Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 129

Thread: Development of the Turbo engines

  1. #101
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Force Fed Mopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Greenville/Spartanburg SC area
    Posts
    7,557

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    I'm digging up more information and pictures. Apparently the interest in the history was noticed and I;ll be a "guest speaker" at the SDAC-27 convention to talk more about what we did. Along those lines I am framing a "straw man" for a good flowing discussion, and digging out more pictures. So that's keeping me a little busy.

    BTW, when I try to post any pictures here I get the message "Sorry, you don't have permission to upload photos." I've emailed in asking how, but received no reply.
    Hopefully this will be videoed for those of us that can't make it this year to see.
    Rob M.
    '89 Turbo GTC

    2.5 TIII stroker, 568 w/ OBX and 3.77 FD

  2. #102
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Wastelands of NJ
    Posts
    729

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    This is fascinating stuff! Too bad Stuart wasn't given free reign over the TIII. Who knows how mega awesome it could have been!

  3. #103
    Supporting Member II Turbo Mopar Contributor Shadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Aubigny, Manitoba, Canada
    Posts
    5,088

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    This is actually quite true.

    The best way to think of these engines is an "airflow processing capability". you want to get a lot in, and a lot out. So one would be wise to look from the point air goes in, to where it comes out (the tailpipe).

    The exhaust manifold design sure looks like a piece of crap, designed by a bad plumber (no argument there). We worked on that and even designed a nice long runner tubular header for the T II engine. We were all kinda shocked that it really didn't help. The way that the Turbocharger inherently works produces high back pressure. At times I saw upwards of 45psi in the inlet to the turbine. With those pressures, the goal is to just get the exhaust gas out. Larger runners or a more elegant design would only work with a larger turbo, that had reduced turbine inlet pressure. But a larger turbo gave us more lag at launch, something the executives didn't want.

    This high turbine inlet pressure is one reason we went to very low, or no overlap camshafts. As first we applied "naturally Aspirated" thinking and increased overlap, and kept loosing power. We finally realized that we were blowing 12psi boost in, bit were working against 35 to 40psi in the exhaust manifold. So until we went to zero degree overlap cams. or a 5 degree clocked a bit, we picked up power. With any overlap on the cam, we were letting exhaust back into the engine.

    We had a restrictive exhaust system too, especially with the mandrel bends behind the catalyst. We fought hard for an improved exhaust system and it just added cost and most did not see the Return on Investment (ROI). I set up one of our executives wit a 2.5" mandrel bent exhaust and a reduced back pressure catalyst and muffler. It still met emissions and noise requirements and it "woke the car up". Even with that car, and a high level executive pushing for change, there was a "why bother" attitude. Our transmissions/clutches were barely holding up and they didn't want more power. And the Torque steer would just get worse. So getting more power beyond the stock Turbo II was not a priority; launch feel and getting a quicker boost rise was. And the suggestion was for a smaller turbo. I had to put on on a car, even though I tried to explain the dynamics and how it was going to become a "choke point". Well, the car launched great and squealed the tires when it launched. Everyone seemed happy, until the engine "tried" to go above 4800rpm, and was "self governed" as the back-pressure was so hihg not enough inlet air could get in. The proverbial "potato in the Tailpipe". So we were kinda stuck as Garret had noting to offer us. And it was their internal oil ring seal that was an issue as it sealed well, but was to tight is caused a HUGE amount of drag on the turbine at idle. And that is when I got permission and started looking at turbo's from KKK, IHI and finally Mitsubishi (MHI). I set up 2 identical cars and took the executives into a small lab where we had equipment to measure turbine speed. At idle, the Garret turbo was sitting there at 0rpm. The MHI was spinning at 13,000prm already. Typical turbine speeds at full output would be ion the 150,000rpm range, so "starting from something" was better than nothing. And the car with the MHI turbo and equivalent a/r and compressor trim launched much better than the Garrett Turbo. Garrett's response was pretty much "this is what we sell, buy it" yet MHI wanted the business and made multiple changes to accommodate us, including a bit lower internal back-pressure.

