Notices
Insert BS here A place to discuss anything you want

M1+V8+track+Turbo?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 08:34 PM
  #1  
steelrat's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 513
Total Cats: 0
Default M1+V8+track+Turbo?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCclA3wiLgQ

It's an interesting watch.... Bueller? Bueller?

Dave,
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 08:42 PM
  #2  
xturner's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,221
Total Cats: 296
From: Round Pond, ME
Default

Hell, I could just listen to that over and over.
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 09:21 PM
  #3  
magnamx-5's Avatar
:(
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,255
Total Cats: 4
From: nowhere
Default

not to horrid for 5 psi.
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 09:50 PM
  #4  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

twin seems pointless. but cool!
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 11:16 PM
  #5  
hustler's Avatar
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
From: Republic of Dallas
Default

wow. That car looks pretty much useless with that much power. But that would be a bad *** daily.
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 11:17 PM
  #6  
Pitlab77's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,914
Total Cats: 5
From: Houston
Default

yeah. spin city interesting though
Old Jun 25, 2007 | 11:19 PM
  #7  
miatamania's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,160
Total Cats: 6
From: Concord, North Carolina
Default

twins were easier maybe? lol.

That was sweet.
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 01:41 AM
  #8  
Rage_Kage's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 473
Total Cats: 1
From: Edmond, OK
Default

ive soiled myself
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 08:59 AM
  #9  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by miatamania
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.
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 10:01 AM
  #10  
Sirnixalot's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 440
Total Cats: 17
From: Cayman Islands
Default

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
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 10:27 AM
  #11  
bripab007's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,450
Total Cats: -1
Default

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.
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 10:40 AM
  #12  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

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)
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 11:26 AM
  #13  
Arkmage's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,895
Total Cats: 0
From: Houston, TX
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
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.
Maybe he did it that way to reduce intake temps?
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 11:44 AM
  #14  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

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.
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 11:56 AM
  #15  
TurboTim's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,035
Total Cats: 425
From: Chesterfield, NJ
Default

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
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)
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 *** 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.

Last edited by TurboTim; Jun 26, 2007 at 12:14 PM.
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 12:41 PM
  #16  
m2cupcar's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,486
Total Cats: 372
From: Atlanta
Default

professor tim!
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 03:56 PM
  #17  
Sirnixalot's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 440
Total Cats: 17
From: Cayman Islands
Default

yeah what tim said :gay:
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 04:08 PM
  #18  
y8s's Avatar
y8s
DEI liberal femininity
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 574
From: Fake Virginia
Default

356 bhp. almost doesn't seem worth the effort to use another motor...
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 04:23 PM
  #19  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by TurboTim
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 *** 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
Old Jun 26, 2007 | 11:47 PM
  #20  
BenR's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,862
Total Cats: 1
From: ABQ, NM
Default

The car is awesome. The driver needs to suck less.




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:59 PM.