Stage X X X X X
05-02-2003, 12:26 AM
#46
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by DarioTexas:
<strong>SHARK</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Hey it can't take my name
I can do the 100m in like 12 flat let alone the 1/4mile hehe
<strong>SHARK</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Hey it can't take my name
I can do the 100m in like 12 flat let alone the 1/4mile hehe
05-05-2003, 10:23 PM
#47
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about...
LFO (Low Flying Object)
DFP (Devistatingly Fast Porsche)
SA (Shockingly Awesome)
AFP (Awsomely Fast Porsche)
DR (Defies Reason)
PTL (Pushing the Limits)
BR (Beyond Reason)
IR (Insanity Realized)
UhHuh
Velocitator
OhSure
OhMyGod
TFFW (Too Fast For Words)
Crusher
GForce
Fearsome
Pack'n
Awestruck
Bruteforce
Giant Killer
Lethal
Lethal Dose
LFO (Low Flying Object)
DFP (Devistatingly Fast Porsche)
SA (Shockingly Awesome)
AFP (Awsomely Fast Porsche)
DR (Defies Reason)
PTL (Pushing the Limits)
BR (Beyond Reason)
IR (Insanity Realized)
UhHuh
Velocitator
OhSure
OhMyGod
TFFW (Too Fast For Words)
Crusher
GForce
Fearsome
Pack'n
Awestruck
Bruteforce
Giant Killer
Lethal
Lethal Dose
05-11-2003, 01:06 PM
#50
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chad,
What a generous offer, it would sure make an interesting comparison.
I would be delighted to compare both and hope you would too!
The results of this comparison might disappoint some as I am not an 'edge' type of guy, and never, ever in someone else's car.
Nevertheless, let's look forward to a mutual comparison.
What a generous offer, it would sure make an interesting comparison.
I would be delighted to compare both and hope you would too!
The results of this comparison might disappoint some as I am not an 'edge' type of guy, and never, ever in someone else's car.
Nevertheless, let's look forward to a mutual comparison.
05-11-2003, 09:36 PM
#52
CJV -
Have you done any searching or personal research on Turbo Coatings? I ask this for various reasons, but how far is the turbo assembly 'physically' from the head on the 996TT? Are there any heat shields, integral to the turbo assembly, or freely affixed in between it and other important parts?
Main Point: If a turbo's exhaust compressor side could be coated and shielded in such a way to reduce radiated and physically (part on part)transfered heat by a large amount, NA motors not previously designed for Turbos could more efficiently be combined with a turbo system (as long as you have room= my problem)
The reason I search you out if because you are pretty free with your info, and many, many others keep it as if it was a state secret.
Thanks,
Have you done any searching or personal research on Turbo Coatings? I ask this for various reasons, but how far is the turbo assembly 'physically' from the head on the 996TT? Are there any heat shields, integral to the turbo assembly, or freely affixed in between it and other important parts?
Main Point: If a turbo's exhaust compressor side could be coated and shielded in such a way to reduce radiated and physically (part on part)transfered heat by a large amount, NA motors not previously designed for Turbos could more efficiently be combined with a turbo system (as long as you have room= my problem)
The reason I search you out if because you are pretty free with your info, and many, many others keep it as if it was a state secret.
Thanks,
05-12-2003, 01:03 AM
#53
I am familiar with Performance Coatings. I am also familiar with SwainTech. Have you coated the Turbos specifically? Will you be on the next motor? KPV had a video of Glowing headers. Seeing this pushes me to a much cooler form of boost [Centrifugal SC]. Mercedes uses Turbos and Superchargers as Power Adders almost equally. It seems that in thier "boulevard" cars, they use turbos, but most of the AMG cars use SCing.
Thats a whole 'nuther thread.
Will you be changing the Valve Materials for the new engine? Sodium filled? Stainless Steel? Titanium?
Thats a whole 'nuther thread.
Will you be changing the Valve Materials for the new engine? Sodium filled? Stainless Steel? Titanium?
05-12-2003, 09:12 PM
#54
Thank you. Its so nice to just get info....
Now I understand that you may not be THIS involved with the dyno process, as you always mention "dropping the car off" but with the ceramic coating on the hot side - do you have any info on the difference in radiated heat, and whether it is a GOOD or BAD idea to try and isolate the Turbo from the headers?
Menaing put a non-conductive barrier there, so that the headers cannot get all of the turbo's intense heat, and thereby keeping the head cooler. Cooler head means cooler block. The piston in my mind is separate because you want heat in the combustion process, but you want to make sure the heat doe snot reside in the piston itself.
Now I understand that you may not be THIS involved with the dyno process, as you always mention "dropping the car off" but with the ceramic coating on the hot side - do you have any info on the difference in radiated heat, and whether it is a GOOD or BAD idea to try and isolate the Turbo from the headers?
Menaing put a non-conductive barrier there, so that the headers cannot get all of the turbo's intense heat, and thereby keeping the head cooler. Cooler head means cooler block. The piston in my mind is separate because you want heat in the combustion process, but you want to make sure the heat doe snot reside in the piston itself.
05-13-2003, 06:03 PM
#55
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Mercedes uses Turbos and Superchargers as Power Adders almost equally. [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Perhaps you'd be kind enough to name a Mercedes Turbo road-car, as I can't think of one........
05-13-2003, 06:22 PM
#57
Yes Guy, as well as the new super luxo boat, Maybach. Twin turbos usually.
And to round out the SC cars, the SL55, the kompressor smaller C and SLK models, etc.
And to round out the SC cars, the SL55, the kompressor smaller C and SLK models, etc.