    The .48a/r Garrett turbo was all I had to chose from as the .63a/r (aka:"super 60") introduced too much launch lag. I was always beaten up for "turbo lag". They wanted quick boost, and low back pressure at Wide Open Throttle. But twin scroll turbo's were in their infantries then. so the MHI was the best I could get. The VNT was an interesting attempt, but we had extreme difficulties controlling it with modulated pressure to the vane actuator can. It BEGGED for a linear actuator for control, but none would stand up to the heat. Build variability exceeded what our control system could manage. And when the carbon/unison ring (the ring that turned the internal vanes) started sticking, there was nothing we could do to control it. Some would only make 7psi "out of the box", while other screamed up to 20psi and him the maximum boost fuel shut off. And the program died quickly.

    The T III was more of a politically driven desire to get Lotus involved. We could have done it, but were not given the task to develop the head. Public relations and executive agenda's made the decision to build that head with Lotus. A 200hp/liter engine was promised by Lotus, and Chrysler engineering could have done it (given the chance). Within the first week I heard of their peak RPM target of beyond 7000rpm. It brought up an issue that I fought for year of fuel injector minimum flow (needed to be stable and consistent for good idle quality) and the maximum flow (called "turn Down Ratio"). The bottom like was there was not enough open intake valve time to get the fuel in at higher engine speeds, and still get a decent idle quality. I was told I was wrong. Same thing on the way I designed the Charge Air Cooler (intercooler) by routing the hot air into the bottom (the cars of that era had a high pressure air zone below the bumper, so I put the hot air part of the where the most cold air was coming in. Lotus put the hot air in the top, charged Chrysler $250,000 for a wind tunnel study to show it worked better with the hot air going into the bottom of the core (just like I designed it) and I blew a gasket. I was supposed to spearhead the T III program but I knew it was going to be a fight of "we're smarter that you are", and I asked to be removed. In the end, they had to ramp the boost down from 12psi to 9, as gee, they were out of injector flow. And the Turbo they picked was wrong and was turning so fast it was way out of it's efficiency zone, resulting in very high turbine out temperatures. just like I had told then in the original meetings. The engineer that had to do the calibration had an awefull time with it. He kept fighting to get 12psi through the rev range and called me down to the dyno to get my opinion. I was one of the quickest and best WOT fuel/spark mapping people, but there was nothing I could do. Exhaust gas temperatures were too high, it was too lean. After about an hour I said "this will never work. Match the boost to fuel flow". He did it and it brought everything down where the target temps needed to be. But when he had to inform management about the boost reductions at high engine speeds, they didn't like the facts and had him try again. It was a lost cause. I was SO glad that I stepped out early. Did they make their goals? yeh, Could it have been a better performing engine?? Some of your members showed it could have and DID get more power out of it.

    BUT, even on that motor, the exhaust manifold was crap, but it did make decent power. The Maserati Turbo exhaust had some good qualities, but the runner diameter was too small.

    In the end, we decided that the exhaust manifold design was really not as important as matching the right turbo and getting a good calibration. So we put our available hours there.

    So was the manifold good? Nope. Did it matter as much as other things? Nope. So why optimize what had little return on investment? We had to "pick our battles" as we were such a small group.
    Stuart
    Gotta feel Good to be able to "air" all of this stuff out after all this time!

    The world is run back A$$wards and it some how continues on. Imagine the difference IF the Right people, who are in the Right place at the time, were also given the Freedom of Controlling what they already Know and have Proven to be true!

    All of the wasted $'s on "Extra research" not to mention wasted time, Gone! And more importantly, the Frustration and animosity.........

    To quote a famous Vulcan, "The world would become 73.76% more Efficient."

    Robert Mclellan
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wambNdfnu5M
    10.04 @ 143.28mph (144.82 highest mph)
    Worlds fastest 8v MTX Shelby Charger
    Manitoba's Fastest 4cyl!
    8 valve, No Nitrous!
    New clutch combo is the SH!T!

  4. #104
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Spokane, Wa
    Posts
    9,046

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by Force Fed Mopar View Post
    Hopefully this will be videoed for those of us that can't make it this year to see.
    yes and thrown on youtube so it can be preserved. So much good info has been given out over the years and lost.

  5. #105
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Spokane, Wa
    Posts
    9,046

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    The Maserati Turbo exhaust had some good qualities, but the runner diameter was too small.


    Stuart


    Oooooh can you talk/elaborate about the maserati setup at all? I heard rumors of Rick Diogo bolting on a bigger turbo and picking up 100hp out of the box. Just rumors but with the stock itty bitty turbo I could see it.

    I have 2 of them I plan to run evenutally. 1 is a 2.2 with Ti long rods, 8.1:1 JE's, ported head, bigger valves, ported exhaust manny with T3 flange and a ported intake with a larger plenum. The other is going to be a 2.5 with Billet steel long rods, 8.1:1 JE's same manfiolds, stock head with bigger valves. Gonna try a GT35R on both of them.


    Thanks

  6. #106
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    61

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    I'm digging up more information and pictures. Apparently the interest in the history was noticed and I;ll be a "guest speaker" at the SDAC-27 convention to talk more about what we did. Along those lines I am framing a "straw man" for a good flowing discussion, and digging out more pictures. So that's keeping me a little busy.

    BTW, when I try to post any pictures here I get the message "Sorry, you don't have permission to upload photos." I've emailed in asking how, but received no reply.



    To the Moderator(s) – if there’s some rule about low-volumeposters not being allowed to upload photos, can it please be overlooked for thisindividual? I don’t care about me, butthis gentleman has tons of relevant TD info to offer and to not let him postsupportive photos seems counter-productive to our small community.


    If this cannot be permitted, can a reasonable explanationplease be provided?




    Thanks!

    David


  7. #107
    We Todd D dot D Turbo Mopar Staff sdac guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Near Detroit MI
    Posts
    4,576

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    It is not necessarily a moderator issue. Many users have of late experienced trouble posting pictures. Some have no trouble at all and others are frustrated by unexplained error messages or messages indicating lack of permission. I tried to start a thread yesterday, and when I went to upload a pic into it, this site froze up. That happened twice. This morning I was able to start the thread and upload a pic into it with no problem at all. The moderators and admin are looking into the problem.

    Barry
    86 Shelby Lancer Prototype
    90 Daytona Shelby VNT
    91 Spirit R/T



    For your questions about SDAC, please contact BadAssPerformance


  8. #108
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by GLHNSLHT2 View Post
    Oooooh can you talk/elaborate about the maserati setup at all? I heard rumors of Rick Diogo bolting on a bigger turbo and picking up 100hp out of the box. Just rumors but with the stock itty bitty turbo I could see it.

    I have 2 of them I plan to run evenutally. 1 is a 2.2 with Ti long rods, 8.1:1 JE's, ported head, bigger valves, ported exhaust manny with T3 flange and a ported intake with a larger plenum. The other is going to be a 2.5 with Billet steel long rods, 8.1:1 JE's same manfiolds, stock head with bigger valves. Gonna try a GT35R on both of them.


    Thanks
    Interested here as well.

    I know for a fact the IHI turbo used on the Masi is TINY (RB5 if I'm not mistaken...same as used on the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe)! The Masi engine was rated at 200hp, but that poor little turbo can only huff about 230hp worth of air on the compressor side. The way I understand it is that the turbine side is actually much more efficient than it looks, but you're still stuffing a lot of air through a small hole. As you know the collector for the turbo is also TINY!

  9. #109
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    MPLS, MN
    Posts
    3,589

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Chris, yes the turbine wheel will support much more HP but it is hampered by a TINY swingvalve. It seemed as small as early T1 swingvalves. I eventually enlarged Quacks to 3". It involved spending a lot of money at an expert cast welder. He built it up with spray weld, then lots of porting. In retrospect, it probably would have been just as cheap to just fabricate one from scratch.
    Todd

  10. #110
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by 4 l-bodies View Post
    Chris, yes the turbine wheel will support much more HP but it is hampered by a TINY swingvalve. It seemed as small as early T1 swingvalves. I eventually enlarged Quacks to 3". It involved spending a lot of money at an expert cast welder. He built it up with spray weld, then lots of porting. In retrospect, it probably would have been just as cheap to just fabricate one from scratch.
    Todd
    I'd heard a long time ago that the Masi engine was "rated" at 400hp as far as hard parts were concerned (forged everything, but I have no proof of this claim)...I would really be interested to know if during development they ever tested that. I also know that MOPAR used the Masi head in IMSA and it would be really interested to know some of the development behind that!

  11. #111
    turbo addict Turbo Mopar Contributor iTurbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Gillette, Wyoming
    Posts
    5,384

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by sdac guy View Post
    It is not necessarily a moderator issue. Many users have of late experienced trouble posting pictures. Some have no trouble at all and others are frustrated by unexplained error messages or messages indicating lack of permission. I tried to start a thread yesterday, and when I went to upload a pic into it, this site froze up. That happened twice. This morning I was able to start the thread and upload a pic into it with no problem at all. The moderators and admin are looking into the problem.

    Barry
    (sorry to go off topic....) This has been my experience as well. I'm kind of afraid to even try posting pics because everything just 'stops'. I've gotten in the habit of cut/pasting my responses (even just text) into a text file just in case. I know it's not the moderators fault, but it is frustrating.

  12. #112
    turbo addict Turbo Mopar Contributor iTurbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Gillette, Wyoming
    Posts
    5,384

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    I would also love to hear more about the history and development of the Masi 16v. I have a crazy 2.0L balls to the wall setup from a guy in Boise that was building a land speed racer. He said he got it all from a guy connected to Mopar Performance R&D a long time ago. It's all new and in pieces but I still don't feel like I'm even at the level of skill to take on assembling it!

  13. #113
    Supporting Member II Turbo Mopar Contributor ajakeski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,624

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Thanks for posting this information and thank you for presenting at SDAC 22 and 27. During your presentation at SDAC 27 you mentioned that the TII air box design created a zip tube for the intake. How does this enhance performance of the intake?

  14. #114
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spearfish SD
    Posts
    2,038

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    was presentation recorded and available for viewing?
    89 Voyager LE, 2.5T2 - rest in peace
    87 Charger Shelby T2 (2.4 conversion in process)

  15. #115
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Jacksonville
    Posts
    411

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    video of the presentation?

  16. #116
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    61

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    I have audio only of the presentation, but it's on (2) phones and I have to compile it into one audio file. Maybe someone's got video but I don't remember seeing anyone recording. I'll try to post something for the audio over the long weekend if no one can produce a video before that.

    Thanks!
    David

  17. #117
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    2,626

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Thank you for speaking on Tuesday night. It was great hearing this stuff directly from one of the people involved! You and your team definitely made a difference pushing for better performance out of these engines, which does not go unappreciated!
    “If the people of the nation understood our banking and monetary system, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” -Henry Ford

  18. #118
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor mopar-tech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Oakdale CT
    Posts
    2,419

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    I really wish I could have made it this year, sounds like I missed a great time. Still dealing with beating out a number of personal "fires" and the CSX decided to randomly puke the rear main seal.

    Gary


    Working on clearing the decks.

  19. #119
    We Todd D dot D Turbo Mopar Staff sdac guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Near Detroit MI
    Posts
    4,576

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    the off topic posts about pressure measurements has been moved to this thread

    http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/sh...e-measurements

    Barry
    86 Shelby Lancer Prototype
    90 Daytona Shelby VNT
    91 Spirit R/T



    For your questions about SDAC, please contact BadAssPerformance


  20. #120
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by ajakeski View Post
    Thanks for posting this information and thank you for presenting at SDAC 22 and 27. During your presentation at SDAC 27 you mentioned that the TII air box design created a zip tube for the intake. How does this enhance performance of the intake?
    Every section of tubing will have a natural resonance point. Usually just one at a given air velocity. In the Turbo II system the lower intake runners create one tuning resonance point. Then intake plenum gives a "dead air" space/volume which puts an end on the runner (by the way, the 1987 TII intake, if cut apart, would show that I put "ideal entries" (like velocity stacks) at the start of the intake runner. The 1988 was just square and awful for airflow as air does NOT like to turn a sharp 90 degrees)

    The "zip tube" that goes from the throttle body, thru the air box, and finally into the intercooler tank also has a resonance frequency. Think of an organ pipe. It's large diameter and length helped create a low speed tuning sine wave. The top tank of the intercooler gives just enough volume to set the tuning frequency by defining the length of the tuning tube. "If" the peak of that sine wave hits the intake valve when it is open, there will be sightly higher pressure and a bit more air will go in.

    It could have been called a "tuning tube", but somehow it got named the "zip tube". The name has no real connection with its function.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Engine (2) Older turbo engines FREE
    By mpgmike in forum Parts For Sale
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-2013, 06:25 PM
  2. Why do turbo engines have such low oil PSI?
    By 87yorker in forum 2.2L/2.5L 16V Hybrid conversions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-16-2009, 08:32 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •