83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

In most cases that's a pretty safe range. I'd try tweaking it up or down a little from there and see where it runs faster. The only car that I've got enough data logs to know for sure about is my '97 WS6, and that one runs fastest with the O2's hovering around 890mV at WOT, but it's one of those things… I wouldn't trust a car tuned by the narrow band O2 numbers, but if I knew where the car ran best I'd have some faith in using them to tweak things on track day.

89JYturbo

For all you guys wondering about the lag associated with this system, let me give you a comparison. This week at work we installed a Turbonetics kit on a 99 Civic Si. This system used a T3/T4 Hybrid (ball bearings, .63AR stage 3 turbine, t04b 57trim compressor with .50AR). It has a FMIC with 2.5" piping. This turbo was a bit overkill for the B16 (1.6 litre), and had very similar turbo lag characteristics as my cavalier. Now this Civic would probably mutilate my cavvy on the strip, it goes to show that there is surprisingly little lag even with the turbo mounted far rearward. Hey, as long as you are matting the throttle while the engine is in its powerband, there is very little lag. Just food for thought.

I'm anxious for someone to try this on a third gen and give us some results. Anyone thinking about trying it yet?!

85berlinetta2.8

how about on a lincoln towncar?

how did the turbo affect your gas milage

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Newer towncars (90 or 92 and up, somewhere in there, whenever they went to the more rounded lines) don’t really have room, they’ve got an oddball little pocket that the muffler sits in, and the muffler looks sorta like a loaded diaper, all dented and weird shaped. Second, I’d be very surprised if you had enough flow back there to accomplish anything. If you’ve ever tried it, they sound almost the same with the muffler removed, there’s 4 cats and a really restrictive y-pipe before you get to the muffler.

Anyway, why would you want to do this with a car that’s actually known for catching fire? (seach the web, there’s websites devoted to that model and up towncars burning)

89JYturbo

No surprises as far as the gas milage is concerned. If you use the turbo the milage gets worse. The worst milage I have obtained with the turbo is 22mpg. If you baby it (don't use the turbo) it gets the same as NA (25-26mpg on country roads).

85berlinetta2.8

my towncar already caught fire. its an electrical problem on all 5.0 fords with the alternator wire. any car can catch fire if maintence is neglected. and my 86 towncar will have a dual cat 5.0 ho in it with headers by end of next month. i think it would be a cool setup if i could add the turbo cheaply and still maintain decent gas milage. with gas being over 1$ a litre here = 3.33$ a gallon.

RSFreak

That is a kickass setup! I have been thinking alot about what kind of remote turbo setup I could do since seeing this post. My 15 yearold son looked at it and asked, "Why not mount the turbo in the trunk?" I thought that was a damn good question and I couldn't answer it. Why not mount it in the trunk? You wouldn't have to worry about it getting wet or speed-bumped or whatever.

TechSmurf

It solves some problems, but creates others.. for one, exhaust systems aren't designed to be rigidly mounted, which would be preferrable for the turbo in that situation... they're designed to flex a bit with the movement of the motor, hence all the silly rubber hangers that love to break. The other problem is the inevitable exhaust leak, and that exhaust leaking into the passenger compartment... aaand then you have to make sure there's nothing flamable in the trunk.. and then you have to find a way to create good positive airflow in the trunk...

Just creates a decent amount of hassle

EDIT -- I suppose the fire hazard and airflow concerns wouldn't be quite as great with the rear-mount.. but I've never seen one in person, so I err on the safe side here.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Technically, it’s illegal in most areas to route exhaust through the passenger compartment. Secondly, a turbo isn’t something that you really want inside… it gets hot enough to set flammable stuff on fire, has hot oil going through it, and you’d be shocked how much noise an air intake makes

89JYturbo

Yes, mounting the turbo in the trunk will probably create more problems than it would solve. I know in the pics it looks like the turbo is vulnerable, but it is actually tucked up under and protected pretty well, so water and speed bumps will not be a problem unless you go off roading. If you look under the car, the only part of the turbo lower than the bumper is the wasgate actuator, and even that is pretty high off the road surface.

RSFreak

Yeah, I guess exhaust gasses in the pass compartment would not be a good thing. I get drowsy enough on the drive to work!

89JYturbo

Update on the syatem.

I now have over 175K on the car (approx 1500 with the turbo). Still running good. However, I have measured oil inlet temps to the scavenge pump at 188° after approx 2 hour drive. Pump diaphragm is only rated to 180°. Still working fine though.

And of course, I had to try some more boost. Yesterday I made an electronic two stage boost controller for it. I teed off the wastgate line and connected it to a emissions vacuum solinoid from an old chrysler. I wired the solenoid to a switch in the passenger compartment, and when you flip the switch it bleeds off boost pressure form the wasgate signal line, therefore raising boost.

I couldn't believe how hard it was to tune in the high boost setting! First I tried it with no restrictors, and boost didn't raise at all (maybe 1psi at the most). Then I installed a ristrictor betweeen the compressor outlet and the tee, and the boost went way too high! I seen 12 psi on my gage before POOF- I blew an intake hose- but it pulled like crazy. Oops- I should know better than trying this on a 175K motor in my daily driver. But of course, I had to keep trying. I added another restrictor in the bleed line and now the high boost setting is 8-9psi. Works pretty good- Low setting is at 5-6psi, high setting up at 8-9psi.

I feel like the guys in The Fast and The Furious- I nail the throttle and get set back in my seat, then the turbo comes in and it pulls harder, then we hit the high boost switch and go even faster. Think I should add two stages of Noss to it yet? Oh wait, that might blow off my intake manifold. JK

Seriously though, I can't wait to get it back to the track and see if I can get a good launch, and with the added boost maybe get low low 14's. Also I would like to try the two stage boost control on my IROC, but with the two turbos it may be even harder to tune in the pressures.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I like the idea of a pushbutton on the wheel or shifter… hit it for a momentary higher boost level when you need it, let it go for the normal boost level. Makes some sense since most engines should be happy at a higher boost level for a few seconds and then would start detonating. That’s not to F&F for me. You could also rigging an “accumulator” in the line going to the wastegate to allow the boost to momentarily spike and then drop to the preset level, basically achieving the same effect (it wouldn’t spike in normal driving since rolling in slowly should fill the accumulator by the time you reach the wastegate preset if things are sized correctly).

89JYturbo

This type of boost controller is cheap, and it really impresses people riding with me when they feel that second punch just from flipping a switch. Try that with a supercharger!

MrDude_1

what are you using for a restrictor to "jet" the boost signal bleed off?

TechSmurf

I tend to shy away from bleeds, myself. Personal preference on mechanical boost controllers:

http://www.xmission.com/~dempsey/perform/grainger.htm
http://www.xmission.com/~dempsey/perform/2stage.htm
http://home.att.net/~jason510/ManualController.htm
http://minimopar.knizefamily.net/per...ulti-eepc.html

89JYturbo

I was actually planning on using one of those adjustable needle valve and ball/spring types of manual boost controllers. But the bleed system I thew together was quick, easy, and very cheap (free). The orfices for the bleeds are accually short pieces of plastic vacuum line found on most newer cars. I had an assortment of engines lying out behind our shop and was able to take a varity of different sized plastic line that provided the needed restriction. The plastic vacuum lines had approx 5/32" od and .080" id. Of course, just about any thing can work for a restrictor, it will just take some trial and error testing.

Here is a quick diagram of my system. Without restrictor 'A' in place, there was very little boost increase. With only restrictor 'A' in place, there was an overboost condition (>12psi!). Both 'A' and 'B' were needed for my application to allow a low setting of of 5-6psi and high setting of 8-9psi. You could also add an adjustable neddle valve in place of restrictor 'B' to allow for an adjustable high side setting. Also note that the sizes of the restrictors were estimated- they will need to be different sizes for different applications. Fortunately, it is easy to switch out the restrictors to dial it in.

This system works on the low boost setting with no power to the vacuum solenoid (the vacuum solenoid blocks boost pressure flow to the bleed). This allows the boost pressure to maintain the stock WG setting. When you flip the switch in the passenger compartment, the vacuum solenoid opens and bleeds off boost pressure feed to the WG actuator, therefore requiring a higher manifold pressure to open the WG.

contactpatch

How much pressure can a typical muffler tolerate?
I assume that a pressure ratio of
three to one would be adaquate.
.
contact

89JYturbo

Another update, this time bad news. The turbo and oiling system is still functioning properly, but the Cartech FMU failed and caused the fuel pressure to stick at over 100psi (the gage I was using only read to 100psi). This caused the factory FPR diaphragm to rupture and pump the engine full of fuel. Luckily it finally let go at work (I had it idling in front of my shop to do some quick tests when it stalled). I replaced the FPR and FMU, and we're up and running again. Not sure what caused the FMU to fail, but I hope it doesn't happen again.

BTW, there is now 176K on the car and original engine, 3K on the turbo system. This was the first problem I had since the install.

I swapped in cooler R42LTSM plugs to help prevent detonation. I also got a hold of some 14" BFG drag radials and would like to soon get some track times with the increased boost and better traction.

primate

i think its awesome to see someone do this. ya, the remote turbos arent the "proper, or in" setup, but they work, and you managed to drop a great deal of time off your 1/4 mile time by taking parts around your garage and in 2 days of garage work, you now have a car that will shock the heck out of alot of people. and once the tuning issues are resolved, i am sure it will be awesome.

innovative thinking is always good, because even if you fail, the knowledge is out there to get closer to a setup that works.
turbos in the early 80's were considered taboo, not we have people inventing systems in their garage. :rockon:

i think that the search for power is a constant, and witnessing someone trying something different should be applauded. looking through all the diy kits makes me feel pretty confident that i will be able to do my car a lot cheaper with damn good results.

btw, i own a 99 ta vert and my project is a 70 camaro with a TT lt1.

MrDude_1

when your FMU fails, it fails rich?

89JYturbo

Not in every case. In my case, the fuel control diaphragm (a thin stainless steel plate) cracked and caused the incoming fuel pressure to block the flow to the tank because the pressure was allowed to push on the back side of the s.s. diaphragm. It acted just like a one way check valve. I verified this theory by testing the FMU with air pressure. If I just bleed a small amount of shop air into the FMU, it would pass through. But if I held my blow nozzle anything over 1/4 open, the FMU would stop flowing. This indicates that the fuel pump would have dead headed to max fuel pressure.

89JYturbo

Got to Maple Grove's Friday Night Grudge Racing this weekend. We had good, cool air, and was able to really put the turbo system though it's paces.

I was very happy with the results:

Run 1- 14.65@95.1 with a 2.19 60'- (this was at the street 6psi setting)

Run 2-14.31@97.27; 2.18 60'
Run 3-14.20@98.96; 2.23 60'

Run 4-13.96@98.72; 2.09 60'

The last three runs were on my stage 2 boost setting (10psi). I reached my goal to break into the 13s with the system. Bottom line- the remote mount turbo systems do work. Who would have guessed you could get a 178K mile 2.8 into the 13's without even pulling the valve covers?

I was glad to finally get the thing to launch as well. The short times aren't great, but quite an imporvement over the 2.4s I ran last track outing. I knew after my first 10psi run that this thing could hit the 13's if I could get it out of the hole properly.

kairles

iTrader: (2)

wow I think I gonna try this on my beater 86' n/a 300zx

89JYturbo

I agree here too, to an extent. The compressor MUST be sized properly for the engine. However, remember those RPM islands on the compressor maps? They represent compressor (turbo) speed. In order to bring the compressor into it's efficiency range, you have to get it up to speed! Do this with a smaller turbine housing than what would be used on the manifold mounted turbo. A larger turbine housing will put the turbo in it's peak efficiency near the end of the engine's efficiency, hence a poor match. Yes, I know it offers a restriction on top-end flow, but remeber we are working with a less than ideal turbo system.

If there is no room in the engine compartment, it is worth the effort. In most cases, it is signaificantly easier to run the charge pipe from the rear than to plumb a complete IC system in the confines of the engine compartment. I'm sure my Cavvy has less engine compartment room than your Honda. And since it is my daily driver, I could not relocate everthing to make the needed room (I had only two days to build the system). I agree about the oil system, but mine has held up for 7k miles so far with no problems.

The charge pipe will not cool the air as well as an IC (too little surface area), but it will also have no (very little) pressure drop. And as far as the long charge pipe causing lag- I'm pretty sure it doesn't contribute much to it. The long distance between the exhaust manifold and the turbine, and therefore cooler exhaust gases, is what makes up the slightly higher boost threshold. I can see 10psi of boost by 3k RPM, so it is not too bad. Lag is really only evident if you punch the throttle under the boost threshold (3k).

Yes, the cat is in the stock position, and it passed PA emissions inspection last month.

The boost refrence for the WG is on the compressor outlet. It is a junkyard Volvo turbo, and it had the fitting there already.

Finally, I am not trying to defend this remote mount theory in any way. I know it is not ideal, but I do feel the advantages outway the disadvantages for a budget turbo system in a vehicle with little engine compartment room. I built this system to test it, so I can speek about it from experience, not just opinion. My car can beat most imports, and even a lot of v8 Camaro's and Mustangs out there with an otherwise stock 179k mile 2.8L V6. That, to me anyway, is a real testament to the systems performance. The A/C, emissions equipement, and everything else is in place and functions normally.

stu

Thanks for answering my questions. I wasn't at all trying to dog your set-up in any way. I was trying to establish a foot hold in your community by spewing everything I know all at once to shut anyone up who thinks I shouldn't be allowed to post here.

I've never been a fan of this set-up, but the more I think about it, the more I realize how much easier it would be to turbo a car with little after market support (such as yours). Once I graduate college and set-up a stable full time job, I don't see any reason why I can't have every car I own be turbocharged just for fun with this method.

89JYturbo

Bingo!

B4Ctom1

I think Moroso sells a oil pump used for pre priming an engine before start up, this pump might make a good return pump. Have you considered an in line fuel pump like a holley red or blue, or an EFI in line pump, both of them have no plastic or rubber parts in the pump portion meaning they would be less temperature sensative.

89JYturbo

I tried a carter fuel pump that used flat vanes similar to the oil pump on a 700r4 trans. I thought it would be perfect- but it only pumped the oil one time, then quit (it was brand new). I also tried a 6.5 diesel lift pump, and it also failed. It pumped oil very well, but not enough volume. After driving for 5 minutes, the exhaust smoked like crazy. Swapped to the pump I have now and had no further problems. I would like to find a pump that would not use any plastic or rubber, but haven't done anymore investigation since what I have is working well.

I will look into the moroso oil priming pump though. Thanks.

B4Ctom1

I can't seem to find the Moroso one myself to show as an example

jbeier

Well, I have a 3rd gen Cavalier I'd like to try it on, lol. I know it's not an F-bod, but this is what I could afford. I'd like to chat with you to see if this would be a feasible way to boost my Z24. I live semi close to maple grove as well, and been there a few times in my N20 assisted 2.4 liter Z24. I pulled off quite a few high 13 second passes as well, but now I'm tired of filling bottles all the time. If you are up to it, I'd like to get in contact with you via e-mail to discuss the in and outs of this setup. I already have a T3 turbo sitting in the garage, ready and waiting. And I'm very good with my tig welder too!

89JYturbo

Thanks for your interest in my project. I would consider a conventional turbo system since manifolds are more readily available for your car. If you research that route and find it too costly or requires more modifications than what you prefer, I'm confident you can make a great performance remote mount system with your 2.4 (your starting with a more powerful engine than I did, so the results should be that much more impressive!). If your interested in seeing my car, I should have it at Maple Grove Oct 30th test and tune- its a saturday). If we have good air, I have all intentions of breaking my record best 13.9 run! I'm sure it's possible if I can get my 60' in the 1.8-1.9 range. My 13.90 was on a 2.1 60', which I feel has room for improvement. Two of my buddies are big into Ford Mustangs, and I'm knocking on their door! I want to beat them- one has a 99 Cobra and has a best of 13.7, the other has a 99 GT with a best of 13.8- they both have more $ in their exhaust systems than I have in my turbo!

jbeier

Actually, the cost IS a big factor, but even more so is apperance. Right now my Z24 looks completely stock inside and out. You have no idea just how fun it is to see the looks on peoples faces when they see me return to the staging lanes after a high 13 second run, pop the hood, and have no evidence of any fiddling whatsoever under there. The N20 system is hidden and even people who know I have nitrous find it very hard to find the nozzle, solenoids, and bottle. I still even have the stock intake and a slightly modified airbox. I like the idea of a remote mounted system to keep it looking stock under the hood, although it will take some engineering to run the charge pipes through the stock intake tubing. I just might have to come to Maple Grove on the 30th. We'll see how things go.

89JYturbo

I see. Your after the sleeper effect. I thought the sleeper effect was going to be great on my car too, but the turbine noise is so obvious people don't have to look under the hood to know that it has a turbo. I'm sure you could fit a muffler under there with some careful planning to help quite things down. I would add a muffler, but I like the turbo whistle.

stu

I've got a conventional set-up routed through 2.5" piping with an 18" resonator and a 2.5" straight through muffler and there is no mistaking my turbo. If you set your car up like 89JYturbo, you'll basically be running an open down pipe. Which means there will be nothing sleeper about it.

jbeier

Hmmm, that definately brings up issues then. I've already been accused of having a turbo when people can't find the N20 kit. When I shift, my lower engine mount makes a hissing noise like a BOV. It's probably due to be replaced by now, lol. I still am interested in trying this setup though. I'll just have to see how it goes, and deal with the noise problem as I get to it. If nothing else works, I might just go with a ****-sleeper. Where people think it's stock underhood with nothing but a gaudy chrome tip on a slightly lowered car with 14" steelies on it. That wouldn't be as fun though. It might be amusing the first coulpe times I go to the track though. Well, if I need any tech questions answered, at least I know where to ask.

stu

LOL, sounds familar.

buzz12586

Man this is freaking awesome. I would love to do something like this to my Camaro but I don't think I can run a turbo with TBI?? Would I have to switch to TPI and a new computer??? This would be sweet on a 3rd gen.

TPIMarow6.6

89JYTurbo- is 6psi the highest amount of boost you can run or are you running it at minimum for safety reasons?

89JYturbo

This system is set for two stages of boost. The first stage is 6psi like you mentioned (this is the factory wastegate setting on this particular turbo). The 6psi setting is great for daily driving. But, when I race, I want more boost so I added an electrically controlly bleed to the wastegate signal line controlled by a switch on the dash. When I flip the Stage II switch, it bleeds off a small amount of air to the wastegate actuator, thereby raising the boost to 10psi. The Stage II boost setting is actually adjustable by turning a small bleeder screw I placed at the outlet of the vacuum switching solenoid (see the diagram I posted earlier in this thread).

During testing, I pinched off the wastegate sense line just to see how much boost this system could make. I seen the boost gauge swing past 15psi before I left off the throttle for fear of damaging the engine! If this car wasn't my daily driver and didn't have almost 180,000 miles on the engine, I would try a run at 13-15 psi. For now, I'm happy with a 13.9@99 at a safe 10psi.

89JYturbo

I'm not saying the turbo noise is a bad thing, its just not what you want if your going for the sleeper effect! IMO, the extra turbo noise is a one benefit of the remote mount system!

MrDude_1

i was poking thru some stuff for my ORR car and came across GMs manual trans cooling kit for their C5R race cars. (Part number 12480080)


it includes more but one of the parts is this:

i found the quote from here: http://www.gmgoodwrench.com/perfpart...827&section=pp


12480081 seems like a intresting choice for a scavange pump.
its made by GM to flow high temp oil at a good volume... it may be somthing worth looking into.

jbeier

Well, I'll see if I can make it out to Maple Grove on the 30th. I wanna see this kit in person. I would like to hear how loud it is and such. Then I can make a decision if i really want to do it or not. I'm already running 13's on spray, but I just hate filling a bottle every week or two.

B4Ctom1

very interesting www.gmpartsdirect.com lists it for:

GM PART # 12480081
CATEGORY: All
PACK QTY: 1 CORE CHARGE: $0.00
GM LIST: $512.33
OUR PRICE: $358.63
DESCRIPTION: PUMP

a nice new twist to the idea of an electric oil pump, good job!

89JYturbo

Thanks MrDude_1 for suggesting this pump.

I seen an install of this cooler kit in a Corvette magazine once. I like it except for the price. I wonder if we could get some flow #s on it we know it will do the job before laying out that much money? If it will do the job with OEM reliablilty, I don't mind spending the extra dough. OTOH, I won't be too serious about searching for a replacement pump when the on I have is working perfectly (especially when it only cost $90.00).

MrDude_1

yea, it is a good chunk of change... lol.


im beginning to suspect the cost of the pump is why the STS kit one is so pricy....

btw, if anyone knows where i would start looking for industrial high temp, high volume 12v DC electric pumps, please let me know.. lol.

B4Ctom1

here is my contribution to the oil pump dilema.

http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/w...7671&langId=-1

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Huh, interesting idea, but I would bet 3 things:
- the seals in that thing were never designed to deal with any heat… turbo/engine oil will be warm, if not HOT
- I’m betting that it wasn’t designed for continuous duty
- It wasn’t designed with NVH in mind (it’ll be LOUD)

B4Ctom1

just like the "water" pump he is using now?

jbeier

I'd worry about the heat too. But for $99, it's worth a try.