05-17-2003, 04:02 AM
#58
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Alberta
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chad:
Thanks again for sharing your data. I have been the guinea pig on previous vehicles and as much as I enjoyed it, I am glad to follow with my 2002 turbo. I am learning a huge amount from your willingness to experiment.
How can you explain the 8%-9% relative out performance in both HP and TQ up to 3500 - 3700 RPM with the 1.75" pipes even though the AFR's are significantly richer in this rpm range vs. the 1.625" pipe? Your relative AFR's (1.75" less 1.625") get continually richer from 2400 to 3600. Wouldn't this suggest less power should be produced in the lower RPM range with the bigger pipes? At 3600 RPM the AFR differential (1.75-1.625) trend leaner and the relative power & torque advantage of the 1.75" significantly diminishes.
This all seem counter intuitive to me. I was under the assumption the leaner produced more power, at the expense of possible detination. Does your data suggest the fat pipes will produce more power and torque as long as the AFR is tuned on the rich side?
Mike
Thanks again for sharing your data. I have been the guinea pig on previous vehicles and as much as I enjoyed it, I am glad to follow with my 2002 turbo. I am learning a huge amount from your willingness to experiment.
How can you explain the 8%-9% relative out performance in both HP and TQ up to 3500 - 3700 RPM with the 1.75" pipes even though the AFR's are significantly richer in this rpm range vs. the 1.625" pipe? Your relative AFR's (1.75" less 1.625") get continually richer from 2400 to 3600. Wouldn't this suggest less power should be produced in the lower RPM range with the bigger pipes? At 3600 RPM the AFR differential (1.75-1.625) trend leaner and the relative power & torque advantage of the 1.75" significantly diminishes.
This all seem counter intuitive to me. I was under the assumption the leaner produced more power, at the expense of possible detination. Does your data suggest the fat pipes will produce more power and torque as long as the AFR is tuned on the rich side?
Mike
05-17-2003, 02:06 PM
#59
Chad,
Looking at your data, I don't see how you can come to ANY conclusions about the pipe sizes. The A/F numbers are completly off scale for Power and torque.
If we just consider the Lean/rich factor, your lean in the lower RPM's, rich in the Torque RPM's and Lean again in the Power RPM's. Unless detenation is the problem, and you have to FLOOD the chamber to stop the DET, you seem to be backward a little.
For peak power and torque, you should be somewhere between 0.87 and 0.083 Lambda or around 12.5 A/F. The torque RPM's will be leaner and should be, but only enough to stop the DET. As this is where the engine is at its peak efficency, it will demand more fuel.
I am not a fan of trying to gain peak performance out of a street system, as there are many other contributing factors which can control or have an effect on the final results. You will most probably have to make some large concessions here. Dynoing on a chassis dyno will also have a major effect. Controlling the temp's etc, is harder and any compensation that the street EFI does will no doubt be activated. Street EFI systems have a lot more functions which with the added inputs, control the fuelling and Timing.
If gaining the peak performance is the excercise here, and understanding which Ex. system is better overall, then maybe the testing procedures need to be reviewed for accuracy.
Looking at your data, I don't see how you can come to ANY conclusions about the pipe sizes. The A/F numbers are completly off scale for Power and torque.
If we just consider the Lean/rich factor, your lean in the lower RPM's, rich in the Torque RPM's and Lean again in the Power RPM's. Unless detenation is the problem, and you have to FLOOD the chamber to stop the DET, you seem to be backward a little.
For peak power and torque, you should be somewhere between 0.87 and 0.083 Lambda or around 12.5 A/F. The torque RPM's will be leaner and should be, but only enough to stop the DET. As this is where the engine is at its peak efficency, it will demand more fuel.
I am not a fan of trying to gain peak performance out of a street system, as there are many other contributing factors which can control or have an effect on the final results. You will most probably have to make some large concessions here. Dynoing on a chassis dyno will also have a major effect. Controlling the temp's etc, is harder and any compensation that the street EFI does will no doubt be activated. Street EFI systems have a lot more functions which with the added inputs, control the fuelling and Timing.
If gaining the peak performance is the excercise here, and understanding which Ex. system is better overall, then maybe the testing procedures need to be reviewed for accuracy.
05-17-2003, 08:40 PM
#60
Chad,
I think the A/F is off the chart for the other engine also. Typically a VE of a turbo engine does not change that much over the RPM range. That is why the fuel curves appear to go straight and then dip(leaner) at the higher Rev's. Unless the other engine has huge something's, and requires huge amounts of fuel in the torque rev's its off too. That engine must be horrible to drive if this is the case. Whats typically called a light switch. In turbo applications, some Tuners typically go for the big HP number as this is what sells. Problem is the cars are horrible to drive. This same effect happens with turbo applications where the engine has low static compression (street cars). Add more boost, fuel to stop DET, you get the big HP numbers, but the engine is a light switch.
These are the compromises you have to accept when dealing with street car platforms.
I think the A/F is off the chart for the other engine also. Typically a VE of a turbo engine does not change that much over the RPM range. That is why the fuel curves appear to go straight and then dip(leaner) at the higher Rev's. Unless the other engine has huge something's, and requires huge amounts of fuel in the torque rev's its off too. That engine must be horrible to drive if this is the case. Whats typically called a light switch. In turbo applications, some Tuners typically go for the big HP number as this is what sells. Problem is the cars are horrible to drive. This same effect happens with turbo applications where the engine has low static compression (street cars). Add more boost, fuel to stop DET, you get the big HP numbers, but the engine is a light switch.
These are the compromises you have to accept when dealing with street car platforms.