367 MJ/hr Miata
02-20-2010, 11:59 AM
#62
Hello everyone, my name is Kory. I have a fully built 1991 1.8L orgional 1.6 block miata running on 20 psi of boost. I have wrenched, and wrenched on this car day in and out. If you are attempting a turbo project and need some advice or help, let me know, I've see and done it all, even tunned my megasquirt myself with a AFR in boost @ 11.1-11.2. Im not a firm believer in swapping motors for a V8, if your gonna go that rout thats fine, however, save a couple more thousand dollars and buy a mustang then or camaro.. Just my opinion. Like I said, if you need help, let me know. Good luck to everyone, zoom zoom zoom.
Also dipshit, Your "afr in boost" looks ENTIRELY too low. Read to see what megaquirt says if you dont believe me.
Flex Fuel with MegaSquirt
9.87 on there. Google it, you will find the same answer on every site. There is less stored energy in e85 than gas, so you need more. You should be running richer than stoich in boost though. Why don't you google something before you lie about it and make yourself look like a freaking moron. Why don't you save you parents a couple of a thousand dollarz more and kill yourself. Your the one that needs to buy a mustang or camaro, V6 preferably, and get on one of those sites and tell them how your going to twin turbo it on E85 because you don't like V8's. Oh and another thing, its only 2 farkin zooms, not 3, this isn't a five dollar footlongs commercial you ***. Incase you didn't get the memo. I am just going to put simply what we are all trying to tell you.
0
02-20-2010, 12:39 PM
#63
Midnightmiata's entire life on MT.net.
2007 - I'm looking for a turbo kit.
2009 - who in Iowa wants to start a turbo miata club
2010 - I'm here to help spread my vast knowledge of turbo Miatas. Here's pics of my rice body kit and impossible dyno numbers. Screw you guys, I'm going home.
2007 - I'm looking for a turbo kit.
2009 - who in Iowa wants to start a turbo miata club
2010 - I'm here to help spread my vast knowledge of turbo Miatas. Here's pics of my rice body kit and impossible dyno numbers. Screw you guys, I'm going home.
0
02-20-2010, 01:00 PM
#64
Dynoed @ 346 whp running 16 psi boost. Car runs on E85 flex fuel.
When it went up for sale, his car suddenly got exponentially more efficient, loosing almost no power, but turning down the boost 4psi. So, he must be making a lot of heat from 16-20... yea, that's it.
When it went up for sale, his car suddenly got exponentially more efficient, loosing almost no power, but turning down the boost 4psi. So, he must be making a lot of heat from 16-20... yea, that's it.
0
02-20-2010, 02:22 PM
#67
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
Ok just for a rough go at it...
7500 RPM
85 % VE @ 7500 RPM
20 PSI
100% Compressor Efficiency
100% IC Efficiency
70 F Air temp
1800 CC
All that =
475 CFM
33.67 Lb/min
365 HP (gross)
256 fl/lbs @ 7500 RPM
Of course if the compressor is at 50% efficiency the air temp raises to 361 F and with an 80% IC efficiency it brings it back down to 129 F. This reduces power to 330 HP.
Perhaps that is optimistic?
That is barely on the map for a T-3 60 if that helps any. But it is on the map and about 65% efficient. Just a little better than the 15G map that was posted.
7500 RPM
85 % VE @ 7500 RPM
20 PSI
100% Compressor Efficiency
100% IC Efficiency
70 F Air temp
1800 CC
All that =
475 CFM
33.67 Lb/min
365 HP (gross)
256 fl/lbs @ 7500 RPM
Of course if the compressor is at 50% efficiency the air temp raises to 361 F and with an 80% IC efficiency it brings it back down to 129 F. This reduces power to 330 HP.
Perhaps that is optimistic?
That is barely on the map for a T-3 60 if that helps any. But it is on the map and about 65% efficient. Just a little better than the 15G map that was posted.
let's make it easy...
lb/min / AFR / (BSFC/60) = 367BHP
X / 11.5 / .00916 = 367
X = 38.65 lb/min required to make 367BHP
at 20psi, the 15g compressor reaches 60% heat efficiency at 30 lb/min or 288BHP (this doesn't mean you'll make 288HP, but that the compressor can support it)
There's no way you'll be able to squeeze another 8 lb/min (80HP) with the temperatures it'll be dumping out.
Here's what that turbo run at 18psi will output:
0
02-20-2010, 03:37 PM
#71
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jax Fl
Posts: 459
Total Cats: 31
As this thread sits dieing i cant help but feel a bit sad inside that the epic lolz will no longer continue as well as the disappointment of never hearing from a certain someone on the subject.
Rest in piece epic thread, and goodnight.
Rest in piece epic thread, and goodnight.
