted by RawAzzLT1
ttt:D

I saw his car this weekend its badass :eek: :bow:

So, where's the setup? :)

bring back the thread from the dead.... ha ha ha
looking for low z injector boxes and found this thread

Turbospeed... yep I remember reading all those threads long ago :D :cool:

Turbospeed hasn't posted in 2 yrs 5 months.

I've got an impedance converter if you need one, it's new.

bring back the thread from the dead.... ha ha ha
looking for low z injector boxes and found this thread

im actually gonna run the fast xfi and from what ive read i dont need one?
correct me if im wrong please

Sorry for bring this back from the dead talked to a couple of people latley about the car and found this vid on my computer.
Here is a vid of the car in question at a dyno day trying to kill the motor.
http://videos.camaroz28.com/video/34ef9b77-e958-4fac-9dd3-9a2a000e0a8c.htm

Sorry for bring this back from the dead talked to a couple of people latley about the car and found this vid on my computer.
Here is a vid of the car in question at a dyno day trying to kill the motor.
http://videos.camaroz28.com/video/34ef9b77-e958-4fac-9dd3-9a2a000e0a8c.htm

Nice:bow:

more then 500 rwho on a stock lt1 woot woot i wonder where this dude is now/./?

Wow, I haven't thought about this thread in years. For some reason, I got an email saying a new post had arrived. Talk about nostalgia!

Sorry guys, no pictures! The secracy was because I had a job I hated at the time and wanted to go into building things like this full time so I was pretty protective since I had a lot riding on it. Oh well, never went through and I'm enjoying a much better gig now.

Ironically, this kit is still running in its original form on a friends car. I had finally hurt the engine a little so I said hell with it and killed it on the dyno. That video was the result. Poor thing had so much blow by, we put a shop vac on the oil fill to try to keep some kind of clean air in the block! Good times. I got far enough into it to buy the forged rotating assembly but ended up selling it to the same guy that bought my old kit. I ended up selling the car as a roller and going to an ls1.

The results of that dyno were a sheared ring land on the #4 iirc and the rings everywhere else were toast. The markings on the ground, I have no idea what caused them. Nothing was over there. The turbo and all the exhaust components were on other side and there were no holes in anything when I pulled the engine apart. Who knows!

Kit details a long time in coming:)

I was using BBK shortie headers and built a 2.5in crossover that bring the passenger side exhaust over to the drivers side and it Y'ed into a collector just under the K-member and went up into the turbocharger. The turbo sat where the AIR pump used to be (iirc on an lt1, lower drivers side). The exhaust snaked its way back past the steering and dropped down there where I had a cut out. From there, it made a couple bends and joined the regular exhaust. Turbo if I remember right was a 72mm compressor with a .55 A/R Ts04 housing, I don't remember the center (it was large than a T4), I don't recall the turbine specs but the housing was a .69 A/R on-center type.

Intake ran off the turbo over to the passenger side inlet to the intercooler which was flat mounted parallel to the ground with a single 12in fan. It came back up and over to the elbow as you see in the video. I never did get into tuning the car. The fuel system was infact 30lb SVO injectors (32ish on GM pressure?) and I was running a stock fuel pump. The fuel came from a tandem inline pump and fuel pressure was ramped to the moon via the 8:1 vortech FMU. there was enough fuel pressure there to split the stock plastic fuel line at one point. It never did run lean!

Trying to remember the details but I did drive it from Tulsa to St Louis to go to World Ford Challenge one year where it dynoed 480 something horsepower and drove it home. Ended up being a 800 and something mile trip. When I finally did put a decent rearend and clutch in the car, after this thread, I shattered an ls1 drive shaft (the nick of paint missing off the front of the car in the video was the result of pushing it on a trailer that night). Never ran it enough to pull down a good time. Best ET was 11.8 and best MPH was 128.

so stock block,heads and cam with no pcm tuning for the 30#'s and you made 480-520 rwhp thats some crazy ish.....was dude on the floor spraying down the IC with n20?

Yeah the guy on the floor had the best view! He had one of those cryo kits that sprayed CO2 on the intercooler's heat exhanger on his terminator so he donated the bottle and some bravery. We started running low on CO2 and they only thing we could get 1/2 way through the dyno run was nitrous so a mix of CO2 and nitrous. At the end of the video, we couldn't get it to start so we sprayed some nitrous off another bottle into the turbocharger to get it to start. Then drove it 25 miles home! LT1s get no love these days but they are damn tough engines.

The first run (492? hp) with no IC spraying was on 93 pump gas. You can see it's already smoking up quite a bit of blow by out of the oil breather. I honestly don't remember what the boost was but I think it was something like 10-11.

Oh yeah, on the PCM tuning, I found the injectors ran fine. I can't imagine what the BLMs must have looked like..

10-11 psi but with no tune for the turbo...?thats awesome bro mad props on the #'s which are pretty impressive almpst a gain of 200rwhp on a stock engine with a single turbo kit supa mad props...

oh yeah and holy wowsers batman on the amount of blowby she was blowing all in all how many dyno passes/times down the track did the stock engine last before it started acting up looks like it held up quite a bit.


oh yeah and i love my LT1'S....

If i remember correctly it was later summer early fall of 02 when I originally installed the turbo kit. It died on the date in the video. It had been on the dyno quite a few times and made a **** load of passes. I think the original damage that lead to the flogging you see in this video after I had a weld break on the intercooler and I removed it to get fixed and ran a straight pipe to replace it for the time being. I got on it once with the boost controller set incorrectly and it detonated pretty good and had some blow by after that day. That was a few months before the video.

So that said, it had a year and some change and quite a few pulls and passes on it. It was a hell of a fun car. I really do miss it from time to time.

haha hey whats up man this is zac from okc i had the chameleon camaro back then on the bottle.

how much you charge to put together another kit like that one on a 94 formula ??

Zac, I remember you. Honestly, while I can help you put a kit together, it's just something I do for fun in my spare time these days. If you get to a point where you are ready, shoot me a PM and I will get you pointed in the right direction.

Zac, I remember you. Honestly, while I can help you put a kit together, it's just something I do for fun in my spare time these days. If you get to a point where you are ready, shoot me a PM and I will get you pointed in the right direction.



what kinda price would i be lookin @???

Dollars. I wouldn't worry about the cost of the kit too much. You will need to be saving for forged parts soon after the install.

This is one of the very few cases I've seen where an LT1 hold up any length of time under boost. My car made significantly less hp/tq than this and from what I gather, I've been extremely fortunate myself that I have been running it for 3 years.

HOLY OLD THREAD!!! :eek:

I was just talking about this thread with a friend from Dallas over this weekend and here it is!! LOL

HOLY OLD THREAD!!! :eek:

I was just talking about this thread with a friend from Dallas over this weekend and here it is!! LOL

Silverram?

Silverram?

No, Tiago used to roll the green firebird v6 turbo

Wow, now this thread brings up some memories :cool: I still remember seeing this car at the track the day it ran a slew 121 to 128 (high point). The moment the car threw up a 128 mph 1/4 I looked at Kurt L. (for people that know him) and said " Oh S***, there is gonna be some haters coming out of the woodwork now! " Even witnessing this car in action, I was hard pressed to believe a stock internal'd LT1 could be this nasty, but I had seen it with my own eyes :p


Good memories for sure :cool:

Don't really see Speed around here anymore.

Nobody wanted to believe what his bone stock ls1 did either. (OK it eventually needed valvesprings, but still)