Turbo time

[urbanj]

yeah man thats 178 rwhp!! regardless on the size of the engine, you can only put a turbo that a certain size in relation to the motor. since he said it makes boost everywhere i am going to assume that he is using a smaller turbo with a lot of boost. its the only possible way. if you look at that gt12 turbo at 15psi and 10lbs/min flow its perfect in the efficiency island. probably the most you would want to use with that turbo. that turbo could put out some good numbers. but thats 15psi. at 5psi im sure we wont need the compression change. our motor is also tuned for 87 the stock timing must be conservative as well as the cam profile. so with 94 it will be able to handle it better as well. that $10000 right there is a pretty extensive build. we could probable do that for less than half. for a mild street setup.

i think im going to have to sit and do the math on this one. why oh why?!?!:rockon:

 

[Hellgate]

^^^ My mistake, I forgot to mention that example is a supercharger, not a turbo.

I looking forward to see what you come up with number wise. I was guessing 4 to 5 K in parts.

 

[Hellgate]

One other thought, would we need an aluminium Plenum? I noticed that most of the liter bike kits have one. I'd thing that air box would totally explode under high boost.

 

[urbanj]

^^^ My mistake, I forgot to mention that example is a supercharger, not a turbo.

I looking forward to see what you come up with number wise. I was guessing 4 to 5 K in parts.

haha yeah, i skipped right by that and its even the name of the page!!! "Supercharging a Yamaha FZ6". that makes sense now. you can do the math to figure out what kind of pressures you need to make a X amount of hp. gotta find the formulas.

as for the aluminum plenum, i dont really know. all i think about when i think 5 psi is that most air blowers are regulated to 10psi for safety and that doesnt feel like that much. i think we'd just have to seal it a lot better. but aluminum would be way cooler.

 

[poorwboy]

Actually lowering the compression reduces the squish area which in turn means you can run more boost and more timing. Timing and boost = MORE POWER.

What I am trying to get at is you can have a 10:1 motor and run 25 degrees timing and 15lbs of boost and you get detonation. Or you can run 9:1 And 25 lbs of boost and 32 degrees of timing and get more power before you get detonation.

Squish area is a science.

I am building a motor right now for a srt4 that should make 600-700 hp. giggity.

A very good standpoint with correct tuning is 10 hp for every pound of boost.

 

[urbanj]

Actually lowering the compression reduces the squish area which in turn means you can run more boost and more timing. Timing and boost = MORE POWER.

What I am trying to get at is you can have a 10:1 motor and run 25 degrees timing and 15lbs of boost and you get detonation. Or you can run 9:1 And 25 lbs of boost and 32 degrees of timing and get more power before you get detonation.

Squish area is a science.

I am building a motor right now for a srt4 that should make 600-700 hp. giggity.

A very good standpoint with correct tuning is 10 hp for every pound of boost.

yes. this is why i stopped playing with my rx7. i wanted to do it myself and when it came to boost and timing, one mistake and bye bye goes your apex seal and rotor and rotor housing. you had to be spot on from the get go. if i were to do this it would be without opening the motor. nice and simple. low boost and high compression will make for a nice responsive fast spooling motor that wont even feel like it has a turbo on it. and with 600cc i think thats better. i want a nice flat torque curve instead of a mountain like one.

have you seen the dyno charts of 1000+hp supras. the guys go for huge power but it peaks so so high and in such a narrow power band that its pretty much unusable for anything but drag racing and bragging rights.

 

[Fred]

I think the airbox might not hold up.

Figure it this way. The airbox top has an area of maybe 3/4 of a square foot (looking top down on it). So, 10 pounds per square inch of pressure multiplied by 81 square inches equals 810 pounds of upwards pressure on the airbox top.

I don't think that those six little screws sunk into the plastic lower airbox are going to hold up against that!

And listen to Poorwboy. He knows his stuff when it comes to compression, boost and timing.

To what he said I'll only add that often people chase higher boost values by pulling timing, when they could be running lower boost with more timing and making more power. There's a lot of variables involved, and making the boost gauge show a big number isn't always the answer you need.

Fred

 

[MarcW]

I think the airbox might not hold up.

Figure it this way. The airbox top has an area of maybe 3/4 of a square foot (looking top down on it). So, 10 pounds per square inch of pressure multiplied by 81 square inches equals 810 pounds of upwards pressure on the airbox top.

I don't think that those six little screws sunk into the plastic lower airbox are going to hold up against that!

And listen to Poorwboy. He knows his stuff when it comes to compression, boost and timing.

To what he said I'll only add that often people chase higher boost values by pulling timing, when they could be running lower boost with more timing and making more power. There's a lot of variables involved, and making the boost gauge show a big number isn't always the answer you need.

Fred

im gonna go take the bike apart tonight. :rockon: check out the area i have to fab an airbox. i know the factory airbox wont hold boost. when i put my k an n in, one of the screws stripped thinkin pretty much no exhaust, oil cooler back next to the shock, front mount turbo with a bottom fed air box. At the moment we are still on the turbo search. :cheer:

 

[poorwboy]

I think the airbox might not hold up.

Figure it this way. The airbox top has an area of maybe 3/4 of a square foot (looking top down on it). So, 10 pounds per square inch of pressure multiplied by 81 square inches equals 810 pounds of upwards pressure on the airbox top.

I don't think that those six little screws sunk into the plastic lower airbox are going to hold up against that!

And listen to Poorwboy. He knows his stuff when it comes to compression, boost and timing.

To what he said I'll only add that often people chase higher boost values by pulling timing, when they could be running lower boost with more timing and making more power. There's a lot of variables involved, and making the boost gauge show a big number isn't always the answer you need.

Fred

Good point fred, I've seen people do that to. They think wow 25 lbs of boost I could make some serious power. The only thing they do not realize is there getting so much pre ignition that there timing is being so far retarded they lost power. Back the boost off to 18-19 lbs and it makes more power.

 

[urbanj]

This is the squid equivalent in the turbo world. big boost sounds cool.
but you have to match the turbo to the motor and how you want to use. If a engine at max VE has the turbo at max efficiency plotted nicely on the map then youre doing good. but say it's at 15psi. bump it to 25 psi and on a specific turbo you lose all efficiency, the air heats up, is less dense and you run into detonation problems unless you pull more timing which then lowers your power output. id say especially with a bikes non-intercooled setup, compressor efficiency is pretty important since there is no provision attempting to cool the charge. so you want the most efficient charge without having to use tons of fuel to cool combustion (which reduces power)

 

[Khyren]

I'm not real sure that this was brought up or not but there was a turbo chevy sprint made. It was a 3cyl 1 liter engine and it has a really tiny turbo. A freind of mine put on on a 125cc 3 wheeler engine and then put the whole combo into a 110cc mini sport bike frame. It really was stupid fast after it got spooled but I doubt that the compressor map will be good enough for our high RPM.

Khyren

 

[Hellgate]

Here's a question for those who have toyed with boost in the real world, I'm only a book turbo guy. Part of Audi's design, lower boost more compression, is to create quicker spool up. Do you think this would carry over to the FZ? Reason being, I'm guessing, that approach could bring to total project cost down: ie: keep stock cams, stock compression, keep the low end - what little we have - and toy only with timing and fuel delivery. Thoughts? The more I think about this the more doable it seems.

Fred - Can you TIG weld aluminum? I really think a new air box is a must. On the CC web site they are about 600 to 700 pounds sterling or $1,200 to $1,400 just for the air box. Turbo another $1,500.

 

[urbanj]

Here's a question for those who have toyed with boost in the real world, I'm only a book turbo guy. Part of Audi's design, lower boost more compression, is to create quicker spool up. Do you think this would carry over to the FZ? Reason being, I'm guessing, that approach could bring to total project cost down: ie: keep stock cams, stock compression, keep the low end - what little we have - and toy only with timing and fuel delivery. Thoughts? The more I think about this the more doable it seems.

