|
M1+V8+track+Turbo?
|
Hell, I could just listen to that over and over.
|
not to horrid for 5 psi.
|
twin seems pointless. but cool!
|
wow. That car looks pretty much useless with that much power. But that would be a bad ass daily.
|
yeah. spin city interesting though
|
twins were easier maybe? lol.
That was sweet. |
ive soiled myself
|
Originally Posted by miatamania
(Post 126122)
twins were easier maybe? lol.
That was sweet. It's not like he put one turbo off each side of the exhaust; he split a single exit exhaust to accept both turbine inlets...one good sized turbo would probably have more potential, since running twins at 5psi just means 2.5psi each. I mean it works, but it could be better. |
i might be wrong but im gonna have to disagree with you on the 2.5psi each equalling 5psi braineack, both turbos will be at 5psi just flowing more cfm
though it is pointless to split a single pipe for twins |
If he's running 5 PSI of boost, as measured at the intake manifold, then each turbo is outputting 2.5 PSI. If they were putting out 5 PSI each, then he'd have 10 PSI of boost.
|
you also split the required CFM for each turbo, not flow more.
so for example, he says it's making 356 at the flywheel. required airflow for that is 39.12 lb/min or 566CFM. each turbo needs to flow 19.56 lb/min (283CFM) |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 126171)
It's not like he put one turbo off each side of the exhaust; he split a single exit exhaust to accept both turbine inlets...one good sized turbo would probably have more potential, since running twins at 5psi just means 2.5psi each. I mean it works, but it could be better.
|
you could possibly argure, that it's easier to find a more efficient map with two small turbos to work within 1.35PR and 20 lb/min as opposed to one turbo at 1.35PR and 40 lb/min.
|
Sirnixalot and scott are 1/2 correct. Each turbo is putting out 5psi at 1/2 of the overall airflow. You look at the compressor map at 5psi and 1/2 flow, not 2.5psi and 1/2 airflow.
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 126199)
you also split the required CFM for each turbo, not flow more.
so for example, he says it's making 356 at the flywheel. required airflow for that is 39.12 lb/min or 566CFM. each turbo needs to flow 19.56 lb/min (283CFM) I would love it to be the other way around. Then my two turbos would have lots of headroom instead of blowing hot air. Think about it like this. If you have two air compressor tanks (or turbos) at 100psi at either end of your warehouse and you join the two tanks with a pipe, you still have 100psi in the pipe, not 200psi. Now you hook up a big ass die grinder to the pipe that requires 300cfm at 100psi to operate. Each of the two air compressors must produce 150cfm at 100psi to supply the die grinder. |
professor tim! :bowdown:
|
yeah what tim said :gay:
|
356 bhp. almost doesn't seem worth the effort to use another motor...
|
Originally Posted by TurboTim
(Post 126229)
Sirnixalot and scott are 1/2 correct. Each turbo is putting out 5psi at 1/2 of the overall airflow. You look at the compressor map at 5psi and 1/2 flow, not 2.5psi and 1/2 airflow.
That's right, but at 5psi, not 2.5. I would love it to be the other way around. Then my two turbos would have lots of headroom instead of blowing hot air. Think about it like this. If you have two air compressor tanks (or turbos) at 100psi at either end of your warehouse and you join the two tanks with a pipe, you still have 100psi in the pipe, not 200psi. Now you hook up a big ass die grinder to the pipe that requires 300cfm at 100psi to operate. Each of the two air compressors must produce 150cfm at 100psi to supply the die grinder. yeah, correct, you should know...silly thing is i knew that, I was still looking at 1.35PR and half the CFM....as in #14 |
The car is awesome. The driver needs to suck less.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:45 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands