| Author | Topic |
|---|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide, SA
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 01:42
 
|
 |
Hahahaha...
Bogans 
|
|
|
Location:
Castle Hill NSW
Registered:
March 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:19
|
|
I'm sure i'm not the only one wondering:
Whats wrong with it?
Is it just the length of the plumbing from the turbos to the IC back to the plenum ?
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:22
|
|
| chrishulbert wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 12:19 |
I'm sure i'm not the only one wondering:
Whats wrong with it?
Is it just the length of the plumbing from the turbos to the IC back to the plenum ?
|
You are not alone. The only thing I can see that might have been done better would be the IC plumbing too.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:24
|
|
Length of the piping is just one thing they've cocked up.
The fact the exhaust housings on the turbos are RIGHT near the inlet plenum is more of a concern, especially with no heat-shielding. Then there is the exhaust piping and turbo manifolds which all run around the inlet manifold.
Inlet temps would be massive as they'd be cooled down by the intercooler and then heated back up as they entered the superheated plenum.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:30
|
|
Don't forget what a turbo does when it gets worked hard :
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:41
|
|
Don't forget the idea of any maintenace on the top of the engine, the inability to get any cool air to the engine, the humungously long piping from turbo to I/C and back.
What car is it in, as it looks like a HUGE engine bay. Valiant perhaps ?
Here is another example of a turbo at work
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:43
|
|
I would have assumed that they would be putting on heat-shields on there as the car doesn't look completed.... If not, then yes, I DEFINATELY see some serious issues there.
The engine bay is tight, and although I'm not a huge fan of the design, front-mounted turbo's would have prolly been a better idea in this case.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:45
|
|
|
Heatshields or not, there is still going to be a whole shitload of heat there. I assumed by the fact they had wrapped all the exhaust piping they weren't going to put any more on at least that part.
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:50
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 12:45 |
I assumed by the fact they had wrapped all the exhaust piping they weren't going to put any more on at least that part.
|
Yeah, good point my man.....
So now I'm curious - What would everyone do to make this a better conversion?
As I stated above, I would mount the turbo's infront of the engine. I guess it's still gonna be compromised due to the length of the exhaust manifolds, but the upside would be shorter IC plumbing. I guess another thing to do would be to have 2 IC cores, so the compressor outlet of each turbo could go straight into the core, rather than having to cross the whole bay.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:50
|
|
| bbaacchhyy wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 10:41 |
What car is it in, as it looks like a HUGE engine bay. Valiant perhaps ?
|
VH commie
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:53
|
|
Move the turbos forward of the engine, each going to the sides of the bay, through a cooler at the bottom tank with two inlets each side, with one outlet in the middle at the top then into the TB. Run the exhausts from the turbos down the sides of the engine.
The biggest change I'd do is put it in a decent car.
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 02:55
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 12:53 |
The biggest change I'd do is put it in a decent car.
|
Indeed. What engine is that anyway? A 1UZ?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:10
|
|
|
|
|
Location:
South Australia
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:30
|
|
yeah, that's a pretty stupid turbo design 
Doesn't look like a 1UZ though...looks more like some kind of crumby pushrod V8 to me.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:34
|
|
|
Definetly a 1UZ, note the covers over the dizzies, and the odd coil placement. The TB has been moved though.
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:35
|
|
|
The engine is a holden V8 If you look close enough it will be written on the top of the V.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:37
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 13:35 |
The engine is a holden V8 If you look close enough it will be written on the top of the V.
|
Funniest thing I have read all day.
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:38
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 13:35 |
The engine is a holden V8 If you look close enough it will be written on the top of the V.
|
BAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 03:52
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 11:35 |
The engine is a holden V8 If you look close enough it will be written on the top of the V.
|
And since when do Holden make a V8 that says "V8 FOUR CAM" on the cam covers...wait a minute, since when do Holden make one that has cam covers. 
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide, SA
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:11
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 13:22 |
And since when do Holden make a V8 that says "V8 FOUR CAM" on the cam covers...wait a minute, since when do Holden make one that has cam covers.
|
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:22
|
|
|
woops my bad i am a nong.
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:24
|
|
The ends of the cam covers (bit with lines across it) sort of give it away as a 1UZ I guess.....
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:27
|
|
|
I thought it was a toyota motor at first but wTf would you put it in a 2o= yr old commodore. When it would be cheaper to just stick a VN 5L in there and either turbo or supercharge it let alone get more power out of it cos of its larger capacity and the larger options for mods.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:27
|
|
| bbaacchhyy wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 12:41 |
Here is another example of a turbo at work
|
BTW, this is a pick of the XR6 Turbo from Nizpro that is putting out a measly 1035 HP @ 6800 rpm, and 800 ftlb of Torque from 23psi and 98 Mobil fuel. Hmmmmmmmmmmm
|
|
|
Location:
On your mum!
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:30
|
|
Looks as though 90 degree mandrel bends were on special and hacksaw blades were unobtainable.
If you did not notice what was wrong with the set up (set up being crap but execution not too bad) then you are invited NOT to do any installation work for me.
I think that they may as well have plaed the turbos right next to the cylinder banks and through the bonnet to get them out of teh way (they will be through the bonnet anyway).
Vote 1 Bogan meets turbo.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth, WA
Registered:
May 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:31
|
|
hahaha
anyone seen the 8 turbo ls1???
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:31
|
|
|
Yes but someone stole the car the engine was attached to, no matter how much power it makes it aint going anywhere. Ten bucks say his gearbox wont hold up for a day, max torque threshhold of the manual is 450nm it would need some serious strengthening or a new box to hold up to that kind of power
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:33
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 13:35 |
The engine is a holden V8 If you look close enough it will be written on the top of the V.
|
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 04:35
|
|
NO but I heard of the quad trubo Buggati eb110 that has huge amounts of lag, there is also some new turbo Chrysler concept car that I think has six turbo on for evry two cylinders. It may have only four tubos but I not sure.
The new Buggatti Veyron = 8.0L V16 Quad turbo. 736Kw and 1350Nm
|
|
|
Location:
1st street on the right
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 10:05
|
|
I've seen tidier abortions, excepting the one the resulted in the person who created THAT! 
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
May 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 10:10
|
|
Either way good design or not it will still go like the shtink...
Jezza
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 10:47
|
|
For about 30 seconds... then the plenum will melt!
|
|
|
Location:
Land of Oz
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 10:51
|
|
Hi,
Easy solution: Rip it out and put in a nice NA engine.
As far as the turbo 1000hp engine, all glowing red, you can keep it. There's no way I want some glowing red-hot monster under the bonnet of my car, unless I had an inch or so of asbestos lining. Did I say asbestos..... Hardy Corp, where are you?????
seeyuzz
river
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 14:57
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Wed, 13 October 2004 14:35 |
The new Buggatti Veyron = 8.0L V16 Quad turbo. 736Kw and 1350Nm
|
yup, and twin driveline (each with seperate clutch) for instant gearchange... lag? what lag? it's just 4 x 250hp, each being on a 2L... 250 from 2L is not that hard....
turbos are up high cos the chassis rails and strut towers are tight..
if it was me. i'd reclaim some of the wasted space just in front of the strut towers... make a bit of a hollow there for turbos to sit (so make them near-front, rather than being totally in front of motor and thus heating all the front bits) then stick two big water-to-air coolers where the turbos now sit.. not sure about plenum entry tho.. twin TB? big front one?
what i DO like about this car is the nice big clamps in the IC piping  mmmmmm
Cya, Stewart
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 15:17
|
|
it appears there is no radiator/other stuff in the car
yet, and could be a reason why things are where they are.
I personaly prefer having the turbo's hanging off the front end of the engine, which leads to shorter IC piping etc.
The piping he's got doesn't seem to be the best, maybe a duel entry cooler or something to keep the symetry.. Its possible also that the car is going to have a scoop which could expose both turbo's to decent cooling..
Don't bag the guy who mad it, since he's not on here to defend
his actions/reasons. (unless you got something better to show for it)
Could anyone one here honestly say that it wouldn't go dam hard
when those 2 big boys got going? -- i've seen worse!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 15:19
|
|
|
Not denying hes executed it well, just pointing out the serious shortcomings in the design of it!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth, WA
Registered:
May 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 16:36
|
|
another contender for stupidest turbo design
ok i found the quad turbo ls1
http://www.lateral-g.org/sandlin/
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Wed, 13 October 2004 21:21
|
|
| ae95 wrote on Thu, 14 October 2004 02:36 |
another contender for stupidest turbo design
ok i found the quad turbo ls1
|
It's not quad, it is actually 8 turbos !!!!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 02:59
|
|
any idea as to how much hp that 8 turbo monstrosity makes?
can anyone say turbo lag?
|
|
|
Location:
Baulko Hillo
Registered:
April 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 03:19
|
|
| MR 1GGTE wrote on Thu, 14 October 2004 12:59 |
any idea as to how much hp that 8 turbo monstrosity makes?
can anyone say turbo lag?
|
There was a sound file of it on the dyno floating around.... And it certainly didn't sound laggy!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 03:30
|
|
| MR 1GGTE wrote on Thu, 14 October 2004 10:59 |
any idea as to how much hp that 8 turbo monstrosity makes?
can anyone say turbo lag?
|
Think of it as 8 0.7l engines, with correctly sized turbos, it shouldn't be laggy at all.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 03:39
|
|
interesting...
Any idea on how much power it makes at high revs?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth, WA
Registered:
May 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 06:16
|
|
|
why wouldnt you just get 2 correctly sized turbos and do away with a shitload of piping. imagine hoe many chances they are for a cooler hose to pop off
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 06:45
|
|
this is one of my fav turbo motors
imagine the port velocity you'd get with this bastard!!
a few things to note
two cylinders per turbo..
twin water to air IC cores.. turbos feed inlet air to OPPOSITE bank, which i guess has a 'self-levelling' effect on boost (if one side boosts earlier than other side)
the funny extractor looking things on top are feeding each cylinder individually..
and this is where it goes
|
|
|
Toymods Vice President
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 09:38
|
|
There's a video of that 8 turbo monstrosity on an engine dyno http://www.teasdesign.com/lateral-g/8xturbodyno.as f.
I don't really dig the exhaust manifold design, it seems to merge into a single pipe like a normal log manifold then go forward and get spread out to the turbo's. This doesn't seem like a real efficient setup. Then again I don't think it was built for efficiency in any area other than "OOH AHH" factor.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 09:41
|
|
thats some nice turbo flutter 
|
|
|
I Supported Toymods
Location:
south Melbourne/KL
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Thu, 14 October 2004 12:37
|
|
| bbaacchhyy wrote on Thu, 14 October 2004 07:21 |
| ae95 wrote on Thu, 14 October 2004 02:36 |
another contender for stupidest turbo design
ok i found the quad turbo ls1
|
It's not quad, it is actually 8 turbos !!!!
|
could call it twin quad!!
|
|
|
Location:
wangaratta
Registered:
May 2004
|
|
Re: Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
|
Fri, 15 October 2004 11:08
|
|
in response to that 4 turbo v8 in the front of the camero, the thing is off its guts!!!
it uses indy car turbos ( only weigh 3.6 kgs each!!! )which are made of magnesium alloy comp housing, stainless steel exhaust housing, and lightweight wheels and shafts.
they push 1.73 bar each, which is enough to make 1641KW @ 9200 RPM, and 2511 NM of torque @ 7500RPM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
tell me those kind of figures make u get a hard on 
|
|
|
Vote #1: Stupidest turbo design
