Edelbrock manifold going on TT mustang *PICS*

[Winters98GT]

opcorn:

 

[lightblade]

First of all he has a STOCK 2V BLOCK, and it probably has lasted this long because he doesn't make a ton of power down low where it puts the most strain on the engine.

Yes and no, high rpm is normally where the weak link will let go which is the stock rods, plus he doesnt run that boost, it says he normal keeps it down to 9psi so thats just a run for a dyno pull he did.

Second, your video shows nothing about spooling vs rpm, all you see are the boost gauge and thats it

I posted 2 vids, here is the one that has rpm as well I have an open wastegate that dumps to atmosphere so when im at full boost you can here as its loud as crap.
YouTube - ‪07 Mustang 67mm billet turbo spool‬‏

Third you have a 3V which is crazy different in so many ways such as head design, intake design, exhaust design, fuel system etc...

Crazy different? lol whats crazy about one more intake valve per cylinder and variable cam timing, although mine is limited. Thats besides the point this is a discussion about turbos and how they work, this setup he made would perform just as bad on a 3v.

Fourth and final, don't bash his setup, if he likes it then ok. You come off all hurt because his "slow spooling twins" made more power on a stock engine then your 'built' engine.

Constructive criticism, personnaly i would set the car on fire if it performed that bad with a twin setup, but I gave have him pointers on how to increase spool and powerband without sacrificing peak power and efficiency.

BTW to the op its not all about peak numbers its about power under the curve. This is how a turbo graph should look full spool/boost low in the rpm range and hp/tq that holds up top.

Now that thats over, who the hell are you? You obviously have nothing to add here, so quit nutswinging and carry on. Oh, forgot this is the talk section, i try to keep all my topics tech related and talk to people with experience on the subject matter...

To the op sorry to gunk up your thread, that new manifold and tb/elbow should peform nicely. I love to see custom turbo setups, it just seems to me your leaving alot on the table right now.

 

[sneaky98gt]

opcorn:

opcorn:

Pass the butter, please?

 

[tank_567]

Hey All I asked is how he was making that much HP on a stock engine over a built one, I did not need a lesson on a turbo from hotmustang331,Plus I just started to get into my turbos power band around 15lbs of boost b/c it was unable to hold 12.5lbs and always dropped below that after hitting peak boost @ 4000+rpm. Good luck with the eddy intake im leaving the thread alone enjoy.

 

[midnightdriver]

Now that thats over, who the hell are you? You obviously have nothing to add here, so quit nutswinging and carry on. Oh, forgot this is the talk section, i try to keep all my topics tech related and talk to people with experience on the subject matter...

First - I am a sn95 mustang owner and posted because I enjoy other mustang owners achievements (or corvette ) and felt that the bashing was not necessary for what the OP post was all about.

Second - Quit "nutswinging", How old are you that you have to resort to a childish attack. All I said was don't rip on him for his setup, and you respond back with this. You say you like to keep all your posts "tech" related, well bashing is not "tech" related. He posted to show us his new stuff not get a lecture on what he is doing wrong,

Third - Experience on the subject matter? I don't need a big E- Peen and don't need to flaunt my knowledge. But if you insist, I have dealt with turbos for 4 years now, and have helped build an engine pushing 65psi of boost (it was a diesel engine obviously) but have also dealt with gas turbo engines as well. I have been involved in the discussion, know information about and continue learning more about the subjects of;

- waste-gates
- non-wastegate
- blow-off Valves
- turbo compressor sizes
- turbo wheel sizes
- exhaust housing sizes
- sizing turbo to engine
- Pre-turbo Exhaust size
- Post-Turbo Exhaust size
- Header vs. Manifold
- Fuel Injector sizes and flow rates vs. turbo size
- Tuning

You get the point


*disclaimer*

I AM NOT AN EXPERT ON TURBOS OR ENGINES, that is not how I am trying to come off, I just told you since you asked.

*disclaimer*

 

[lightblade]

I actually laughed out loud after reading this. I think I use to write papers in 5th grade where I put first, second, and third at the beginning of all my paragraphs hahhaha!

My question was rhetorical, I didnt know you were so sensitive,( well i thought you might be thats why i made the joke about being a nutswinger since it says your from nor cal lol) you came in saying dont bash his setup like its gonna hurt his feelings, but obviously you seem to be more upset about it for some reason....

Honestly made me think of this lol
YouTube - ‪LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!‬‏


Anyways, I cant hang with that long list of bullets and your articulate grammer skills, you will win every argument you ever have with all that experience lol, im out.

 

[navarro98gt]

There is a lot of good information in this thread…..It’s a shame that people can’t have a constructive conversation without getting all bent out of shape.

 

[N8Dogg98]

First of all he has a STOCK 2V BLOCK, and it probably has lasted this long because he doesn't make a ton of power down low where it puts the most strain on the engine.

Second, your video shows nothing about spooling vs rpm, all you see are the boost gauge and thats it.

Third you have a 3V which is crazy different in so many ways such as head design, intake design, exhaust design, fuel system etc.

Fourth and final, don't bash his setup, if he likes it then ok. You come off all hurt because his "slow spooling twins" made more power on a stock engine then your 'built' engine.

First - I am a sn95 mustang owner and posted because I enjoy other mustang owners achievements (or corvette ) and felt that the bashing was not necessary for what the OP post was all about.

Second - Quit "nutswinging", How old are you that you have to resort to a childish attack. All I said was don't rip on him for his setup, and you respond back with this. You say you like to keep all your posts "tech" related, well bashing is not "tech" related. He posted to show us his new stuff not get a lecture on what he is doing wrong,

Third - Experience on the subject matter? I don't need a big E- Peen and don't need to flaunt my knowledge. But if you insist, I have dealt with turbos for 4 years now, and have helped build an engine pushing 65psi of boost (it was a diesel engine obviously) but have also dealt with gas turbo engines as well. I have been involved in the discussion, know information about and continue learning more about the subjects of;

- waste-gates
- non-wastegate
- blow-off Valves
- turbo compressor sizes
- turbo wheel sizes
- exhaust housing sizes
- sizing turbo to engine
- Pre-turbo Exhaust size
- Post-Turbo Exhaust size
- Header vs. Manifold
- Fuel Injector sizes and flow rates vs. turbo size
- Tuning

You get the point


*disclaimer*

I AM NOT AN EXPERT ON TURBOS OR ENGINES, that is not how I am trying to come off, I just told you since you asked.

*disclaimer*

No reason to get all excited about it. I was enjoying the debate between Lightblade and hotmustang331. There's a lot that can be gained from sitting back and listening to what they both have to say. All that happened here was constructive criticizm from one which resulting in a debate between both about turbo setups. I for one would like to see this debate continue so that I may learn more.

 

[Stumbaugh]

No reason to get all excited about it. I was enjoying the debate between Lightblade and hotmustang331. There's a lot that can be gained from sitting back and listening to what they both have to say. All that happened here was constructive criticizm from one which resulting in a debate between both about turbo setups. I for one would like to see this debate continue so that I may learn more.

I'm with you Nate. The best way to learn is with either hands on training, or listening to people more knowledgable.

And then midnightdriver had to go and ruin everything for us.....geez.

 

[midnightdriver]

I'm with you Nate. The best way to learn is with either hands on training, or listening to people more knowledgable.

And then midnightdriver had to go and ruin everything for us.....geez.

Well I apologize to you guys, I didn't mean to ruin the thread I just felt that he was bashing not doing constructive criticism. Just know what its like, along with almost everyone on here, to put a bunch of work and time into you car. The have someone, come and talk your project down in a manner that I viewed as uncool.

 

[N8Dogg98]

Well I apologize to you guys, I didn't mean to ruin the thread I just felt that he was bashing not doing constructive criticism. Just know what its like, along with almost everyone on here, to put a bunch of work and time into you car. The have someone, come and talk your project down in a manner that I viewed as uncool.

No worries bud. It sounds like there are two guys with different philosophies about how to set up a turbo car, and I'd really like to hear more about their differences in opinion so that I may come out with more understanding of them.

 

[midnightdriver]

I actually laughed out loud after reading this. I think I use to write papers in 5th grade where I put first, second, and third at the beginning of all my paragraphs hahhaha!

My question was rhetorical, I didnt know you were so sensitive,( well i thought you might be thats why i made the joke about being a nutswinger since it says your from nor cal lol) you came in saying dont bash his setup like its gonna hurt his feelings, but obviously you seem to be more upset about it for some reason....

Honestly made me think of this lol
YouTube - ‪LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!‬‏


Anyways, I cant hang with that long list of bullets and your articulate grammer skills, you will win every argument you ever have with all that experience lol, im out.

Just for the record, not to drag this out but I am not "sensitive" just because I stated what I believed was occurring and simple answered your question and knew it was rhetorical. View it as you will, because I can't change your mind.


For the rest of stangnet, here is a good link I have had for quite awhile. Like all things on the internet, don't believe 100% of the data, take it with a grain of salt as they say and continue doing research.

Here you go

http://horsepowercalculators.net/turbocalculator/our-turbo-calculator-explained

 

[Ares]

What size throttle body is that? I assume 90mm as I didn't notice it mentioned.

 

[d98gt]

We'll have to see that car when we goto the Texas mile in October! I'll even do a friendly call out at SAR if you are interested in running a slow GT

 

[hotmustang331]

Where back presusre becomes an issue for overall power is after the turbo(s), not between the engine and the turbo, once the cars at target boost and the wastegate is fully open theres almost no back pressure here sense the pressurized exhuast coming out of the engine is just going right out the wastegate. This is the number one reason why boost drops off a little bit in the upper rpms since there is alot less back pressure now so it reads less but you still make power, this is also why dumping the wastegate to amtosphere is more efficient than routing it back to the downpipe and you can pick up a little power this way.

I agree that backpressure after turbo has HUGE effects on power, but the power loss is mainly caused by sound wave pulses that bounce back and impact the impeller wheel.
So there is little to no backpressure once at full boost, because its going out of the wastegate? Thats the problem, lack of understanding of how the system works...the waste gate is dynamic..its not just full open once you hit target boost. T-76GTS Backpressure test data

The above link shows different back pressure tests of a 76GTS...they only played with exhaust post turbo through. OP trapped the same MPH with 2PSI less boost after opening up the exhaust some. There was about 50HP left if he added the 2PSI back...so thats roughly what it gained him.

My setup made 604rwhp at 14psi with a.96 ar housing. I went to a .68 housing and still made 605rwhp at 14psi and increased spool around 200-300 rpms. And my entire power/tq curve was higher through out the rpm range. This was with no changes to the wg spring or boost controller. At relatively low boost levels ie 10-20psi turbine flow is more importnat for efficiencey and spool. Its when you start running 20-30+psi where a turbine with not enough flow can hurt peak power. On a v8 at the 15psi theres really no power loss. You can get away with the larger exhuast housings since you have 2 turbos so spool isnt hurt as much but those larger housings arent gaining you any peak power over say a .81 or .68 housing.

I used to run .68 housings on my 57MM setup...caused the car to float exhaust the valves over 5700RPM @ just 8PSI. Now no issues up to 14PSI.
Your car has VVT and has VERY well flowing intake ports but with still low flowing exhaust ports...so your not going to be effected nearly as much as the 2Vs. My reply was to a question on a 2V about how im making the power. Was this on the same dyno and same day? Have grapghs?

Boost at the manifold is just a measure of restriction and is almost completely centerd around how well the engine can take in and push out air. So yes the manifold, heads cams, engine dispalcement and exhuast does come into play. But the biggest factor here is the engine. I think you are a little confused and seems like your trying to say on someone else setup it would read more boost to explain the power, but this its just not the case. It would more rely on engine mods like heads/cams work, compression, stroke etc.

almost everything effects the "boost" numbers... the key is FLOW.

Your never going to have a 1:1 ratio unless you have a 6" diameter downpipe dumped to atmosphere right after the turbo. Besides 1:2 is ideal bp, your turbine does need some back pressure.
Hows your boost curve look? It will tell you alot about how the setup is working if you have dyno graphs to post up, also what are the specs on the motor?