Fred - Can you TIG weld aluminum? I really think a new air box is a must. On the CC web site they are about 600 to 700 pounds sterling or $1,200 to $1,400 just for the air box. Turbo another $1,500.

Yeah this is what I was talking about. I think that considering the FZ6 motor is detuned from the r6 in the cams and a slight decrease in compression and smaller throttle bodies. I would think the major power reduction would come from the decreased airflow and reduced timing. which would also indicated why it can run on 87. this is why i agree with the above that we can keep all things stock and run low boost and be ok to go with just fuel adjustment and 94 octane. more power can be made with timing but i dont think there is anything out there for the FZ6 to play with the timing. and all the kits out there don't touch the timing and thats for r6/r1's. im really interested in building the parts over the winter.

 

[Fred]

Yeah, aluminum's no problem at all.

My welder.
Miller Dynasty 200 DX.

If you told me you were either going to kill my family or take my welder, I'd need a minute to think about it.

 

[Fred]

Here's a question for those who have toyed with boost in the real world, I'm only a book turbo guy. Part of Audi's design, lower boost more compression, is to create quicker spool up.

It sounds good. There's a couple of things to consider.

A smaller turbo will spool faster/sooner. But you also run the risk of overspeeding the turbo as your engine RPM's increase. So you'd have to be careful about the turbo sizing.

When you calculate the airflow and start looking at turbo maps, calculate at 25, 50, 75 and 100% throttle. This will give you a better idea of what turbo is right for you.

An early spooling turbo on a bike might be a bad thing. V1.0 of the K-75 Turbo spooled very early, at 2500 RPM. I didn't like this at all in the corners. It came on boost as fast as you could twist the throttle. There was no turbo lag at all. But when you were going through a corner and rolling on the throttle, it was not good. A slight throttle movement, boost comes on and power increased suddenly.

It made for some white knuckle riding at times. But maybe I just needed to get used to it.

V2.0 will have slower/later spoolup. I'm hoping it will make the overall experience more enjoyable.

Fred

 

[MarcW]

Yeah, aluminum's no problem at all.

My welder.
Miller Dynasty 200 DX.

If you told me you were either going to kill my family or take my welder, I'd need a minute to think about it.

my welder- Miller - TIG Welders - Syncrowave 350 LX :cheer:

i have pretty much a full service fab shop in my garage. AL will be used mainly. i havent touched the bike in a couple days. went to the casino and made some turbo money :cheer: made 400 bucks last night at the blackjack table. :rockon:

 

[Fred]

Nice machine. I used older model Synchrowaves at a foundry I used to work at. They sold me on Miller welding machines.

What do you use it for? It's got a lot of output for a home machine. You could weld up a Shermin tank with 400 amps!

Also, do you use the pulser when you're working with aluminum? I've played with mine and it has potential to make a very pretty weld, but I don't know enough about how to use it. Got any advice? All my aluminum welds have been without the pulser. They hold, but they're not as pretty as I'd like.

Fred

 

[opds9091]

take the easy way out and use NOS

 

[opds9091]

:rockon::rockon: save the money and NOS it up :rockon:

 

[MarcW]

Nice machine. I used older model Synchrowaves at a foundry I used to work at. They sold me on Miller welding machines.

What do you use it for? It's got a lot of output for a home machine. You could weld up a Shermin tank with 400 amps!

Also, do you use the pulser when you're working with aluminum? I've played with mine and it has potential to make a very pretty weld, but I don't know enough about how to use it. Got any advice? All my aluminum welds have been without the pulser. They hold, but they're not as pretty as I'd like.

Fred

i do a variety of things. i quit my job on monday actually. but for side jobs, i have a friend that works at a machine shop that gives me a good amount of work. i do alot of small parts, Stainless fittings for aircraft companies, little bit of Ti, i have a variable speed pipe jig at home. big drill press, lots of layout tools, and in about a month ill have the cash set aside for my behemoth axle table. i have done some aluminum work and have used the pulser, but i was taught on older syncrowaves, and can weld x ray quality with no pulser. what are your settings like? if you would like you can PM me and we cant get into it further :thumbup: