PDA

View Full Version : Turbo Talk



XxSlowpokexX
04-23-2006, 01:02 PM
I figured we could start a turbo thread here where we can all just spill out our thoughts without hijacking threads. Lets see how this works:O)

xThunderbirdSCx
04-23-2006, 03:36 PM
if this kid doing his turbo setup pulls through and makes some good numbers, i know where ill be headed (to a turbo)

CMac89
04-23-2006, 03:54 PM
If you want to go drag racing then stick with the positive displacement blower. If you want to go road racing then go turbo or centrifugal.

Parker Dean
04-23-2006, 04:42 PM
If you want to go drag racing then stick with the positive displacement blower. If you want to go road racing then go turbo or centrifugal.

Tell that to the Grand National crowd.

CMac89
04-23-2006, 05:00 PM
Tell that to the Grand National crowd.
Doesn't mean you can't make turbo cars fast, but how do you know that a positive displacement blower of the same CFM capabilities won't be better.

I know what's better because I see these cars in comparison EVERY weekend.

XR7 Dave
04-23-2006, 05:50 PM
if this kid doing his turbo setup pulls through and makes some good numbers, i know where ill be headed (to a turbo)


You guys crack me up. To begin a successful turbo application you must first master some basic engine building theory and tuning procedures not to mention some fairly in depth installation and fabrication abilities. No offence to anyone here but most of you really have no idea what you are talking about.

You want to run a turbo? Then get yourself some engine tuning software/hardware and a WB02 meter and start tuning. When you have a good handle on how to manipulate your EEC with the M90 on it then you are ready to start talking about upgrading to a turbo. Ask anyone who has run a turbo on their SC how they did with tuning it. Oh ya, no one has done it yet.

Sure you can take the car and get it tuned somewhere but unless you want to pay $450 every so often to compensate for a little change here or there, having someone tune the car for you is NOT a practical solution. Look at any of the successful turbo cars and find out how they handle tuning.

1) They pay someone a lot of money to get it right.

2) They learn how to do it themselves.

The problem with a turbo application is that your results, the turbo, the motor, and the tune are all interconnected and you can't seperate them. There is a whole learning curve that will need to come with the application of turbo's to the SC which has yet to be explored.

And don't tell me that is what I'm here for. :p I dont' mind helping anyone who wants help but I'm not about to take responsibility for the success or failure of anyone's turbo project. I'm not trying to get off track here but I have noticed a real trend with SC owners that they want to bolt things on and go fast but extremely few have taken on the responsibility to learn how to tune their own cars. This is something that I feel really needs to happen if anyone is serious about performance.

I learned this the hard with with the AR kits. These were basically bolt on kits with all the same basic characteristics of the M90. They are really easy to tune. However, because the blower by virtue of it's boost capability requires bigger injectors and less ignition timing than a typical M90, I included a chip with each kit to accomplish these necessary changes. I thought I was providing a service. Boy was I wrong. As soon as I provided a chip with those changes, suddenly I was responsible for any and all reasons why the car didn't run. When the end user doesn't understand or have the ability to manipulate the program then there is a never-ending cycle of "it won't run" and "something's wrong". Been there done that and not going that direction any more! The only AR's that performed to expectations are ones that I tuned hands on. Think about that for a moment. I think you'll find the same thing with a turbo only possibly to a higher degree. If you can't tune it then don't even think about it (well, unless you plan to send the car to someone and have it delivered back to you turn-key). Notice the $7K price tag on Ralph's Vortec kit before you think you want to go that route.

Ask Chris Lazzo or David Neibert how much fun their turbo kits have been so far. They paid similar price tags for their kits. I'm not negative about turbo's, but I think I'm being realistic when I say that only someone who has the fabrication capabilities and tuning knowledge/hardware to put the whole thing together should even consider it.

A kit is hardly a decent option either. If someone goes through the effort to put together a kit that you install at home, who is going to get it running for you? 8 out of 10 says it won't run right out of the box. So how is company "A" going to market a kit when they can't guarantee that it is going to even run? I would have thought that it wouldn't be that hard, but so far my simple bolt on AR kit is running a pretty low % rate of delivered to running well ratio. Think about that. I can see it now. $5k turbo kit with a 10% running ratio. Boy that would be some bad press to overcome!

xThunderbirdSCx
04-23-2006, 10:01 PM
You guys crack me up. To begin a successful turbo application you must first master some basic engine building theory and tuning procedures not to mention some fairly in depth installation and fabrication abilities. No offence to anyone here but most of you really have no idea what you are talking about.

You want to run a turbo? Then get yourself some engine tuning software/hardware and a WB02 meter and start tuning. When you have a good handle on how to manipulate your EEC with the M90 on it then you are ready to start talking about upgrading to a turbo. Ask anyone who has run a turbo on their SC how they did with tuning it. Oh ya, no one has done it yet.

Sure you can take the car and get it tuned somewhere but unless you want to pay $450 every so often to compensate for a little change here or there, having someone tune the car for you is NOT a practical solution. Look at any of the successful turbo cars and find out how they handle tuning.

1) They pay someone a lot of money to get it right.

2) They learn how to do it themselves.

The problem with a turbo application is that your results, the turbo, the motor, and the tune are all interconnected and you can't seperate them. There is a whole learning curve that will need to come with the application of turbo's to the SC which has yet to be explored.

And don't tell me that is what I'm here for. :p I dont' mind helping anyone who wants help but I'm not about to take responsibility for the success or failure of anyone's turbo project. I'm not trying to get off track here but I have noticed a real trend with SC owners that they want to bolt things on and go fast but extremely few have taken on the responsibility to learn how to tune their own cars. This is something that I feel really needs to happen if anyone is serious about performance.

I learned this the hard with with the AR kits. These were basically bolt on kits with all the same basic characteristics of the M90. They are really easy to tune. However, because the blower by virtue of it's boost capability requires bigger injectors and less ignition timing than a typical M90, I included a chip with each kit to accomplish these necessary changes. I thought I was providing a service. Boy was I wrong. As soon as I provided a chip with those changes, suddenly I was responsible for any and all reasons why the car didn't run. When the end user doesn't understand or have the ability to manipulate the program then there is a never-ending cycle of "it won't run" and "something's wrong". Been there done that and not going that direction any more! The only AR's that performed to expectations are ones that I tuned hands on. Think about that for a moment. I think you'll find the same thing with a turbo only possibly to a higher degree. If you can't tune it then don't even think about it (well, unless you plan to send the car to someone and have it delivered back to you turn-key). Notice the $7K price tag on Ralph's Vortec kit before you think you want to go that route.

Ask Chris Lazzo or David Neibert how much fun their turbo kits have been so far. They paid similar price tags for their kits. I'm not negative about turbo's, but I think I'm being realistic when I say that only someone who has the fabrication capabilities and tuning knowledge/hardware to put the whole thing together should even consider it.

A kit is hardly a decent option either. If someone goes through the effort to put together a kit that you install at home, who is going to get it running for you? 8 out of 10 says it won't run right out of the box. So how is company "A" going to market a kit when they can't guarantee that it is going to even run? I would have thought that it wouldn't be that hard, but so far my simple bolt on AR kit is running a pretty low % rate of delivered to running well ratio. Think about that. I can see it now. $5k turbo kit with a 10% running ratio. Boy that would be some bad press to overcome!


i just got http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y5/NineTails_87/pwned.jpg

David Neibert
04-23-2006, 10:20 PM
Ask Chris Lazzo or David Neibert how much fun their turbo kits have been so far.

It hasn't been much fun up to this point, but I knew this was going to be a difficult project and I remain hopeful that it will be very fun in the not too distant future.

Had I gone with a milder combo (450-500 rwhp max) or just built a race car, it would have been a lot easier. But that wouldn't really be anything special, so I'll just keep going after my original goal.

David

XR7 Dave
04-23-2006, 11:28 PM
I didn't post that to be negative about anyone's turbo plans or projects. I just want people to understand that a turbo is not the beginner's route to HP nirvana.

The turbo project that is ongoing now has some of those bases covered. The person doing the install has good knowledge of the car, has good fabrication abilities, a way of tuning the EEC, he has done his homework, and has another car to drive. ;)

What I think we should be talking about in this thread is what turbo would be a good one to start out with, one that uses a flange and physical orientation that can be used in upgraded form. In other words, what would be a good turbo to start out with that might work well with a more or less stock motor but be able to be "bolt-in" replaced with something capable of 600rhwp. What would be the best turbo to use that offers that kind of range of output and would match the airflow that the 3.8 is going to generate?

I for one wouldn't want to build a whole piping system and then find out that it won't work with the turbo I need to upgrade to and have to remake half my stuff. Or am I overcomplicating things?

seawalkersee
04-24-2006, 12:24 AM
Okay...lets see here...
Step 1) Get a turbo
Step 2) Get piping
Step 3) Oil line and return w/pump
Step 4) Get wide band O2
Step 5) Get a good carb
Step 6) Tune carb:D

Chris

XR7 Dave
04-24-2006, 12:32 AM
You are funny Chris. We are talking V6 here.

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 08:46 AM
I seriously have no idea why Chris or Dave are having problems with thier turbo projects. I have an old school bank frire DFI setup and my setup ran without a hiccup. 306 with a t76..No MAF of course. I will be upgrading soon to a newer FAST system however.

As far as running posative displacement vrs turbo..I was sold on turbos when I saw REAL small block ford engines running 2,000 rwhp. You guys should really check out the NMRA.

David Neibert
04-24-2006, 08:58 AM
Damon,

I think the MAF is causing most of my tuning problems. Data logging shows real spikey readings at part throttle indicating turbulance. Not sure why because it's located on a section of intake pipe with several feet of straight pipe before the MAF. Might be because of the large size, I had to go with an 85mm C&L tuner MAF to keep from pegging it at max air flow.

David

seawalkersee
04-24-2006, 09:42 AM
I have actually heard of that on blow through designs. It was about 9 years ago and I could only imagine what they were talking about then. Damon does have a point though. The Speed Density systems will be a tad quicker on the crispness of the throttle with a calibrated inlet setup. The MAF will never give a bad reading nor will it cause a restriction.

David. This may sound stupid to you, but If you think you are getting turbulance in the MAF, Try sticking a tornado (I know but hear me out) in line. The tornado is just an example of course. I would try some kind of diffuser if I could not get a consistant reading though. I know you have a lot of room before the maf, but if it has a sharp turn right after it, and the tubing is sooo big, it could be causing the air to bypass the wires at lower speeds and when you get to part throttle, it could be just getting half of a reading. Have you tried turning it in the pipe to move the sensor?

Chris

XR7 Dave
04-24-2006, 09:55 AM
I'm not participating in this to go on and on about turbo vs. supercharger. There are many rules in the NMRA that favor turbo's but that really isn't what this is about. If people want to adapt a turbo to fit onto an SC it needs to be something that is workable with the existing SC EMS and physical layout of the car. I'm interested in things like what aplvalydrtybird is doing. He is working on a semi bolt in replacement for the supercharger and looking for some results with a turbo sized for similar boost levels as your typical street SC.

I would like to see some people post what turbo's would work best and tell why they would chose a certain unit. I'd like to know what flanges to use and why etc. If people really want to build turbo applications for this car we should really get down to basics and put out some useful information.

We should be discussing what turbo to use and where to put it.

Randy N Connie
04-24-2006, 10:45 AM
Dave is right about the tuning end.If you can,t tune or can't find
some one to tune.There is no sence in building a turbo system.

I have two turbos that I was going to fab the pluming and install
on a 3.8 motor. But have no idea on how to tune nor any one
that can tune a turbo system..So they have been setting
around the shop for a few years .

Same for superchargers. I have a MP III, & A/R. But cannot
get a tune so they are all worthless.Not because they are
not set up right.All are good products when installed and
used for there spec intened purpose.But with no tuning skills,
they are worthless parts.

I think I have the knowlege and skills to build a 600 hp plus
3.8 motor build up. But why do it with no tuning skills.
I have started selling my parts. Because of giving up on
getting a tune for a supercharger syle that came with
my SC Bird. After waiting Around going on four years for
a tune. And then buying the stuff to do my own tuning,
and not knowing how to use.Its just silly to even think
about finishing a turbo system.When I can't tune for the
superchargers I have.

Thanks Randy

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 10:50 AM
Before I go on....


So how is company "A" going to market a kit when they can't guarantee that it is going to even run? I would have thought that it wouldn't be that hard, but so far my simple bolt on AR kit is running a pretty low % rate of delivered to running well ratio.

You SON OF A @&*^@*&....I recall getting my hiney handed to me at the mere mention of asking if the AR kits tuning issues have been resolved. And here you go saying it! I dont want to hear crud from anyone next time I mention something. No I'm not mad but this is an example of stuff I mention and then get crud about me being full of crud and having no idea what I'm talking about. BTW I would expect a car to need tuning when bolting on a power adder with different dynamics then the on the car was originally meant for. It's expected and I would never blame Dave D for that.

About the NMRA.

Actually the NMRA uses many forms of restriction to assure its a fair game. However it will never be 100% fair. Keep in mind the NMRA was formed when Superchargers were the #1 power adder along with Nitrous. A buddy of mine back then built a twin turbo stang and was basically blacklisted from all events because of the twin turboes. Eventully turbo technology caught on. The rules are ever evolving. But if you can imagine a REAL 302 making that type of power its amazing. These are not Hemi based big cube monsters. It just blows me away.

Back to Turbo Discussion

I was thinking of going two turbo but after reviewing the engine bay and where I would need to put these things (and cost) I was thinking a single turbo setup. One based on my current v8 setup which is meant for the street and retains all accesories. Drivers side location near power steering pump.

Two idea come to mind.

#1 If I wanted a true bolt on kit for the SC. This would retain all SC brackets and accesories and use the factory SC lower. A modified return adapter would be made to mount the TB. Factory radiator would be used as well. A not so huge front mount IC would be included along with turbo header, crossover, downpipe, an alchy injection kit, a custom burnt chip, Maf and injectors. Of course the turbo, wastegate and BOV would be included. This would not in my mind be the ideal setup however it would require minimal custom fabrication if any on the part of the instaler. This kit would be a waste f someone was out to make huge power as they would be buying stuff that would eventually be updated or replaced. I would think 400rwhp would be obtainable

#2 Offer a race version. This would include the BOV, wastegate, turbo, header, crossover, downpipe, front mount IC, all plumbing and a custom upper.. What would be differnt here is that it would require the use of a N/A 3.8 lower use all N/A 3.8 accesories and a full lenght radiator. It would not come with a chip nor injectors as this is a race kit and that would be up to the builder to take care off.

#3 Offer just the hot side plumbing for the fabricator to do with as he wishes. Turbo header, crossover and downpipe. This way you can leave the rest of the kit to the installers imagination. Perhaps he wants to use factory SC accesories and intake but wants to go bigger on everything else. Who knows.

This is over simplifying the concepts but I could definately see a kit developed at a reasoble price.

If someone were to just build a quality turbo header/downpipe/crossover/ setup that would be a great start. The rest of the fabrication process is simple in comparison...Tuning will be a whole other subject.

Turboing an SC will take a little more effort then what the stang guys are doing because we have all this extra crud specifically for use of our SC. That is why Daves kit is so nice as it uses all these "extra" parts. To really make a clean turbo kit on an SC wed have to remove all that stuff and start from scratch. More effort. more time, more money. A turbo would not be an easy or cheap endevour, However if you can fabricate it yourself it will definately be a cost effective solution. I know of peopel making the same HP with a DIY turbo kit then one bought from a manufacturer. 1,500 total compared to 3,500-4000.

Anyway just throwing some ideas out there without getting technical..Maybe I can draw something up. I';ll see what I can do

CMac89
04-24-2006, 11:05 AM
Whenever it comes to an outrageous high performance motor that is put in drag racing you can't just look at what the motor makes at peak then "AWE" over it.

The Supercharged Pro Mod cars are making 2600HP with 550CI and the turbo Pro Mod cars are making 3100HP. At the exact same weight tell me why the Supercharged cars are running 6.00's and the fastest of the many turbo cars are running 6.20's still.

Hell, NHRA and IHRA Pro Stock run faster than them NMRA cars and they're naturally aspirated.

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 12:05 PM
The Supercharged Pro Mod cars are making 2600HP with 550CI and the turbo Pro Mod cars are making 3100HP. At the exact same weight tell me why the Supercharged cars are running 6.00's and the fastest of the many turbo cars are running 6.20's still.

Ummmm ...Take a good look at what these top NMRA guys are running time wise with a REAL and I repeat REAL small block ford engine. 6.6's at 209mph in the Pro 5.0 class...Fun Ford Weekend 6.4's @ 223mph. Never did I say that there arent faster cars out there. But you have Fords....With REAL FORD motors....And still there are MAJOR restrictions slowing them down. Every year a rule change allowing a larger turbo or supercharger means more records broken. Its great stuff. When you are rooting for a Ford..Its really a ford! Thats what makes it great.

And the technology turbo wise gained through this helps us all. And it can all fit under the hood to boot. Not to mention being able to change your boost with the push of a button or turn of a knob from inside the car...While driving no less. 87 octane today......No problem. The combination of programable fuel injection and turboes gives you endless opportunities at streetable, tunable, horsepower. Something a large roots blower will never do.

Keep in mind my first ever "build" was a small block ford with a lil roots blower on top with nitrous and a preditor carb. It was a nice setup. My last was a turbo v8 setup...Times changed so did I. I can live in the past...But why when turbocharging really is the future:O)

And this thread is to furthe rinvestigate that option and to throw out ideas. Not argue about generic ProMod motors vrs Factory based Fords..Commone now!

XR7 Dave
04-24-2006, 01:01 PM
Damon, let me point out that the supposed "tuning issues" with the AR's revolved entirely around mechanical problems with the cars. NOT the AR. You made it sound like the AR was causing all kinds of tuning issues when the fact is that it wasn't. I proved that by personally tuning several of the cars. Anyone who witnessed the tuning can tell you that to get an AR car right takes no more than 3 pulls on the dyno. I've logged 30 pulls on the dyno trying to tune an M90. Funny how much easier it is to tune when you have no detonation and no belt slip.

That same can't be said for the turbo car's I've worked with. Not saying that a turbo is impossible, but I am saying that I am aware of the tuning challenges that will be presented by the turbos. Just because a car "runs" doesn't mean it has tuned well or that it will perform up to expectations.

I'm sure we've all seen our share of turbo cars that have embarrased themselves at the track. I'd say for every glory pass there are 100 that didn't look so hot.

I also don't buy into the idea of "turning the boost up and down" at the flick of a switch either. You made reference to all the GN guys who have a habit of "cranking up the boost till she blows", but then you turn around and advocate the same thing here. I totally disagree with that philosophy. I've seen cars change more than a full point of AFR on the dyno just from a change of fuel. I sure wouldn't mess around with boost levels AND fuel source "on the fly". I think that is a completely stoopid idea.

Tune the car for a reasonable amount of boost and use your right foot for ultimate control. Always run good gas and NEVER use ethanol diluted fuel if the car wasn't tuned for it.

I'm looking at this from the back side. I've seen what happens to these motors when you aren't careful with what you do, and as the only tuner around here I've been blamed for more than my share of mishaps. Until we get a few more people around here that can talk tuning on a competent level these ideas of big HP are going to be just dreams and rare occurances. I'm trying to keep things on a realistic level for people who might actually have the ability to deal with a turbo setup.

It starts with tuning and people are going to have to learn how to tune. This means get a wide band O2 meter and some tuning software/hardware and tune your car! If you can't do that there is no way on earth you are going to get satisfactory performance out of a turbo.

David Neibert
04-24-2006, 03:43 PM
It starts with tuning and people are going to have to learn how to tune. This means get a wide band O2 meter and some tuning software/hardware and tune your car! If you can't do that there is no way on earth you are going to get satisfactory performance out of a turbo.



Dave,

Learning to tune isn't something many of us have the ability or the desire to do. Well, I've probably got the ability but don't really want to screw my car up learning how to do it.

David

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 04:01 PM
Dave D,

The motor needs to be able to handle the boost. Then it truly is a matter of turning the boost up and down. I think the issue that you have seen is in the stock EEC. People you see making fools of themselves with turbo cars are those that thought they could just bolt on a turbo and go which isnt the case at all. My freinds and I have all had very successful turbo cars without any tuning issues. Granted none of us bothered with the stock EEC computer and that may be the key. It can be done I supposse however it just isnt as easily tuned for it.

Me, I wouldnt want to look for BIG HP numbers out of a turbo 3.8 ford. Just respectable and on par or a bit higher then what we can achieve now. Really in my mind turbocharging is the next evolution for us. It wont be easy which is why it isnt being done on any widescale means. It will cater to the people however who want a bit more and who are intersted in tuning and fabricating themselves. For the everyday SC owner...No

A basic non race kit can be a reality with a max fixed boost level. Weather it is cost effective or people would want that is a whole other subject.

xThunderbirdSCx
04-24-2006, 04:22 PM
I think we need to jsut design a single turbo kit that would mount in the same place as our air filter. It would come with 1 modified passenger side manifold, and the turbo would just blow through the maf into the supercharger. Everything else would be the same. It would be bolt on and i bet we would see some decent power gains from it.

I know nothing about tuning, but because the maf would be in use where its at it would still be making accurate readings right? The turbo would make big boost up top and the supercharger would just move the air at a much faster rate and alot earlier in the game.

Is this illogical?

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 05:10 PM
Location of the turbo would have to be where it fits best. I think that would be drivers side. A custom turbo header would need to be mounted on for the drivers side whiekl a stock stang shorty header could be used on the passenger side. A crossover pipe from that passenger header to the drivers side header would need to be fabricated. A wastegate can be mounted on that crossover pipe. You would then have the whole hot side of the turbo system ready to go. A front mount intercooler could be installed just as everyone is doing now and the MAF located in the tube leading to the Throttle body (blow thru). The hardest part is really the fabrication of a quality turbo header that is strong, durable and fits well. A common problem with many of the first turbo kits produced for the stangs was broken turbo headers and wastgates that used to crack off. When I get home from SC this weekend I am going to check out my roomates Pauls cougar and see just how well or not well turbo placement would be. I have an idea in my head but I need to look up close to visualize

XR7 Dave
04-24-2006, 06:25 PM
I find it much easier to place it I knew which turbo we were going to use. Things like the orientation of the inlets/outlets seem like a big deal to me.

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 06:56 PM
If you mount the turbo inlet foward exhaust backwards everything works out pretty well. Spacing for a downpipe may be an issue and vary dependant on brake system used (year of car)

http://www.turbotechnologyinc.com/Mustang_Turbocharger_Systems.htm

Take a look at the single turbo stang setup. That is what I have on my cougar. Very clean almost stock appearing. Only mod I had to do was cut down the power steering fill a 1/4 inch to get it away from the Turbo. I was actually thinking remote mount resevoir to make it handier. I think if we could fit something in that location even if we had to switch to N/A 3.8 accesories and brackets it could be a very clean install.

Anyway thats what I was thinking. Nothing crazy..Not to much Bling...But all Brawn :O)

seawalkersee
04-24-2006, 07:17 PM
I think we need to jsut design a single turbo kit that would mount in the same place as our air filter. It would come with 1 modified passenger side manifold, and the turbo would just blow through the maf into the supercharger. Everything else would be the same. It would be bolt on and i bet we would see some decent power gains from it.

Is this illogical?
No...it would still need a tune. The difference being the ability to have a compressor that would give the same boost as the SC. Next, there is less drag on the engine making the MAF duty function less to a point and then coming on strong as the trubo does at full boost. The difference would be great enough (IMHO) that you would run the risk of running to fat until you reached full boost. In fact, if you were in town driving for two hours, I believe there may be a big enough difference that it could kill the bearings from the gas in passing into the lower end.

If I am wrong, say so. That is just what is running through my head. I have stared at graphs until I am blue in the face trying to find spikes in MAFs, DPFEs, O2s, and other sensors. I have never been lucky enough to start from scratch and go from there.

Chris

Pablo94SC
04-24-2006, 07:41 PM
Damon, you'll want to look at the SC since it's the one with everything removed. That'll let you get the best measurements.

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 07:58 PM
Paul, Didnt even think of that. Plus its a 94...Anyway my check cleared so pickup will be soon! And two sets of turbo headers could easily be produced at the same time....

Chris,

When I first started playing with Turbos we had thrown an Incon twin turbo kit on my buddies stock stang. Before we had dynoes readily available to play with. With stock EEC chipped, a blow through MAf, an Upgraded upper intake, 65mm TB, 24lb injectors and a BONE STOCK 89 5.0 GT....11.10's. I cant recall the mph but I remeber it being high for the time.

Anyway I dont see the car running rich or loading up at all just cruising around. I think Ill get some pictures and stuff taken this weekend. Just for measurmenst sake

XR7 Dave
04-24-2006, 07:58 PM
No...it would still need a tune. The difference being the ability to have a compressor that would give the same boost as the SC. Next, there is less drag on the engine making the MAF duty function less to a point and then coming on strong as the trubo does at full boost. The difference would be great enough (IMHO) that you would run the risk of running to fat until you reached full boost. In fact, if you were in town driving for two hours, I believe there may be a big enough difference that it could kill the bearings from the gas in passing into the lower end.

If I am wrong, say so. That is just what is running through my head. I have stared at graphs until I am blue in the face trying to find spikes in MAFs, DPFEs, O2s, and other sensors. I have never been lucky enough to start from scratch and go from there.

Chris

No offense to Chris, but this is exactly why I keep saying that you need to be able to tune the car before you think about putting a turbo on it. Tuning is not that difficult. If you invest in the tuning software/hardware (get an EEC tuner if that's all you can afford), and a wide band O2 meter. You have to do this.

I am more than willing to talk tuning with anyone who wants to talk discuss it but it doesn't mean anything to you unless you've tried it hands on. You have to understand the relationship between air, fuel, load and the way the EEC calculates it.

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 08:15 PM
Or dump the EEC and go standalone.. I have the SCT setup anyways and an LM1. But like I said..Perhaps the factory EEC just isnt the most user freindly for this application..Well I know it isnt the most. But is it at all is the question.

Cant really say much about the tuning aspect of it untill it was actually on the car. We already have someone in that phase and yoru helping himn along so we shall see

Pablo94SC
04-24-2006, 09:53 PM
Paul, Didnt even think of that. Plus its a 94...Anyway my check cleared so pickup will be soon! And two sets of turbo headers could easily be produced at the same time....

Think you can get ahold of a bunch of paper towel tubes so I can mock up a header this weekend? :D

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 10:20 PM
ehh just need to see downpipe fitment and turbo placement. Then I can talk to someoen about it....All lined up already

seawalkersee
04-24-2006, 10:47 PM
Why would I take offense to that? Was I wrong?

Damon, the reason the bone stock worked okay was because it was not a boosted computer to start with. You would not have to add fuel to that until you were already in the throttle right? So an FMU would be mostly what you needed. Welll...probably some timing too.

Correct me if I am wrong, but you should be able to run the SC on the stock computer with no SC. But what I would do if I were running the computer would be to manage the load and boost according to throttle response and MAF voltage. Now, you see that you are going to need more fuel with the SC then with a turbo right? I would say that the blower takes more power to turn. On a computer that ALREADY SEES the load from the blower and can attach that to the boost numbers, a turbo would have to have a tune. Espically if it were one of those that did not spool up right away. I do not know what numbers calculate to which size impellers (yet) but I will be looking into this. I think you could easily adapt a turbo to a carburated car with a wideband O2. The computer is adjustments at the carb according to the O2. The leaner you go under WOT means you need to step up the linkage on the accelerator pump. If the thing runs rich, step down in jet sizes. If it is hit and miss, fix your vacuum leak. I assume the computer is the same....just different parts to adjust...

Like I said before; correct me if I am wrong. I think the turbo is a good idea, BUT I think a bolt on turbo is impossible.

Chris

Pablo94SC
04-24-2006, 10:50 PM
ehh just need to see downpipe fitment and turbo placement. Then I can talk to someoen about it....All lined up already

Well alright! :D

Ira R.
04-24-2006, 10:58 PM
Dave,

Learning to tune isn't something many of us have the ability or the desire to do. Well, I've probably got the ability but don't really want to screw my car up learning how to do it.

David
I am throroughly enjoying this discussion, and will retake my seat at the bar in a second. I just had to jump in here and give a loud "AMEN" to what David said. Sure, I can play with the laptop and probably figure it out too, but who wants to risk screwing up all that hard work with one stupid mistake?!?

I'll go sit down and order another beer now......... carry on.

Ira

seawalkersee
04-24-2006, 11:03 PM
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....beer....

Chris

XxSlowpokexX
04-24-2006, 11:47 PM
Mmmm beerrrr...

xThunderbirdSCx
04-25-2006, 06:32 AM
Dave D...........


if you could, read my post a couple up about placement and using the stock MAF location and supercharger still.

Do you think that design would work? The turbo would blow through into the supercharger putting less work on the SC meaning we could UNDERDRIVE it at least i think. Then with a decent intercooler and some alky injection the SC would provide down low power and the turbo would provide top end boost still? Would this be too hard to tune or even pointless at that?

XxSlowpokexX
04-25-2006, 10:20 AM
Some trucks have setups like this. I think though that you would end up weighing the front of the car down and teh m90 would end up being a restriction. Untill someon tries it I hav eno idea but heck..We havnt even gotten a turbo going good yet

super red91
04-25-2006, 04:29 PM
I think its funny how everytime this comes up people want to put a turbo and a sc together. As if a turbo isnt hard enough...the last thing you need to do is try to get it working along with a supercharger :rolleyes:

seawalkersee
04-25-2006, 04:46 PM
VW is using this setup right now. It COULD be done....but I think they are usin it in a diesel.

Chirs

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 12:31 AM
http://www.overboost.com/story.asp?id=290
http://www.evotuners.com/hartford2.htm
http://www.urbanracer.com/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=2
http://www.importdrag.com/racers_MattHartford.shtml

Here is a major article on Hoyos v6 car from 2001 and a few other articles as well. I think the main confusion is that in other articles Hoyos himself refered to the motor as being 3.8 thunderbird SC based. This article clearly states all the facts. In this article it lists the motor as making 1,100 hp but later articles have the car running 1,400 which I do recall seeing year sago..Just cant find em. So this will clear up some of the misunderstandings motor wise. After th2 2001 season there was a big contravery because it didnt have dual over head cams...IMAHGINE THAT! These motors sold originally through FMS and had 5 hundred and change HP..Flywheel not rear wheel in N/A form....So you know..1,100 or 1,400 is a hell of a lot more!..Al hail turbos;O) The only thing restricting us is keeping the motor together

XR7 Dave
04-26-2006, 10:04 AM
http://www.overboost.com/story.asp?id=290
http://www.evotuners.com/hartford2.htm
http://www.urbanracer.com/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=2
http://www.importdrag.com/racers_MattHartford.shtml

Here is a major article on Hoyos v6 car from 2001 and a few other articles as well. I think the main confusion is that in other articles Hoyos himself refered to the motor as being 3.8 thunderbird SC based.

He was saying that mainly to ward off protests that it was a Nascar motor. In order to run in the class it had to be a "production based" motor. That is what SVO called it at the time also. I think that was necessary via Nascar rules as well. Nascar doesn't run production motors but they are "production based".

550hp was "out of the box" power levels for that motor. Race ready motors made about 100HP more and you can rest assured that the Hoyas motor was thoroughly warmed over prior to use in that car. Also, at 4.7L it's a LOT bigger than our motors. All I'm saying is that I think the motor was making, *realistically* about double the HP that the motor made NA. In our case, if you could get a 3.8L to make 350hp N/A you'd be doing extremely good. Then if you add the best turbo system in the world and run on alcohol you might be able to double that number like they did. So that puts the top cap on hp at about 700. Work backwards a little and you will see that 600rwhp is very nearly the most that it would be reasonable to ever hope to get out of this motor. If we can get 550 out of a bolt on AR with a much wider torque curve than the turbo and suddenly the supercharger doesn't look so anemic.

That's all I'm saying.

seawalkersee
04-26-2006, 11:37 AM
I will say that 700 crank HP will NEVER happen with our cars. Sorry, but the heads will lift before that and you will spray water all over the place. They just have too small of a deck on them for four bolts to contain the pressure at rpms that would support that number. PROVE ME WRONG...I dare ya:D

Chris

SCCoupe50
04-26-2006, 03:40 PM
I dunno if any of you have messed with the MAPECU unit yet, but its a very impressive box. I switched to it on another car of mine when I came to the point of maxing out the MAF. You remove the MAF and put this in its place. The stock ECU doesnt know the differance. The MAPECU uses the map sensor and temperature to calculate MAF voltages to send to the stock ECU. Tuning is cake as well. Plugin a wideband and your all set. This sounds like a commercial, but this is a great MAF alternative. Drivability and idle are just as good as before. You can also put your BOV whereever you want.

http://www.performancemotorresearch.co.nz/

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 04:20 PM
Ever see how many head bolts my trusty lil v8 has? :O) The one advantage of the v8 is aftermarket heads with or course thicker decks.

In order for the motor to be a ford production motor it would need to be sold at a certain volume which I am assuming they did. You should see what they are doing with the 5.4 ford GT block nowadays(lil off topic)..Production block yes..The main protests were not having dual overhead cams and that is was a v6. They did not distinguish a 4 6 or 8 cyl in the class. WHo would have the advantage?.....Remember fors used to sell the 600cid big blocks right out of thier catalouge as well!

The limitation we will have with a turbo is how much power can the stock block take. Turbo sizes and trims are practically unlimited. We also have to keep in mind that a SC takes quite a few HP to turn and puts extra strain on the crank that a turbo otherwise wouldnt. Guys are making more hp with less boost.

Yes we are talking two completely different power curves when comparing a turbo to a posative displacement blower. All I can say is that people building kits in thier garage are making over 500rwhp and in the low tens and 9's with thier stangs. Low tens in an SC? WHo knows at this point but it would be nice to see it work. I opened a turbo thread in the member section for any progress I will make on my own project. Hopefully all works out.

This whole turbo debate isnt to discredit any other forms of aspiration just to talk about turbos and yes to compare. BTW I will dyno my car before and after turbo installation for comparison at the same boost level

David Neibert
04-26-2006, 05:11 PM
Dave,

Just got back from taking my turbo car for a drive...my hands are still shaking a little. The additional timing on the low end made it spool the turbo much quicker and the manifolds are not getting nearly as hot now. Still has the part throttle stumbles and wants to backfire with light throttle once in a while, but it's much more streetable and responsive than before.

This car is tearing the heck out of my M/T ET street radials. They are getting feathered badly and rubber particles are stuck in the fenderwells. With 15 pounds of boost it easily spins them on any surface thru 1st and 2nd gear. I didn't get a chance to see what happens in 3rd because there wasn't enough road. I might have to put some Nitto DRs or something with a harder compound on the car until it's race ready. At the rate I'm going I'll need new tires before I even get it back to the track.

It's running well enough that I might take it over to the dyno just to see how much power it's making. My butt dyno says 600 plus rwhp but it's hard to tell at this power level....:D

David

XR7 Dave
04-26-2006, 05:48 PM
David you never fail to crack me up. Good stuff. :D I do think it would be a good idea to put it on the dyno, it can't be any harder on it than booting around town like that. Who knows you might be surprised. :eek:

super red91
04-26-2006, 05:49 PM
I will say that 700 crank HP will NEVER happen with our cars. Sorry, but the heads will lift before that and you will spray water all over the place. They just have too small of a deck on them for four bolts to contain the pressure at rpms that would support that number. PROVE ME WRONG...I dare ya:D

Chris

Matthewneuharth over at v6power.net has been making some impressive power and e.t. times with his 4.2l turbo. There is alot of info and other stuff about his car over there. Heres a bit from his sig :
The First and Only 9sec production based V6 Stang!

95 C4 single port
Turbo Dyno #s [email protected] and [email protected] (pump gas)19psi
587rwhp abd 601rwtq 26psi race gas.

race [email protected]
1/[email protected]
60ft-1.447

So 587rwhp x 20% loss (being nice) = 117.4

587 + 117.4 = 704.4 crank hp....So does that prove you wrong;)

seawalkersee
04-26-2006, 06:26 PM
Dont know...is he running factory heads on his turbo OR is he running the SPI heads which have a thicker deck? If he is running the SC heads, I would think that yeah...he might prove me wrong...but it was a long night last night and I wrote that while I was a tired boy...

Chris

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 06:34 PM
There is no doubt that head lift will occur. Weather supercharged or turbocharged. But the fact you can make more power with less boost...at the same boost level on the edge of lifting a head...

I dont know if you guys have seen Matts setup but it can easily be duplicated by anyone who can fabricate.

Also I have seen about 50 to many videos of worked AR and eaton powered 03/04 cobras getting waxed by Supra turbos on the top end or on highway runs.

And David once you get that thing running tops you will eb very very happy. If your happy now just wait.

XR7 Dave
04-26-2006, 06:34 PM
95 single port

Also, Chris Wise made 505rwhp with his M90 so you can add another 150hp spent turning the M90 as well as the non-locking converter etc. I'd put his at more like 750 inside the motor.

It's not that 700hp can't be produced, but you have to look at what is a reasonable ceiling to expect and 700hp is getting very close to what probably should be considered a reasonable limit. How much of that 700-750 you can harness, now that is another story altogether.

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 06:43 PM
Also, Chris Wise made 505rwhp with his M90 so you can add another 150hp spent turning the M90 as well as the non-locking converter etc. I'd put his at more like 750 inside the motor.

Dave that is indeed the #1 question. But if I can do it with a turbo, a small cam and mild head work that would be great! His combination was all out and on the laughing gas.

We will eventually come upon the limits of our block but what is it? I dont know yet. ALso will it be different with a turbo due to less strain on the bottom end?

Chris was much like Kevin in that he really romped his car at the track. Its on ething to make power and another to put teh combination to the test. My cougar v8 turbo made 748rwhp with a stock block. I KNOW that if I raced that on a weekly basis I wouldnt no longer have a block. Regardless of induction people like them will surely bring us to the edge of what our block can take.

Me... I want to see what can be done with a stock SC longblock and a turbo power wise. And if I'm happy leave it at that. I plan on no more then 17-21 psi on a stock motor. And I dont see why it wont handle it. Maybe more?..I dunno

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 06:56 PM
I will say that 700 crank HP will NEVER happen with our cars. Sorry, but the heads will lift before that and you will spray water all over the place. They just have too small of a deck on them for four bolts to contain the pressure at rpms that would support that number. PROVE ME WRONG...I dare ya:D

Chris

Ok... there is a guy in FLA putting down over 600rwhp with a 2.x twin-screw/ That equates to at least 690chp with a 15% drive train loss without factoring in parasitic loss from the blower. So what do I win?

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 06:59 PM
NADA because its still not 700! :O)~!

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 07:01 PM
Dont know...is he running factory heads on his turbo OR is he running the SPI heads which have a thicker deck? If he is running the SC heads, I would think that yeah...he might prove me wrong...but it was a long night last night and I wrote that while I was a tired boy...

Chris

Ported stock single port heads... from the Mustang, not the SC.

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 07:05 PM
NADA because its still not 700! :O)~!

I said I didn't factor in the parasitic loss from the blower. That's gotta be a good 50-75hp, if not more. :p

PS: You mean we're going to see what the stock bottom end can handle. :cool:

XR7 Dave
04-26-2006, 08:10 PM
Paul, I'm aware of the car and I've seen some pictures. However I've neither seen nor heard anything that would indicate that it makes over 600rwhp. I think that is internet lore more than anything. I may just have to call him up and ask him if it has ever been on the dyno. Based only on the size of his blower pulley, I'd guess that he is just not making the boost necessary to generate that kind of HP.

I just don't think it requires 600rwhp to run 165 in the 1 mile. If David's 4200lb SC makes 600hp and does 130 mph in the 1/4 mile it should follow that 600hp would be doing more than 165mph 3/4 of a mile later.

Damon, you and I both know that big cams are not what makes turbo's happy. I find it interesting that turbo guys often brag about their "mild cams" making it seem like if they went with a more radical cam they would make more power. Truth is that if you put a radical cam in a turbo application you will all but murder the thing. Even with a blown application big cams don't mean a lot. My car was one of the higher HP cars even when it had the old S-Port on it and my cam was under .500" lift. The cam I'm doing for my new motor is fairly radical by SC standards but it should "idle like a stocker" as people like to put it. With only 262 gross duration it has less gross duration than my current cam.

super red91
04-26-2006, 08:48 PM
Dont know...is he running factory heads on his turbo OR is he running the SPI heads which have a thicker deck? If he is running the SC heads, I would think that yeah...he might prove me wrong...but it was a long night last night and I wrote that while I was a tired boy...

Chris

Single port heads, and what is even more interesting is that he ported the heads himself and the stock ford valves are still being used :eek:

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 08:51 PM
Dave,

I agree with you 100%. I just think it would be nice to make the power with a relatively mild cam. I'm not looking for anything radical either.

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 09:35 PM
Paul, I'm aware of the car and I've seen some pictures. However I've neither seen nor heard anything that would indicate that it makes over 600rwhp. I think that is internet lore more than anything. I may just have to call him up and ask him if it has ever been on the dyno. Based only on the size of his blower pulley, I'd guess that he is just not making the boost necessary to generate that kind of HP.

How is it internet lore if Dan H spoke with him in person? If that's what the guy said, then that's what the guy said. I have no reason not to believe him.

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 09:37 PM
Single port heads, and what is even more interesting is that he ported the heads himself and the stock ford valves are still being used :eek:

Exactly. Proof that you don't need Steigimeyer-esque welded heads to make a lot of power.

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 09:42 PM
With a turbo you dont need much of anything......

When you are trying to squeeze every inch of power out of a 3.8..The Steig heads do thier thing.

Now I wouldnt want to use a head with a welded floor in a turbo application..Id be a lil scared..

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 09:43 PM
Btw Shouldnt You Be Working Hahah!

Pablo94SC
04-26-2006, 09:44 PM
Btw Shouldnt You Be Working Hahah!

I'm taking a break. :D

XxSlowpokexX
04-26-2006, 11:01 PM
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/DBF37CEF-2C33-4503-B3F4-D615A622A4F5.htm

XR7 Dave
04-27-2006, 08:12 AM
Exactly. Proof that you don't need Steigimeyer-esque welded heads to make a lot of power.

You just figured this out? :p I wasn't aware that people thought welded heads were necessary to make a lot of power. I've always thought welded heads were cool but I think Kevin proved that welded heads weren't necessary a couple years ago.

sizemoremk
04-27-2006, 09:50 AM
Couple of things here...

I totally agree with the learn to tune it yourself method. IMO, the best example is Fastsc92, he ran 12.7 on a M90 with home ported heads, and CMRE stage Iish cam, and a small zex shot; but he tunes his own junk with an eec tuner and SCtuner software, and a PLX wideband and a datalogger. This is the basic model I am following... He's done lots to the car since, and he aint gotta drive halfway across the country and spend more $$$ to get it tuned.

On the SCT tuners, the impression I get from their website is that you cannot tune those yourself? I do have a friend in the market for a tuner for his 01 Mustang SC project, and he seems to read it the same way. So coulc someone with an SCT tuner, tune it himself with a WB02? It looks to me like only an SCT dealer has the capability to tune them?

Also, from the limited conversations and what I've read about GN guys, they all seem to go for "canned" chips and I don't see much evidence of those guys tuning their own cars... It seems to me if so many of them run with "canned tunes" the turbo tune couldn't be all that difficult to master. I know a guy with a GN with a mail order chip outta a catalog that absolutely embarrassed a Z06 vette, by like 10 cars... Bigger turbo, FMIC, snow kit, etc...

But there again, I haven't stayed at a Holiday Inn express in several years now, so maybe I'm just waay off in that assumption... Is our MAF setup and the SD setup is so dissimilar? Is there a quick explanation on why they don't have to be so exact in their tunes? I don't completely understand the SD setup, but I've always been under the MAF setup was more forgiving to changes and such.

But since Damon put up the little rice video, I guess its OK to post a quick finding from the evo site....
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=142793

This is sparking my interest because we just sold our expedition and got a steal of a deal on a low mileage, crown vic sport, and I have visions of twin remote mounts and a big IC dancing in my head :D I always said my next project would be a Lincoln TC, but this deal was too good to pass up, and prolly weighs a bit less than a TC and its darn near brand new… but I digress:o

XR7 Dave
04-27-2006, 11:30 AM
Mike, you need to be a little more specific about what "SCT tuner" you are talking about. There are several products that offer anywhere from -0- to 100% tuneability depending on application.

As for the GN guys, they have a totally different ball of wax to deal with. Their computers are circa 1984 and not even in the same league as the SC computer.

As you well know there are success stories from every corner of the performance world. Look at Jim Demmit running 11's with no EEC tuning of any kind. If we focus on the success stories we will gloss over the immense problems that plague the majority. How many GN owners gave up when the car didn't respond the way they thought it would? How many GN's blew headgaskets and melted pistons? Check around, you'll find many. SC people want to do it once and do it right. GN guys have torn down and rebuilt their cars 14 times for every one time that an SC guy has rebuilt his motor. The point is that there is no need for us to go down that route. With proper tuning practices we have the tools to get it right the first time. The other thing that GN guys have over us is that there are businesses that have devoted huge budgets to racing and perfecting the tunes for these cars, then offering fairly "pat" recipes for them. In our case, each person that is anywhere near the edge of the performance envelope has their own idea on what will or won't work and has built their combination based on those ideas. This makes it very hard to put together one "chip" that fits all.

For example, if we could get all SC'ers who want to run big HP numbers to use the same injectors, air filters and MAF meters we would be 90% there. But no, everyone wants to run their own unique combination which has to be tuned individually. That is one of our achiles heels. The truth is that one meter, one set of injectors, and one intake setup would more than suffice for 99.9% of all SC's. But you know what that means.....

Ira R.
04-27-2006, 12:27 PM
Dave,

I agree with you 100%. I just think it would be nice to make the power with a relatively mild cam. I'm not looking for anything radical either.

Holy @#$% !! :eek: :eek:

Did he really say that??

oh my god, the sky is falling... the sky is falling...... :D :D

Ira

sizemoremk
04-27-2006, 01:02 PM
Well the XCAL2 seems to be the most common tuner in the places I've looked, and also offers datalogging... It appears to give minimal options for end-user tuning.

Are familiar with that one?


On the GNs, my comments were just concerning the latitude they have as far as their tunes go, I would bet that few two mod combos are exactly alike, things will be off from car to car anyways even if the same guy did everything exactly the same... So I am wondering is their ECU, or the SD setup is just more forgiving or what? Do their ECUs not do a closed loop with O2s or what?

My point is that they are running turbos, and their tunes are evedently just close enough for gubmint work. And if their tunes don't have to be dead-on-balls-accurate:D I don't see how tuning for turbo would be that darn sensitive...

So does this mean that the SD setup in more forgiving than SD? Cuz I've always heard the opposite... Maybe this means the SD setup might simplify tuning on the higher performance SCs:confused: Could late 80s SD components be retrofitted to MAF computers? I do know that there were kits to convert from SD to MAF...

JStudrawa
04-27-2006, 01:09 PM
Holy @#$% !! :eek: :eek:

Did he really say that??

oh my god, the sky is falling... the sky is falling...... :D :D

Ira

I know :( This thread really ended up being a lot less drama filled than I had hoped :(

Oh well, back to reading about Supras :(

XxSlowpokexX
04-27-2006, 02:44 PM
Dont worry I am sure it will get better :O)..I havnt even begun to comment on the Grand Nationals yet.....

Parker Dean
04-27-2006, 03:13 PM
On the GNs, my comments were just concerning the latitude they have as far as their tunes go, I would bet that few two mod combos are exactly alike, things will be off from car to car anyways even if the same guy did everything exactly the same... So I am wondering is their ECU, or the SD setup is just more forgiving or what? Do their ECUs not do a closed loop with O2s or what?

Well, I've got about five of 'em I'm messing around with down here (none of 'em mine :( ) and what we've found to be successful is to buy a canned chip from a couple of sources like TurboTweak or Max Effort. The tuning in these chips took many years of GN trial and error to get from what I understand and they operate well for part throttle through WOT, even with large injectors like 60's on mild motors

Anyway, we also dump the OEM Delco MAF that was a piece of crap back in the day, and age hasn't done them any favors, and replace them with the LS1 MAF that late model Camaros use. These meters operate with a different scale than the OE's did so you need a device to change the signal to what the ECM can understand. In most cases we've used a device called a Translator Plus for this, although in one instance we used the Translator Pro which makes it speed-density. The T-plus and T-pro allow fuel and timing trims of up to +/- 12%/6 degrees which is whats' important. It means we can take a canned chip that offers good driveability and trim it to the individual cars needs for WOT. Assuming it's within range of course.

Part of my point is that these canned chips that are so successful now didn't exist five years ago. Take for instance a Red's chip. IME these things are ridiculously rich part throttle. Black smoke rich. And they surge. Stall cold, etc. I undrstand that was a leading chip for the GN's not so long ago. So we need to understand that knowing what works for our SC's isn't going to happen overnight, but at the same time we need to get going or we'll never find out what does.

1FASTSC
04-27-2006, 08:48 PM
You guys crack me up. To begin a successful turbo application you must first master some basic engine building theory and tuning procedures not to mention some fairly in depth installation and fabrication abilities. No offence to anyone here but most of you really have no idea what you are talking about.

This is basically how I feel. 99% of the people here talk the talk, but only a few walk the walk. I made a post about tuning my evo on this thread, hoping that Dalke would take a look at it (he didn't, I don't blame him, he hates me) but no one even had a ricer comment for it. Most likely because most people here wouldn't know a fuel table if it slapped them in the face.

I know that sounds really rude, but it's honest.


Case in point is the guy not 5 or 6 posts up that wants to run remote mount turbos WITH an intercooler on a crown vic. Now, I love remote mounts, but the fact remains the charge pipe will cool itself and there is no need for an intercooler. On top of that.....it's already a lot of piping, especially on a longer car like a crown vic, adding an intercooler will make piping not only a nightmare, but also make it that much longer.

I don't think people that don't wrench their own cars or build their own fuel/timing tables should be allowed to call me a ricer on this site =)

Pablo94SC
04-27-2006, 09:15 PM
Well, I've got about five of 'em I'm messing around with down here (none of 'em mine :( ) and what we've found to be successful is to buy a canned chip from a couple of sources like TurboTweak or Max Effort. The tuning in these chips took many years of GN trial and error to get from what I understand and they operate well for part throttle through WOT, even with large injectors like 60's on mild motors

Anyway, we also dump the OEM Delco MAF that was a piece of crap back in the day, and age hasn't done them any favors, and replace them with the LS1 MAF that late model Camaros use. These meters operate with a different scale than the OE's did so you need a device to change the signal to what the ECM can understand. In most cases we've used a device called a Translator Plus for this, although in one instance we used the Translator Pro which makes it speed-density. The T-plus and T-pro allow fuel and timing trims of up to +/- 12%/6 degrees which is whats' important. It means we can take a canned chip that offers good driveability and trim it to the individual cars needs for WOT. Assuming it's within range of course.

Part of my point is that these canned chips that are so successful now didn't exist five years ago. Take for instance a Red's chip. IME these things are ridiculously rich part throttle. Black smoke rich. And they surge. Stall cold, etc. I undrstand that was a leading chip for the GN's not so long ago. So we need to understand that knowing what works for our SC's isn't going to happen overnight, but at the same time we need to get going or we'll never find out what does.

Call Hypertech in Memphis. The guy started the company because he wanted to tune his 12 or so GN and T-type Regals. I think he might be able to give you some really good advise on tuning them.

XxSlowpokexX
04-27-2006, 10:07 PM
I don't think people that don't wrench their own cars or build their own fuel/timing tables should be allowed to call me a ricer on this site =)

OK ricer. I personally dont know the background of every single person on this board however everyone starts somewhere. No one I know of was born with a silver ECU in thier mouths. Every good idea starts with a dollar and a dream. If you dont have the skills but have the means..You can easily make your fantasy become a reality without knowing crap about a fuel table or even turbo systems in general. A typical turbo system is very uncomplicated. And heck,,,If you dont like EFI go carberated. I can show you many 1000rwhp + turbo carberated cars.

If owning a fast car went hand in hand with knowing how to tune one...Hell 99% of the people out there would be SOL. Not everyone has the time or patience to want to learn. I learned enough to program my old school DFI and know enough to get myself into trouble with my SCT setup...However I am no master tuner. I'd rather pay someone. However I can design almost anything I can dream up. Thats what I'm good at. Wish I could do it all..Fabrication, design and tune but I work and time doesnt allow me to play as much as I like. It also doesnt afford me the tools I would need.

SO basically instead of shunning peoples Ides...We should embrace them and at the same time guide them towards reasonable solutions. Personally a turbo SC, stock longblock 17-21psi.....Nice. Now lets talk about how we can get their.

Just kididng about the ricer thing but ya know....You practically asked for it!

Parker Dean
04-27-2006, 11:29 PM
Call Hypertech in Memphis. The guy started the company because he wanted to tune his 12 or so GN and T-type Regals. I think he might be able to give you some really good advise on tuning them.

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind if I want to start burning my own chips. So far though we're where we should be on the mod/ET curve and everyone is happy. Of course that never lasts :)

David Neibert
04-27-2006, 11:51 PM
This is basically how I feel. 99% of the people here talk the talk, but only a few walk the walk. I made a post about tuning my evo on this thread, hoping that Dalke would take a look at it (he didn't, I don't blame him, he hates me) but no one even had a ricer comment for it. Most likely because most people here wouldn't know a fuel table if it slapped them in the face.

I know that sounds really rude, but it's honest.

I don't see any post on this thread by you except this one. BTW, What did you expected a bunch of supercharged T-Bird guys to say about tuning an EVO anyway ? Your right it does sound rude.

People talking about doing a turbo on their car is just the first step...they don't have to know all about them to want one. They probably didn't know anymore about superchargers when they bought their SC....I sure didn't, but I know plenty about it now. l agree that people should attempt to educate themselves before jumping into a turbo project, but I don't see why they need to understand a fuel table before doing it.

I don't understand how a TV works, but I still enjoy watching it.

David

Ira R.
04-27-2006, 11:55 PM
This is basically how I feel. 99% of the people here talk the talk, but only a few walk the walk. I made a post about tuning my evo on this thread, hoping that Dalke would take a look at it (he didn't, I don't blame him, he hates me) but no one even had a ricer comment for it. Most likely because most people here wouldn't know a fuel table if it slapped them in the face.

I know that sounds really rude, but it's honest.

I don't think people that don't wrench their own cars or build their own fuel/timing tables should be allowed to call me a ricer on this site =)

We must have been typing at the same time. So yea, what David said!! Also:

First of all, what the heck does being able to read a fuel table got to do with anything?? I can't read one. Noone ever showed me. So? Big hairy deal. Some of us learned how to tune a car by gapping points and using a timing light. What do I know from computers? And a fuel table? And why do I have to know all that much about it? There are people out there who have already acquired that knowledge to advise me.

And because I have set aside my wrenches for the most part so I can watch, admire and learn from the folks who can do it, all the while enjoying my rides and the friendships I make, means I can't comment on your car?? Horse hockey. You're right, I can't argue fuel ratios and EEC's with you, so? Tell you what, if it makes you fell better, here; if it sounds like my lawnmower and weighs about the same, well, call it anything you want. It's your thing, not mine. Besides, some of us just don't generally make those comments in public because we were raised better then that.

Remember that if you're gonna make a big deal about walking the walk, you better make sure people give a damn where you're going.


Ira

seawalkersee
04-28-2006, 04:17 AM
I don't see any post on this thread by you except this one. BTW, What did you expected a bunch of supercharged T-Bird guys to say about tuning an EVO anyway ? Your right it does sound rude.

People talking about doing a turbo on their car is just the first step...they don't have to know all about them to want one. They probably didn't know anymore about superchargers when they bought their SC....I sure didn't, but I know plenty about it now. l agree that people should attempt to educate themselves before jumping into a turbo project, but I don't see why they need to understand a fuel table before doing it.

I don't understand how a TV works, but I still enjoy watching it.

David
I have to agree with David on this. When I first got my SC he showed me the light about quite a few things. I have owned quite a few cars...02 GT, 83 GT, 97 LX, 83 Ranger with a small block...all of those are different beasts. I have set up a lot of things now and have fixed a LOT of stuff on the SC just from changing the way I look at it. Once you get the basic principals of boost, a lot of other things just fall into play. The point is, an air pump is an air pump and parts are parts. If they are the wrong ones or set up incorrectly, they do not work right.

I must say that in order for me to even have applied for my degree, I had to take a mechanical apptitude test. I missed one...I should not have missed the question but that shows my apptitude. I catch on rather quickly to how things work. I have never even messed with a FMU but I can tell you how they work...

Chris

XR7 Dave
04-28-2006, 10:32 AM
I feel that it is imporant to understand how to tune your car. This is not getting easier and people are being left behind. The gap between those who know and can do and those who wish they could is getting bigger.

There was a day when if you could make 300rwhp you were someone who stood out and people looked up to you. Now newbies are tucking themselves in at night with visions of 450rwhp.

That's not all. I get the emails and the phone calls from people who have thousands upon thousands of $$ tied up in their cars wanting me to wave a magic wand and fix their mess. However, when I ask a simple question of "is it rich or lean" I get the equivelent of blank stares via the internet. The people become frustrated and dissallusioned when that just isn't necessary. It pains me greatly to see what some people are putting themselves through.

It's not necessary. People can learn to tune their own cars. I'm here to offer you any assistance you need but in many cases it means you will have to do the actual tuning yourself. You will have to be able to understand what I'm telling you, execute the process and interpret the results.

Understanding the basic priniciples of how the EEC works is essential to being able to make wise decisions on what to do and how to mod the car to achieve your desired results. People learned how to post on this BBS, people learned how to post pictures and people learned how to read and reply to PM's. You can do this too.

Yes it means an investment in a WB02 and some tuning software. Get an EEC Tuner if you must but get something. It's not like it was 8 years ago when no one would explain to me what the columns and rows were on the base fuel table. I will be more than happy to help anyone who takes on the initiative to start but I'm not going to drag people down the path. You have to want to learn.

Sure not everyone wants or needs to learn how to tune, but if you want to put a turbo on your SC you damn sure need to. It's not hard, but you will have to tune the car. Otherwise you can go on complaining about how it doesn't run or doesn't perform to expectations, etc after all the money you've spent on it. I hear that enough already.

Parker is right, those GN guys have learned a lot the hard way. Do you really want to go down the same path? The SC processor is different enough from the Mustang guys that you can't use their chips, you can't use their hardware, you can't even use all of their proceedures. We have to develop our own.

Sorry about the rant. Go back to talking about turbo's. :) I've stirred things up enough which wasn't my intention in the first place.

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 12:29 PM
The biggest problem here and Dave has brought it up already, is that everyone wants to try their own combination.....Instead of one that is known to work. Also alot pf people in this hobby regardless of the make of car do not set themselves realistic goals or goals in general. This will only lead to failure and dissapointment on a major scale. Heck even the best planned out projects just don ot work. I was never happy with teh known combination because it is just that..Known..Easy..and not nes the most powerful...

I have owned SC's for the past 12 years or so and never did I even have the urge to modify any one of them up untill about 6 years ago. Honestly I wasnt impressed at all with the performance per $$$..Totally built up cars were going slow. Slow compared to the $$$ I would have to invest when compared to a Small Block Ford lets say. Finally when I thought the bolt on aftermarket for the SC was within acceptable $$$ I splurged and just about did every bolt on you can buy. Was I happy? Yes I was. I got what I thought I would get. I bought proven parts and they worked out great. I drove my 94 for a few years that way. Then Chris W and Dave N started going fast. Thats when I said now is the time to build a motor. So I started gathering up the parts. Then SCT came out with a racer package and I bought an LM-1 wideband...Ohh now I can have a motor and a great way to tune!.....I'm on a roll.....THEN I bought what I thought was a complete project 2.2 AR and there was the death of me. My perfect plan for world domination was set back buy a project that has ended up taking on a mind of its own. It needed more work then anticipated and here I sit now. You see even the best laid out plans do not always work out. SO three years later I have an incomplete car with a 2.2 liter AR in limbo. I bit off more then I can chew. Should I wait for the AR to be done?..Should I just put the eaton back on??? I dont know at this point. Its depressing and not under my control. So I find myself buying a few more SC's to hold me over. First one gets stolen and burnt, the next I recently sold, and now I have what will be my Turbo project car. So how did I plan this one you say?

Found a fabricator that will do the job from start to finish. I bring it in and it comes out a week or so later done. This person does custom turbo kit sfor all makes and models of cars. I then found a tuner who does a lot of turbo work. He can tune anything and any system because he does know fuel tables and how they relate to turbos and boost. An expert if you will. And then you have me watching:O).

My part in this? I tell them what I want and what I expect.

The plan 400rwhp stock longblock. I am told it can be achieved.

So we will see.

Best advice I can give those wanting to go fast. Set a goal. Know what you want..Find out what it takes to get there,,,Then go for it...And dont skip any of the above steps or you will only get dissapointed

turbospeed
04-28-2006, 12:44 PM
so lets say i buy a WB02 , then ill need a SCT tunning tool? , or the data collected there is enough to have it dencently tuned?( send the result via email etc etc)

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 02:44 PM
A tuner can only help you so much over teh phone. In person would be the best bet. But yes get a wideband that datalogs and that will help greatly. Of course knowing how to tune yourself would be the best bet. But it isnt for everyone

XR7 Dave
04-28-2006, 03:03 PM
The SCT tuning tools are a worthwhile investment IF you seriously plan to keep your SC for the duration and IF you aren't going to give up when things get tough. The SCT tuning tools will give you the ability to do the same things that I, or Damon's tuner can do. Keep in mind that no tuning tool is worth it's weight if you don't have data aquisition to go with it.

If you are not so sure if you are that dedicated, get the WB02 first. It is an investment that will pay for itself first, and then it will retain it's value if you ever want to sell it, and third, it can be used on any car, not just an SC. I can provide a mail order tune that will get you 90% that way but it will take some time. This form of tuning is very successful for someone who just doesn't want to do it themselves.

Or, if you get the WB02 and think you want to tune yourself, you can get an EEC Tuner. They are cheap to buy and will retain about 50% of their value if you decide to sell it. Still a minor investment where you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. I will help you learn your EEC tuner as will others here on this site. The more that have them and the more that use them the more comfortable people will become with the lingo. Ultimately whether you use the EEC Tuner or the SCT software the programming is the same, only the interface is different. The SCT software gives you control over more parameters, but the EEC tuner is an inexpensive way to get started into the world of tuning your own car.

Believe me, things will never be the same once you start tuning your own car. Do not look at the failures of others and assume you will end up the same way. If you get the WB02 FIRST and then start tuning later you will learn and you will have success. To me it is beyond comprehension how people bought tuners all those years (I was one of them at first) but never obtained the WB02 or datalogging capabilities that are essential to being able to actually make use of a tuning device.

Ira R.
04-28-2006, 03:52 PM
............and the best place(s) to acquire all of this would be.......??

Ira

sizemoremk
04-28-2006, 04:20 PM
Since there is some good info in this thread, I will try not enter into a urination contest with the evo feller; but I must admit I have always found a good urination contest hard to resist:D

I will say that the reason that many of us choose to ignore the evo comments is because we hope if we ignore them long enough, they will go away...

And as for off-the-wall ideas, is this not the place to discuss such ideas? We usually have some naysayers, but folks don't usually come around with smug attitudes and talk smack; it is especially rude coming from you toyoda and honda guys...

Anywho, there has been a little more talk about tuning here lately, but he fact remains that there are not so many resources to learn how to tune, especially for our cars. So many of us are still in the beginning stage and have what some may consider "barny level" questions, but we all have to start somewhere. So if you feel that the level of conversation is beneath you, just let it go; or perhaps find a camaro, or mustang board to annoy with your "sport compact" ramblings.



I do have my WB02/datalogger, and my eec tuner with the SCtunner software; and as soon as I can get my car put back together I will begin working with Dave on learning to tune. If I end up being comfortable with tuning my car, I'll be glad to assist others at that point, without coming on the boards talkin’ mess to folks with lower levels of experience.

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 04:45 PM
Actually Its not about tuning OUR car. Its about understanding how to tune. And this will go for any car. Experience will help of course. The more you understand EFI the better you will be at tuning. Of course all teh theory in teh world doesnt help if you do not practice what you preach. I am personally up to my ears in reading with little experience. That will change eventually but for now it remains that way.

As for where to get information. Buying teh SCT sowftware and a wideband is #1. #2 is joining the SCT website where you can get some information. Step #3 is read up on the information SCT gives you on variables within teh software. Step 4 is puting it all to use.

Everyone starts somewhere...

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 04:48 PM
BTW the EEC tuner with SCTuunner software and SCT are different for those who dont know

Pablo94SC
04-28-2006, 04:51 PM
You have a fabricator already? Damn Damon, you move fast.

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 04:58 PM
You can thank Dennis. I'm to busy to do that stuff on my own. Hopefully it will be sweet.

Pablo94SC
04-28-2006, 05:46 PM
I dunno... it's Dennis we're talking about. Speaking of Dennis, does he even exist?

David Neibert
04-28-2006, 11:20 PM
Damon...make sure to use V bands they are great.

I'm seriously thinking about cutting the stupid ball and socket crap off my headers on the 91 and replacing them with V bands.

David

XxSlowpokexX
04-28-2006, 11:25 PM
Believe me..I thought I was unforgettable...But when dennis is around he makes his presence known.

Dave I have no experience with band clamps however I been checking them out with the v6 stang guys setup and it looks like a great idea. My v8 kit is all flanges.

If you have the midlenght kooks headers it be a great idea. Teh one bad thing about the non full lenght kooks os that ball design.

David Neibert
04-29-2006, 12:20 AM
Speaking of the V6 mustang guys....Here's an interesting post.

http://www.turbomustangs.com/smf/index.php?topic=61445.0

David

XxSlowpokexX
04-29-2006, 12:28 AM
Thats Matt again. Definitely nice numbers

Parker Dean
04-29-2006, 12:56 AM
Damon...make sure to use V bands they are great.

I'm seriously thinking about cutting the stupid ball and socket crap off my headers on the 91 and replacing them with V bands.

David

They used ball and socket? WTH!

One of the TR's here has some ATR headers that uses V-bands and it's the way to go IMO. So easy to disassemble, and it stays together and doesn't leak when assembled.

XxSlowpokexX
04-29-2006, 01:44 AM
Do the V bands allow for movement?...If not you willend up cracking the header. The ball and socket allows movement

Pablo94SC
04-29-2006, 02:48 AM
That's why you have flex-pipe somewhere in the system downstream from the turbo.

XR7 Dave
04-29-2006, 03:57 AM
Tuning discussions on this board have been generally lame because people have not taken the first step towards learning to tune. The first step is to get a datalogger and WB02, connect them to the car, and start watching what your motor is doing. Once you have some logs to post here, we can begin intelligent discussions on what to do about them.

I have all kinds of things I would like to say right now about tuning but I am saving my breath for until we have some real data to work with. You guys are plenty smart enough to tune your own cars. It's not that hard. But we can't learn to play basketball if we don't get out of our chairs.

XxSlowpokexX
04-29-2006, 09:35 AM
That's why you have flex-pipe somewhere in the system downstream from the turbo.

He was talking his non turbo car. I was thinking about it and your exhaust will need some kind of movement. There has to be some give somewhere. I guess you can add flex section to your standard exhaust

And Dave..I hate basketball...

Randy N Connie
04-29-2006, 11:01 AM
[QUOTE=XR7 Dave]Tuning discussions on this board have been generally lame because people have not taken the first step towards learning to tune. The first step is to get a datalogger and WB02, connect them to the car, and start watching what your motor is doing. Once you have some logs to post here, we can begin intelligent discussions on what to do about them.[QUOTE]

Dave D.
This is because some of use are lame when compared to your knowledge
of tuning.You do not start with the first steps. And that is the hook up
of the equipment.

I have no idea or any info on how to hook up Innovate LM-1 with RPM
to even start any data down loading.Other than the wide band o2,
and weld a bung in.There is no direction that I have found or seen
for are cars for sensor pick up..

I tried once with incomplete direction,and burnt the LM-1 up.

The problem is that no one starts from the very beginning on how to tune.
And that is how to even install the data down load and tuning equipment.
Some of us ,or me at least do not know the first thing about wiring.
I have other parts to install,(example snow injection.)well I can make
brackets to mount and hold parts.but don't have the slightest idea about relays or wiring.
I see no or have any directions for this parts hook-up either.
If its not plug-in and play.I am lost.

I would like to mount the LM 1 an keep it in the car all the time. But with
my knowledge all I can do is plug the wide band into the cigarette lighter.
the the rest,don't have the slightest idea what to do..

And if I did have data from my motor.I do not have the slightest idea
on how to download the info to the SCCoA.

Thanks Randy

XxSlowpokexX
04-29-2006, 11:34 AM
Randy,

Dave started out knowing nothing like everyone else. Its really haveing the will to learn. I have 50% will...You may have less...Dave has more.

XR7inWI
04-29-2006, 12:01 PM
Its really haveing the will to learn.
Truer words have never been spoken. If someone really has the drive to learn how to do something, they WILL find the information. If there are others out there doing it, then there should be no reason at all that the rest of us can't learn how too. Sparky wasn't born knowing how to datalog and tune. I would bet he spent many long hours reading, researching and learning.

I plan to get into it sometime in the future as well. Before I get my car to the point that it will need tuning, I want to know how to do it myself as well as have all the tools to do it properly. There is no way I will modify my car to the point it will need tuning if I can't do it myself. There just isn't anyone near me that can do it and I refuse to have to wait till I can get it to someone or for someone to get to me.

David Neibert
04-29-2006, 12:54 PM
He was talking his non turbo car. I was thinking about it and your exhaust will need some kind of movement. There has to be some give somewhere. I guess you can add flex section to your standard exhaust

And Dave..I hate basketball...

V-Bands are on the turbo car, one flex joint is required on the 3.5" pipe that attaches about where a long tube header collector would be. All the connections on the headers, waste gate, cross over tube and down pipe are V-Band and remain rigid when clamps are tightened.

If I used them on my 91, I would add a section of flex pipe in the downpipe very close to the connection at the collectors. The exhaust system would still be supported by the brackets in the trans mount.

The ball and socket style coupling on my headers isn't working wery well and I've already reworked/repaired the headers and downpipes several times to try and stop them from leaking. Anytime I race the car (especially with nitrous) I end up with an exhaust leak at the collectors. The flanges usually bend and the bolts get loose and start falling out.

David

PS: I'm planning to do the stuff Dave suggested (wide band o2, data log sensor output, ect...) and learn how to tune my turbo car.

Randy N Connie
04-29-2006, 02:37 PM
Randy,

Its really haveing the will to learn. I have 50% will...You may have less...Dave has more.

I don't see it as not having enough will to learn. Its buying products
from manufactures with Instruction sheets that are not complete.
For the application of are cars.

Thanks Randy

Randy N Connie
04-29-2006, 07:53 PM
Dave D. has been kind enough to stop by and show me some tuning procedures.Thanks!

And I have just about worn out my SCT Pro-Racers basic of tuning
book. So my problem is not being able to tune my car.I don't think
I will have to many problems in this area, some I am sure.

My problem is not being able to hook up the Innovate LM-1. So
I can start data down loading.I have no idea of what wires to
splice into,or even what type wire to use as jumpers.

And after breaking 8 vertebrae in my back,I am not able to bend
to get to the computer in the kick panel.So the first time of tring
to hook up the LM-1 direct to the sensors.Turned out to be a
disaster. I hit one sensor pick-up wire on 12volts.

And splicing into the sensors under the hood,I have the impression
that I will not receive the correct voltage read-out.Not the same
voltage read-out as my computer will be receiving.

Thanks Randy

Randy N Connie
04-30-2006, 10:16 AM
I found two places to buy aluminum rods the length that I want.
I think they will work nice with a stroker crank. & if I deside to
go with turbo for boost.First I am going to use the A/R with
raised manifold,and heads with welded intake and exhaust ports.

Randy

sail7seas
04-30-2006, 11:25 AM
>And splicing into the sensors under the hood,I have the impression
that I will not receive the correct voltage read-out.Not the same
voltage read-out as my computer will be receiving.<

For these reasons is why is like this pricey setup...
http://www.racesystems.com/sneeciv/sneec.htm

Scott Long
04-30-2006, 01:01 PM
Ok, here's my idea, since I have only read the first 3 pages, and will now go read the rest.

1. Easiest to do would be to use a 3.8L N/A lower and upper, remove the a/c and ac/jackshaft bracket. Put the turbo on the passenger side front of the engine compartment (like GN), run an FMIC that feeds from the left, and exits at the right, goes up through the stock air filter hole in the fender and makes a fairly straight shot at the throttle body. I am not sure where to put the maf? Before the turbo after the filter like GN, could we use the stock maf for that? Or put it in the stock location before the TB but it would be after the ic and turbo so it would need to be a blow through.

2. To make the most power looks like it could be done with split port heads, 4.2L upper and lower, and the same setup as above.

My question is this:

Could we use a passenger side turbo manifold w/ a flange or would it not make enough air to really spool the turbo? I suppose you could do two custom manifolds and then y-pipe into a flange and use both banks of the engine to spool the turbo quicker. I'm not sure how GN's do it.

We could even use a windstar upper and put the throttle body facing forward and design the system almost identical to the GN setup except definately use a big FMIC.

The first thing I'd do would be to take off the SC lower intake, its a piece of ~~~~. Who on earth would want to use a rear entry manifold and then try to evenly fill the heads with air. GN's use restrictor plates to even out air supply to the cylinders I'm sure it could be done, but why, the 3.8L N/A upper and lower is basically a 5.0L setup w/ two less cylinders. The intakes are designed w/ longer runner length up top and equal supply to each intake port on the head. That would be the best and easiest way to assure that each cylinder gets equal airflow.

1FASTSC
05-06-2006, 08:03 AM
Actually Its not about tuning OUR car. Its about understanding how to tune. And this will go for any car.

This should sum it up for the individual that was bashing my comment.

It's about knowing how to tune.

XxSlowpokexX
05-06-2006, 09:12 PM
I'll bet my house that one doesnt have to understand how to tune to have even a 9 second 1/4 turbo car let alone a 12 or 13 second one..

Scott Long
05-06-2006, 10:29 PM
Whats the difference between the LC-1 and the LM-1. I can get an LM-1 shipped to my doorstep for about $390. Is that a good deal?

Also with the serial cable it comes with do I need an old school laptop or could it work with USB?

Blown347
05-07-2006, 08:26 AM
I'll bet my house that one doesnt have to understand how to tune to have even a 9 second 1/4 turbo car let alone a 12 or 13 second one..

I would love to take that bet. The only way to have a 9 second car and not know how to tune is to pay others to do it.

XR7 Dave

Randy N Connie
05-07-2006, 11:11 AM
Whats the difference between the LC-1 and the LM-1. I can get an LM-1 shipped to my doorstep for about $390. Is that a good deal?

Also with the serial cable it comes with do I need an old school laptop or could it work with USB?

Scott I think you can get an adapter/cable to switch from serial to UBS.
I bought a Dell that has a serial connection.And also with a sound card
in the laptop.

Thanks Randy

Kurt K
05-07-2006, 12:32 PM
Scott I think you can get an adapter/cable to switch from serial to UBS.
I bought a Dell that has a serial connection.And also with a sound card
in the laptop.

Thanks Randy
Like Randy says, you can buy USB-to-serial adapters. They work, although in my experience, the communications is significantly slower. However, that won't be a big deal for how you plan on using it.

1FASTSC
05-07-2006, 03:01 PM
I'll bet my house that one doesnt have to understand how to tune to have even a 9 second 1/4 turbo car let alone a 12 or 13 second one..

I'm damn near running 11s in an every day driven 2 liter econobox with 4 doors. Pump gas, full interior, street tires (not drag radials).

Out of everything done to my car, the tuning is BY FAR the most important. If I didn't understand that I would have just thrown parts at the car and not understood why they weren't working.

On a forced induction car, the TUNING is the MOST important thing.

XxSlowpokexX
05-07-2006, 05:29 PM
Having tuning be important and needing to understand tuning in order to have a fast car are two completely seperate animals.

My turbo v8 (306) cougar 748 rwhp was tuned once...Done..Runs great last It ran. Has a Batch fire old school DFI setup. I didnt originally tune it. Now tell me why I need to know how to tune it? I do but explain to me why?

Several supercharged EFI v8 fords I've owned. Tuned once...The EEC wasnt even touched....All of these cars ran great till I sold them or ripped them apart.... All in the 400-500rwhp range. 6-14 psi range. Hell didnt even have to go into the EEC or go after market EFI

If you are CONSTANTLY paying someone to tune your car...
either they have no idea what they are doing or somethings wrong with your stuff.

You build a combination and it SHOULD NOT have to be tuned again unless not originally tuned correctly.

So tell me why someone needs to know or even understand how to tune an EFI setup to own a fast car???? I'd much rather pay someoen once to tune my car then to buy all the equipment I need and do all the learning I need to do...To do it myself...Even though I did....Why should I have to to own a fast forced induction car?

Whats cheaper..Having someone tune it....Or buying all the stuff yourself...Wasting countless hours of your time....And for what? To want and need are two seperate entities..

BTW,,,,WHats cheaper...Experimenting tuning and blowing up your own car after buying everything you need to do so properly...Or paying someone to tune it right?...And most likely better then you ever would have anyway?

You guys make no sence sometimes

Conan56
05-07-2006, 10:11 PM
Anyone In San Jose Cali area willing to test fit a turbo kit?
I have been in contact with a vendor that builds turbo kits for V6 mustangs
He is willing to build them for Thunderbirds also But he needs a car to
take measurements off of and test fit. He wants to see if his Manifolds for the Mustang can be modified to fit the Thunderbird


Email me [email protected]


if your interested in testing out a turbo kit

1FASTSC
05-07-2006, 10:14 PM
Why not just pay for someone to do everything then? You can pay someone to change your spark plugs too, that doesn't mean that they'll gap them correctly, or know that you're running 20lbs of boost when the stock computer thinks it's only seeing 12lbs and the guy gaps them for stock boost pressure.

You do things yourself so that you know they're done right. You had someone tune your car, I can't blame you, but you should atleast understand the concept of what's going on with your ecu the same way you should understand the concept of other features, and problems of your car.

Normall when you go to a tuner, he's going to tune the car pretty conservative to keep in line with changes in weather, gas, etc. By being able to tune the car yourself, you can run more efficiently and make changes for different seasons.

When I was tuning my own car, I would retune the car every 3 months or so to acomodate for the climate and gas. This tuning meant, in a lot of cases, 30hp plus or minus. It makes that much of a difference.

So, in short, you can own a 1000hp car and not know how to tune, yes. BUT when something goes wrong, it's just one less thing you're left in the dark about and have to pay someon BIG money to do for you.

I'm not sure about SC's but a custom dyno tune for my car will run anywhere from 400-600 bucks, I'd rather pay the 300 for a wideband, 600 for a piggy back and take a laptop and tune the stupid thing myself.

Hope that clears it up for you.

XxSlowpokexX
05-08-2006, 12:31 AM
Idealy everyone should ...But not everyone can. 99% of the population cant. And I have a conservative tune on my turbo car..I just dont think risking explosion by being on the verge is worth an extra XXXX amount of power. Especially with a turbo car where weather alone can cause a boost spiek enough to grenande a motor and teh boost controlers arnt quick enough to compensate

I see where you are comming from but realize that a majority of car enthusists will never ever go there. When you tune o n teh verge..Things blow up

Pablo94SC
05-08-2006, 01:41 AM
Why not just pay for someone to do everything then?

You don't have to know how to tune a car to be a car enthusiast, design/build a car, or even own and drive one. Example: race teams. See the word TEAM? That means a group of individuals who have combined their knowledge in order to accomplish a goal. They have specialists who deal with specific functions of the car. Do you think every professional driver knows how to tune the car he is driving?

That's why there are people who get paid to tune cars. There wouldn't be a market if everyone could do it, or if the equipment was affordable enough for everyone. But I guess you think everyone who owns a car should also have a full machine shop, a dyno, and an alignment machine in his garage. :rolleyes:

1FASTSC
05-08-2006, 07:06 AM
No, but they should have access to all of them.


Race teams are pretty much an invalid point as we're enthusiests here, not in the car business for the most part.

xThunderbirdSCx
05-08-2006, 09:38 AM
Do you think every professional driver knows how to tune the car he is driving?

See: Days of Thunder

XxSlowpokexX
05-08-2006, 10:37 AM
Race teams are pretty much an invalid point as we're enthusiests here, not in the car business for the most part.


Exactly we are enthusiests!!!!!..Not professional tuners. We enjoy our cars. Some enjoy building, some tuning, some driving and some all of the above. But to be an enthisiest one need not know how to do anything but drive! (and some cant even do that properly!) If tuning a hobby for you so be it. If I were a tuner. I'd be making a living at it!

Lets get back to the turbo discussion. We may all have different opinions on what makes us enthusiests but the topic at hand is Turbos.

So what do we feel would be a properly sized turbo for our application an dbrands. Perhaps we can talk about various compressor maps and thier efficiency!.

XR7 Dave
05-08-2006, 12:10 PM
Exactly we are enthusiests!!!!!..Not professional tuners. We enjoy our cars. Some enjoy building, some tuning, some driving and some all of the above. But to be an enthisiest one need not know how to do anything but drive! (and some cant even do that properly!) If tuning a hobby for you so be it. If I were a tuner. I'd be making a living at it!

Lets get back to the turbo discussion. We may all have different opinions on what makes us enthusiests but the topic at hand is Turbos.

So what do we feel would be a properly sized turbo for our application an dbrands. Perhaps we can talk about various compressor maps and thier efficiency!.

Some people would rather argue. I've been trying to help but evidently my help is not needed.

super red91
05-08-2006, 12:23 PM
I talked to matt and he suggested a 62-1 with a P-tirm exhaust wheel and a .81 A/R exhaust housing which on the 3.8 is good for 450-480rwhp. Anything more than that and he suggested a T67, which wheel and A/R would work good with the T67?

XxSlowpokexX
05-08-2006, 02:11 PM
Some people would rather argue. I've been trying to help but evidently my help is not needed.

I think any and all help is needed.

As far as tuning if thats what you are reffering to...We should actually have a forum specifically dedicated to that.

XxSlowpokexX
06-23-2006, 12:27 AM
Hmmmm SO as we get closer a word from an unamed sponsor! hehe



I see a lot of confusion and hearsay on here and I would like to attempt to clear some of it up both in here, and in practice with a project I’m currently linked to. I will if possible attempt to keep all brand names out of my discussions to try and keep things from sounding like a commercial and I will not speak of the project I am working on.

First Engine Management:
Be it a standalone or EEC Manipulation as long as it is not a piggyback (EEC tuner and certain chips excluded as being a piggy back) there is no black magic it is simply math, feedback and input. With that being said, there are a LOT of rules that need to be adhered to and the basic principals of how your engine operates, why it operates and what your feed back is telling you is needed BEFORE you try and tune a vehicle. Once a vehicle is PROPERLY tuned on a load bearing dynamometer you will never have to tune it again SO LONG AS YOU DO NOT ALTER A MAJOR PART IN THE SYSTEM. This means at different altitudes, different temperatures, and different climate the vehicle will still remain in a “SAFE” and “Competitive” tune.

THIS INCLUDES:
Knowing what type of hardware/software you are using. Everything about the engine from Injector type, size, etc down to cam, maf, map, etc … the list goes on and on. If you do not know the BASICS and how these pieces of hardware work together and what will come about if you link them together in a system, then you are tuning dangerously and quite simply blind. I can not explain how important this part is. If you put parts together that do not work, you are creating a hardware issue that CAN NOT BE TUNED OUT. It would be the equivalent of getting angry with your computers software tech support because your computer won’t boot, even though it was you whom left your computer unplugged.

There is more to tuning a vehicle then strapping it to the dynamometer holding the pedal to the floor and hoping things go ok. And if they don’t there simply isn’t enough time to let off and save a motor. Proper technique and tools are necessary for tuning. The art of “Steady State Tuning” is the proper and safest way to tune a vehicle. I will not go into how to steady state, but I will mention some of the advantages. When in steady state you are tuning 1 single part of a map at a time. This gives you feed back of what you are doing for each and every change you make right there and then. It is the SAFEST way to tune b/c you are allowing the dynamometer to hold the vehicle and if things start to go haywire it will happen VERY slowly … not to mention prediction of the next part of the map is already easily attainable. This prediction based on steady state will get you within 6% or less of where you need to be. This 6% is more then safe enough so long as you error on the conservative side. Doing dynamometer pulls will not do this and all information attained is after the fact and could be too late. Even when trying to error on the conservative side things CAN AND DO happen in a dynamic environment that can not be controlled or predicted. If you can not steady state then you can not tune part throttle and you can not tune safely. There is NO way around this. The better tuners of the world all agree with this method. That includes the engineers for F1, NASCAR, FIA etc …



Now Moving onto Turbo’s:
The import crowd is looked down on because no matter where you live, you have “that kid” who received his/her mother’s economy box as his/her first vehicle. They promptly modify it to be obnoxious and ruin any quantifiable reason for any human to actually want to operate the vehicle. However, on the other end of the spectrum are people spending a LOT of time and money engineering, testing, and developing products that make 1.6L engines produce hp numbers and reliability that domestic drivers should be envious of. I’m not here to say that imports are the way to go, and that everyone should sell their American car and buy an import. I’m simply saying that for them, their goals are not tied to doing things “The Domestic Way”. They aren’t afraid to embrace technology and try new things. So what am I getting at? We need to embrace and try new technology. If a 1.6L can make 400 wheel hp drive on pump gas be street able and fun to drive then why can’t we do it with more cubic inches and cylinder heads that are close to the efficiency of the OHC engines. Because honestly, the efficiency of a well prepped OHV head is close if not dead on with OHC engines.

Just one example I want to throw out there. Porsche is considered a “Super Car”. Yet the efficiency of one of those nasty air cooled engines is HORRID. For every CFM of air they ingest their return on HP is extremely LOW! Yet they are making 800+hp on 93 unleaded by using technology to their advantage.

Technology isn’t always the new gadget that is out on the market. The new electronic gizmo or thing, technology extends to titanium retainers and keepers, aluminum rods, high tech coatings, composite turbo wheels that virtually eliminate turbo lag, flow bench testing multiple parts etc … etc … etc. The list goes on and on.

FACT: for a given CFM rate of input a Turbo will ALWAYS make more hp then a Supercharger be it positive displacement or centrifugal. Reason being is turbo power while not free the energy needed to spool a turbo is significantly less then spinning even a centrifugal supercharger. The only additional hp adder that requires less crank power to use is Nitrous Oxide.

FACT: Turbo chargers DO like bigger cams. You can still make plenty of hp without them, but the rules of physics does not change when it comes to making more hp by getting more air IN and OUT of an engine.

FACT: Using hp output to decide who will go down a drag strip faster will NEVER work. Chassis development is key to getting down a track. If someone has a better chassis then another person and makes less hp they have a good chance of going faster through the ¼ mile as they are transferring MORE power to the pavement. I have first hand knowledge of this as I am part of a team that works with an EXTREAMLY fast 10” tire class car that runs Big Cubic Inches and Nitrous Oxide yet we are still VERY competitive. The car doesn’t make as much power as the turbo cars, but chassis development is FAR superior. So even though we are using an inferior engine combination we are STILL competitive.

I see Buick’s Turbo 3.8 being brought up in these threads on a regular basis. That motor is the biggest ~~~ I have ever laid eyes on. The Ford 3.8 is far superior in just about every aspect but the GN’s are in the 8’s and faster. We have yet to see a SC in the 10’s(without nitrous). Not every GN uses a pre-programmed chip. A majority of the faster GN’s use standalone engine management. A properly tuned and set up GN will make a LOT of power, run extremely fast at the track and drive on the street all day long without a hint of a problem. So why are GN’s soooooo much faster then SC’s? Lets go back to use of technology. They are using a more efficient way to cram air into an engine then SC’s are, they are controlling their ignition and fuel in a more efficient way the most SC owners are, and they are setting up their chassis to get down the drag strip better then most SC owners are. It truly is that simple. No black magic.

As far as “Kits” go, I would like to point out Greaddy, HKS, and Blitz. They have “bolt on kits” for several import vehicles that once installed run properly right out of the box. So saying that putting a kit together is impossible is simply ignorance talking.

On a final note, procedures are the same from vehicle to vehicle IF YOU KNOW THE PROPER PROCEDURES. Setting up a turbo kit on a Honda or a SC and tuning it IS THE SAME. The parts, engine management, and numbers will be different, but the procedure is a universal constant. Do not make up your own rules of physics; don’t overlook the obvious and the simple. The MN-12 isn’t a secret platform that the basics simply won’t work on. There is NO smoke and there are no mirrors it has all been done before just not by this specific community.

BUT IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!<~~my disclaimer

XR7 Dave
06-23-2006, 09:39 AM
Carlisle Land Owner strikes again. :rolleyes:

Toms-SC
06-23-2006, 10:05 AM
Holy snap 600 HP here we come :rolleyes:

XR7inWI
06-23-2006, 10:51 AM
Carlisle Land Owner strikes again. :rolleyes:
I was thinking the EXACT same thing Dave. :rolleyes:

XxSlowpokexX
06-23-2006, 12:16 PM
Holy snap 600 HP here we come

Actually looking for 400rwhp on a stock longblock. Realistically.

David Neibert
06-23-2006, 04:39 PM
Actually looking for 400rwhp on a stock longblock. Realistically.

Damon,

Is Jason (AKA Carlisle Land Owner) going to be involved in building or tuning your turbo project ? I thought he was a race car only guy.

David

XxSlowpokexX
06-24-2006, 01:46 AM
David,

I've known Jason for a few years now and yes he would be helping me as I am no tuning expert. He also knows more about turbos then I do and the whole concept to reality will be taking place by a group of us. We feel that 400rwhp on a stock long block is possable. Turbo sizing will be that so I can achieve 600rwhp plus. (not that I even want to come close to that but just in case) Twin or single hasnt been decieded. Fitment will be key here. Thats the one variable that may put a kabosh on things. I am not willing to give up one ammenity of the SC for the turbo.As far as him only working on race cars. I cant speak for him however a 400rwhp 3.8 SC is a race car around these parts :O)

Damon

cudaz101
06-27-2006, 05:12 AM
Johnny Boos has already broke 400rwhp with a stock block SC engine with Twin Turbos. He made a 10sec pass with his stang and is now shooting for a 9sec pass with a NEW turbo setup.

LINK
http://www.a23turbo.com/motor.html


Brad

seawalkersee
06-27-2006, 06:53 AM
Weird...GM coils...and is a mustang.

Chris

cudaz101
06-27-2006, 07:29 AM
Weird...GM coils...and is a mustang.

Chris


Negative Chris...Those are (DFU's) Direct Fire Units that come with a tec3 setup. Nothing GM about it...

Not too bad for a pair of scrub tbird turbos...The new setup is gonna raise alot of eyebrows. The new Turbos' he is using are capable of 1000HP...Still going to use the stock bottom end too...The dude is semi-nuts and VERY talented.


Brad

XxSlowpokexX
06-27-2006, 09:39 AM
I dont plan on using a cam or doing any head work at first plus hes using a TEC III system. But we shall see. Reality speaks in the end and 400rwhp is very obtainable. Now that the mustang v6 guys have completely embraced turbo technology....We will only see more and more good things to come

CarlisleLandOwn
06-30-2006, 12:19 PM
Carlisle Land Owner strikes again. :rolleyes:

Is there something you would like to add to help further the discussion? Perhaps some of the information is incorrect? Let me know, I'm willing to discuss.

XR7 Dave
06-30-2006, 03:45 PM
Is there something you would like to add to help further the discussion? Perhaps some of the information is incorrect? Let me know, I'm willing to discuss.

Thanks for the patronizing statements. Sorry, I have no desire to discuss anything with you. I do find it funny how your arrogant and closed minded attitude is clearly evident in anything you type without the reader having any pre-existing notion that you authored it. That's funny right there. :)

XxSlowpokexX
06-30-2006, 05:35 PM
Thanks for the patronizing statements. Sorry, I have no desire to discuss anything with you. I do find it funny how your arrogant and closed minded attitude is clearly evident in anything you type without the reader having any pre-existing notion that you authored it. That's funny right there. :)

Children play nice...Ive been a good boy lately....No?

If I can do it anyone can

CarlisleLandOwn
06-30-2006, 07:05 PM
Thanks for the patronizing statements. Sorry, I have no desire to discuss anything with you. I do find it funny how your arrogant and closed minded attitude is clearly evident in anything you type without the reader having any pre-existing notion that you authored it. That's funny right there. :)


Gotcha. Cause if I were you I wouldn't want to get into a factual debate with CLO infront of all of my customers so CLO could point out the art of black magic doesn't exist and its all a scam to dupe people into believing what ever it is you want them to believe. Now THAT RIGHT THERE is funny.

CMac89
06-30-2006, 07:12 PM
Facts and logic clearly rule out all scam's and beliefs. The difference between male and female. Now that's funny.

Super XR7
06-30-2006, 08:35 PM
Pardon me, but what was this thread about? Something about turbos and Supercoupes?

Mike

Super XR7
06-30-2006, 08:38 PM
Weird...GM coils...and is a mustang.

Chris

TEC 3 DFU coils, but it does have a GM IAC!

Mike