1:2 is the max you want to run. 1:1.5 is considered good. Please go to the turboforums and read. Here is a quote from the tech section of myturbodiesel.com "As a rule of thumb, you don’t want more than a 1:1.5 ratio of boost to backpressure. For example, if you are making 10psi of boost you don't want more than 15-18 psi of backpressure. If so, then the turbine side could benefit from more air flow and you’ll make more horsepower for every pound of boost you run."

Edit i see on your vid i says stage 1 cams so thats the reason you only see 14ish boost and make more power. But your setup has way too big of piping and no back pressure and spools so ridiculous slow. You dont even hit full boost till jsut before you let out. A twin turbo setup should make full boost way down low in the rpm range. I have an eboost2 as well love it!

Actually I went from small piping (2.5) to 3ich and gained almost 1000RPM of spoolup. I used to only hit 11.9PSI on the dyno @ 6100RPMs...now I get that closer to 5200RPMs....so there goes that theory. Post turbo piping cannot be too free flowing....make it as big as you can.

Found your graphs. You have almost no power band/spool its like you dont get full spooled till 5000 rpms no boost curve though. Looks alot like a centi supercharger graph. Very weak for a twin trubo setup to say the least.

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/808244-twin-turbo-mustang-dyno-results-yep-its-me-d.html

My car is setup from the highway...and actually a built motor which I do not have yet. I dont care about instant torque on this car...when I want that, I jump in my cobra. Besides, ever hear about a little thing called brake boosting? Also whats with the focus on a twin setup? I can make an almost identical power curve with the right sized single...twins has nothing to do with where my power "should" be.

So your saying your car is setup for the track? Is it stick or auto? Ever run it down the 1320?
I bet it cant even make full boost in first gear.
You dont have enough motor to spool that setup which is sad since its twin turbos.
That looks like a setup you would see 400+ cube motors or that run 200 shots of no2 down low to get the turbo's spooled.

The lack of back pressure after the turbo's as your piping is so big and free flowing, that combined with .96 ar is why your setup spools so so slow. At your boost/power level a turbine housing swap will not effect peak power at all. I would swap both turbine housings to .68 ar. You will make the same peak power but also increase power band and spool and the car will be alot faster.

Nope it is not...its setup for the highway rollons. Stock 3650 with spec stage 3 clutch...stock rearend. Only took it with my old exhaust setup @ 550RWHP and street tires. 12.0 @ 125 @ 12PSI. I ran it to check the trap....which seems to have bested your 3V when you ran it making 550RWHP @ 12PSI, plus your much uber superior spoolup and torque curve. You make it sound like my car is useless and makes no power. If I wanted to go for an ET, I just need to leave on antilag with slicks and it would stay @ 14PSI the entire run...but my trans and rear will not hold up to that...thus I baby it at the track.

Some info of turbine housing
TurboByGarrett.com - Turbo Tech102

Turbine A/R - Turbine performance is greatly affected by changing the A/R of the housing, as it is used to adjust the flow capacity of the turbine. Using a smaller A/R will increase the exhaust gas velocity into the turbine wheel. This provides increased turbine power at lower engine speeds, resulting in a quicker boost rise. However, a small A/R also causes the flow to enter the wheel more tangentially, which reduces the ultimate flow capacity of the turbine wheel. This will tend to increase exhaust backpressure and hence reduce the engine's ability to "breathe" effectively at high RPM, adversely affecting peak engine power.

Ok....lets actually read what you quoted lol. It backs up what I am saying...may not happen in 100% of the cases depending on the setup, but it IS one of the reasons for why my 2V with heads that flow 160CFM is making more power than a built 3V with heads that flow around 230CFM intake.

You have twin 61s correct? A 61mm with .68 will easily flow to 500-600hp before you seen any loss in performance from any back pressure. With two turbo's were talkin 800-900hp with that housing size.

Where did this knowledge come from? This is coming from your opinion? Someone that has had a turbo stang for around a year?

Yes and no, high rpm is normally where the weak link will let go which is the stock rods, plus he doesnt run that boost, it says he normal keeps it down to 9psi so thats just a run for a dyno pull he did.

I made 30+ 3rd-4th gear pulls at mostly 12.5PSI a few months ago...some @ 9PSI and some @ 14PSI. 95K miles. 14PSI wasnt just for the dyno...I street tuned it in on 14PSI and then have ran it several times since.

this setup he made would perform just as bad on a 3v.
Constructive criticism, personnaly i would set the car on fire if it performed that bad with a twin setup

Thanks


BTW to the op its not all about peak numbers its about power under the curve. This is how a turbo graph should look full spool/boost low in the rpm range and hp/tq that holds up top.

Whos graph is this? Hmm how much did all the extra power help you at the track? 3 tenths faster than mine..but wait I had a 2.0 60 vs your 1.8....all that ET was simply from my purposfully weak launch and resulting 60'. Very little was from power under the curve.

To the op sorry to gunk up your thread, that new manifold and tb/elbow should peform nicely. I love to see custom turbo setups, it just seems to me your leaving alot on the table right now.

Thanks...the system will perform as planned once I throw in the built motor. Its designed for 1000+RWHP...im simply running it as is to do things noone else has done. Before I buy the motor, I wanted to prove that the whole "stock motors blow past 450RWHP" theory was not accurate. I run around @ 509RWHP and thats my lowest setpoint.

 

[hotmustang331]

Hey All I asked is how he was making that much HP on a stock engine over a built one, I did not need a lesson on a turbo from hotmustang331,Plus I just started to get into my turbos power band around 15lbs of boost b/c it was unable to hold 12.5lbs and always dropped below that after hitting peak boost @ 4000+rpm. Good luck with the eddy intake im leaving the thread alone enjoy.

You asked a question and I answered it. You asked how I made more than your stock motor and a whole list of other cars with built motors with all their turbo specs. Please dont try and act as if your asking how my engine is handling the power...you were trying to figure out why I was making more at a given boost.
If you dont want to learn, thats fine, if you dont have anything to add to the topic, thats fine, but dont ask a question and then bail without even a thanks, while acting like you didnt need the answer in the first place.

What size throttle body is that? I assume 90mm as I didn't notice it mentioned.

Yes sir...accufab 90MM

We'll have to see that car when we goto the Texas mile in October! I'll even do a friendly call out at SAR if you are interested in running a slow GT

LOL we have been meaning to meet up at the track for years...yes that would be great to make it happen! Although I still have lots to do before I feel its safe to run at the track...I always drive to the track haha so next time I want to be able to beat on it. (built rear and magnum T-56 are on my list )


ALSO midnightdriver, thanks for trying to back my car up...lighthouse is def on the rude/blunt side, but a lot of his theory was not accurate, so I was laughing more than anything.

 

[tank_567]

Ha thats funny how im running low 11s on street tires(that was on stock rear ) w/ 100 less hp(450rwhp)and only 3mph slower...hmmmm So if you want I just got another stock bottom end from a friend really cheap and installing in the next two weeks. You want to meet up down at mustang week and run them and see whos turbo kit is "efficient"? OH and I will be on stock heads/cams as well. BTW you will be running a VERTon a stock t45 as well. I love to crash cars w/ 100-200 more hp than me its fun good luck with the built THANKS of the lesson!

 

[d98gt]

LOL we have been meaning to meet up at the track for years...yes that would be great to make it happen! Although I still have lots to do before I feel its safe to run at the track...I always drive to the track haha so next time I want to be able to beat on it. (built rear and magnum T-56 are on my list )

October is when we (as in Winters97gt (Mark) and any other Stangnet members that are rolling with us) will be in the area prior to Texas Mile; that gives you plenty of time
I'll be hundreds of miles from the house so I better not break

 

[Mr. Rustypwnz]

[/IMG]dang everyone is copying my crap now lol

that is one sick N/A intake! and even better on the bewst. Thing would pull to 7k so fast. Dont hate on the sweet cai i had on there at the time lol.