How about... EIGHT TURBOS? On an LS1!?!?!
How about... EIGHT TURBOS? On an LS1!?!?!
No fooling. Check out the dyno video link on this page: http://www.lateral-g.net/sandlin/
I am stunned. :hail: :hail:
I am stunned. :hail: :hail:
Supreme Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,967
Likes: 0
From: Elk Grove Village, IL
Car: 1989 TransAm GTA
Engine: One sweet modified 355 TPI.
Transmission: The kind that shifts....
Is it me, or does it just seem a waste to have 8 turbo's on the car? Does each cylinder REALLY put out enough exhaust to spool the turbo's and make a decent amount of boost?
Seems like its a lot of extra weight and unnessesary hassle if you realy wanted to go fast. I'm no turbo expert, so I could be just way off base and ignorant.
Seems like its a lot of extra weight and unnessesary hassle if you realy wanted to go fast. I'm no turbo expert, so I could be just way off base and ignorant.
Last edited by FruityOne; Jun 15, 2004 at 10:57 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Car: 87 Black Formula
Engine: Rollercammed Lg4
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 10 Bolt Locker
I was just thinking, If you get those turbos small enough, like the flow of two regular ones, wouldn't they spin up real fast and possibly make alot of boost down low?
Well, just a thought...
Well, just a thought...
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
From: SE PA, USA
Car: 89 Camaro IROC-Z
Engine: Intercooled Twin Turbo LQ4
Transmission: Tremec TKO 600
It may not be the most effecient set-up, but it sure looks cool. And its a blast to talk to your buddies about. I marvel at the fabrication skills involved at that place. They got some real talent (and money)!
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,941
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, FL
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 357cid
Transmission: T5 Swap
Axle/Gears: 10bolt 7.5" 3.23 soon to be 3.73
the damn turbo setup is larger than the engine itself... lets see 16 turbos... maybe in parallel hook up like on import tt boost into boost.. i wanna see 300psi!!!:hail:
watched the vid.. that thing has morre whoosh than a fat man running to the car after he heard about the new all you can eat buffet.
watched the vid.. that thing has morre whoosh than a fat man running to the car after he heard about the new all you can eat buffet.
Last edited by Saigon_Bob; Jun 20, 2004 at 09:54 PM.
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 2
From: Caldwell,ID
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
Originally posted by tilstad
I was just thinking, If you get those turbos small enough, like the flow of two regular ones, wouldn't they spin up real fast and possibly make alot of boost down low?
Well, just a thought...
I was just thinking, If you get those turbos small enough, like the flow of two regular ones, wouldn't they spin up real fast and possibly make alot of boost down low?
Well, just a thought...
with 8 turboes you have more mass to spin
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,941
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, FL
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 357cid
Transmission: T5 Swap
Axle/Gears: 10bolt 7.5" 3.23 soon to be 3.73
Originally posted by TwinTurboROC
sorry mark that was just a wasted thought
sorry mark that was just a wasted thought
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 2
From: Caldwell,ID
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
Originally posted by 83 Crossfire TA
Actually, properly sized it the total moment of inertia should be smaller, OTOH, smaller turbos tend to be less efficient.
Actually, properly sized it the total moment of inertia should be smaller, OTOH, smaller turbos tend to be less efficient.
with more turbos you would seem to have more mass to move
more friction
more lots of things
less airflow going through each one
stuff like that
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,028
Likes: 93
From: DC Metro Area
Car: 87TA 87Form 71Mach1 93FleetWB 04Cum
Originally posted by rx7speed
I really don't know about that
with more turbos you would seem to have more mass to move
more friction
more lots of things
less airflow going through each one
stuff like that
I really don't know about that
with more turbos you would seem to have more mass to move
more friction
more lots of things
less airflow going through each one
stuff like that
Then find a large single that will move 8x the air and do the same thing. You’ll find that the large single will take more power to spool, but will also be more efficient at moving that mass of air (assuming a similar design).
When done with twins vs a single you typically get something in the range of 1:2.5 (basically, it will take 2.5x the energy to accelerate the larger turbo then the 2 smaller ones)
Friction ends up negligible once the turbine shaft is supported on it’s oil film.
Not that I’m trying to make an argument that this attocity is a good idea… for most applications a properly sized single will not have any significant lag (assuming the rest of the setup is built appropriately) and will be more efficient, so why use more?
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 2
From: Caldwell,ID
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
Originally posted by 83 Crossfire TA
Weigh a small turbine/compressor wheel, find it’s radius of gyration, calculate it’s moment of inertia. I=K^2M (I= moment of inertia, K= radius of gyration and M=mass)
Then find a large single that will move 8x the air and do the same thing. You’ll find that the large single will take more power to spool, but will also be more efficient at moving that mass of air (assuming a similar design).
When done with twins vs a single you typically get something in the range of 1:2.5 (basically, it will take 2.5x the energy to accelerate the larger turbo then the 2 smaller ones)
Friction ends up negligible once the turbine shaft is supported on it’s oil film.
Not that I’m trying to make an argument that this attocity is a good idea… for most applications a properly sized single will not have any significant lag (assuming the rest of the setup is built appropriately) and will be more efficient, so why use more?
Weigh a small turbine/compressor wheel, find it’s radius of gyration, calculate it’s moment of inertia. I=K^2M (I= moment of inertia, K= radius of gyration and M=mass)
Then find a large single that will move 8x the air and do the same thing. You’ll find that the large single will take more power to spool, but will also be more efficient at moving that mass of air (assuming a similar design).
When done with twins vs a single you typically get something in the range of 1:2.5 (basically, it will take 2.5x the energy to accelerate the larger turbo then the 2 smaller ones)
Friction ends up negligible once the turbine shaft is supported on it’s oil film.
Not that I’m trying to make an argument that this attocity is a good idea… for most applications a properly sized single will not have any significant lag (assuming the rest of the setup is built appropriately) and will be more efficient, so why use more?
kinda like if you find a motor that displacement 8x more air then a honda motor it might weight a little and stuff also right :-p
but not trying to compare a turbo made for huge boost with stock twins
twins vs a single both made to flow the same amount of air
I would say the single would lag les
for one thing I would think mass would be less with the single
but also comes the issue with leverage
I would think that since with twins most the surface are ais closer to the inside the exhuast isn't able to get as much leverage as with a single
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 2
From: Caldwell,ID
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
ack wait
isn't moment of inertia covering the whole pivot point thing and the leverage or whatever you want to call it
isn't moment of inertia covering the whole pivot point thing and the leverage or whatever you want to call it
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,028
Likes: 93
From: DC Metro Area
Car: 87TA 87Form 71Mach1 93FleetWB 04Cum
Moment of inertia is determines the amount of force that must be exerted on it to accelerate it. Oh, and if it helps the radius of gyration is the radius that you could put all the weight of a rotating object at that would act the same as the actual object based on how it’s weight is distributed.
Would you care to rephrase your post, edit it or leave it like it is before I rip it to shreds? Or is that just unnecessary and you understand where/why you’re wrong?
Would you care to rephrase your post, edit it or leave it like it is before I rip it to shreds? Or is that just unnecessary and you understand where/why you’re wrong?
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 2
From: Caldwell,ID
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
Originally posted by 83 Crossfire TA
Moment of inertia is determines the amount of force that must be exerted on it to accelerate it. Oh, and if it helps the radius of gyration is the radius that you could put all the weight of a rotating object at that would act the same as the actual object based on how it’s weight is distributed.
Would you care to rephrase your post, edit it or leave it like it is before I rip it to shreds? Or is that just unnecessary and you understand where/why you’re wrong?
Moment of inertia is determines the amount of force that must be exerted on it to accelerate it. Oh, and if it helps the radius of gyration is the radius that you could put all the weight of a rotating object at that would act the same as the actual object based on how it’s weight is distributed.
Would you care to rephrase your post, edit it or leave it like it is before I rip it to shreds? Or is that just unnecessary and you understand where/why you’re wrong?
least your giving me a chance
and I have seen this discussion somewhere else though and I'm trying to recall what they said but it wasn't just moment of inertia as the only object they talked about
and for the life of me I am trying to recall where or what else they said and I'm not sure
oh well will think about it another time :-)
but still willing to accept any of your advice
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,941
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, FL
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 357cid
Transmission: T5 Swap
Axle/Gears: 10bolt 7.5" 3.23 soon to be 3.73
if you find a TT set up that will push the same amount of boost as one turbo the twins will spool faster becuz the compression impellers are smaller therefore having less drag. the draw back to twins power is maybe a lil less power, more heat in teh engine bay, mounting size/clearnces, money, etc....
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Houston-katy
Car: 1986 Irocz- Houstons Fastest Street
Engine: 408 LS1 w/ 2 stage
Transmission: Turbo 350
Axle/Gears: 3:73,3850 lbs , best of 9.92 @ 138
Originally posted by Saigon_Bob
if you find a TT set up that will push the same amount of boost as one turbo the twins will spool faster becuz the compression impellers are smaller therefore having less drag. the draw back to twins power is maybe a lil less power, more heat in teh engine bay, mounting size/clearnces, money, etc....
if you find a TT set up that will push the same amount of boost as one turbo the twins will spool faster becuz the compression impellers are smaller therefore having less drag. the draw back to twins power is maybe a lil less power, more heat in teh engine bay, mounting size/clearnces, money, etc....
That my friend is why they made nitrous, gas helps spool anything, honestly the guy who built this really needs to find something to do with his money. i had heard it is not making anywhere close to the power the guy wanted
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Houston-katy
Car: 1986 Irocz- Houstons Fastest Street
Engine: 408 LS1 w/ 2 stage
Transmission: Turbo 350
Axle/Gears: 3:73,3850 lbs , best of 9.92 @ 138
im sure it still makes power and moves but you probably power wise could get more out of less
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 968
Likes: 0
From: Montreal\Quebec|Canada
Car: Camaro Z281991 Engine: 5.7L/350 TPI Transmission: TH700R4 ··································· Car: Acura CL 1998
Engine: 3.0L/183
Transmission: 4 spd auto/OD
What a huge waste of money.
Why show off a product that isnt efficient power wise ?
Why show off a product that isnt efficient power wise ?
TGO Supporter


Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,991
Likes: 1
From: Cheyenne, Wyoming
Car: 1992 B4C 1LE
Engine: Proaction 412, Accel singleplane
Transmission: built 700R4 w/custom converter
Axle/Gears: stock w/later 4th gen torsen pos
Originally posted by Guido
8 turbos
800 posts Ive seen about this on other message boards.
8 turbos
800 posts Ive seen about this on other message boards.
Last edited by B4Ctom1; Sep 17, 2004 at 04:52 PM.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,259
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
Car: 1987 Trans Am
I remember a few years ago Pat Musi was experimenting with a 4 turbo setup, but never got it sorted out...due more to the fact it was banned than anything else, from what I understand. Of course, he was going for power, not looks.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bohemian
Aftermarket Product Review
11
Nov 25, 2015 09:38 PM