0
02-20-2010, 04:30 PM
#72
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shelbina, MO (North East)
Posts: 332
Total Cats: 1
let's make it easy...
lb/min / AFR / (BSFC/60) = 367BHP
X / 11.5 / .00916 = 367
X = 38.65 lb/min required to make 367BHP
at 20psi, the 15g compressor reaches 60% heat efficiency at 30 lb/min or 288BHP (this doesn't mean you'll make 288HP, but that the compressor can support it)
There's no way you'll be able to squeeze another 8 lb/min (80HP) with the temperatures it'll be dumping out.
Here's what that turbo run at 18psi will output:
lb/min / AFR / (BSFC/60) = 367BHP
X / 11.5 / .00916 = 367
X = 38.65 lb/min required to make 367BHP
at 20psi, the 15g compressor reaches 60% heat efficiency at 30 lb/min or 288BHP (this doesn't mean you'll make 288HP, but that the compressor can support it)
There's no way you'll be able to squeeze another 8 lb/min (80HP) with the temperatures it'll be dumping out.
Here's what that turbo run at 18psi will output:
Without an intercooler on a 70 degree day the output temp @ 60% would be 313 F which would drop air flow to 23 lbs/min. I guess turbocalc knows what it is doing? With the IC density comes back up, which increases VE and TQ output.
Send me a PM with an email Scott and I'll send you some goodies.
0
02-20-2010, 04:30 PM
#73
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
lets make it even easier...
Per Corky, the lowest output achieved on a turbo setup was .052 bhp/cid psi and the highest is .077 bhp/cid psi.
Example: A 110 cid engine with 20 psi boost
Lower value = 0.052 x 110 x (20 + 14.7) = 199 bhp
Higher value = 0.077 x 110 x (20 + 14.7)= 293 bhp
Still down 74 bhp to see the best results Corky has ever measured of out a turbo's performance.
Per Corky, the lowest output achieved on a turbo setup was .052 bhp/cid psi and the highest is .077 bhp/cid psi.
Example: A 110 cid engine with 20 psi boost
Lower value = 0.052 x 110 x (20 + 14.7) = 199 bhp
Higher value = 0.077 x 110 x (20 + 14.7)= 293 bhp
Still down 74 bhp to see the best results Corky has ever measured of out a turbo's performance.
0
02-20-2010, 04:42 PM
#74
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I could even go as far as: 367/120 -1 = 2.05 = 205% gain
2.05 x 14.7 = 30psi required.
or i could do something like :
MAP required = lb/min x Gas Constant x (460 + IM Temp) / VE x (rpm/2) x cid
367 x AFR x BFSC/60 = 40.3 lb/min
40.3 x 639.6 x (460 + 100) / .85 x 3600 x 110 = 14434492 / 336600 = 42.88apsi = 42.88 -14.7 = 28psi required
0
02-20-2010, 04:59 PM
#75
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shelbina, MO (North East)
Posts: 332
Total Cats: 1
I like to grossly simplify. I know all the math for the air density and crap, if I look at straight up compressor efficiency, I know it cant handle it.
I could even go as far as: 367/120 -1 = 2.05 = 205% gain
2.05 x 14.7 = 30psi required.
or i could do something like :
MAP required = lb/min x Gas Constant x (460 + IM Temp) / VE x (rpm/2) x cid
367 x AFR x BFSC/60 = 40.3 lb/min
40.3 x 639.6 x (460 + 100) / .85 x 3600 x 110 = 14434492 / 336600 = 42.88apsi = 42.88 -14.7 = 28psi required
I could even go as far as: 367/120 -1 = 2.05 = 205% gain
2.05 x 14.7 = 30psi required.
or i could do something like :
MAP required = lb/min x Gas Constant x (460 + IM Temp) / VE x (rpm/2) x cid
367 x AFR x BFSC/60 = 40.3 lb/min
40.3 x 639.6 x (460 + 100) / .85 x 3600 x 110 = 14434492 / 336600 = 42.88apsi = 42.88 -14.7 = 28psi required
HAHA! I love this place.
For the pulling tractor...
Lower value = 0.052 x 340 x (65 + 15) = 1414 bhp
Higher value = 0.077 x 340 x (65 + 15)= 2094 bhp
0
02-20-2010, 07:19 PM
#79
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,022
Total Cats: 6,589
Just out of curiosity...
1 watt = 1 joule per second.
So, 367 MJ = 101.9 kWh, thus 367 MJ / hr = 101.9 kWh / hr or 101.9 kW continuous.
101.9 kW = 136.6 HP.
1 watt = 1 joule per second.
So, 367 MJ = 101.9 kWh, thus 367 MJ / hr = 101.9 kWh / hr or 101.9 kW continuous.
101.9 kW = 136.6 HP.
0
