 |
|
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 01:29 AM
|
#106
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MN
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by turbovanman
Your a moron!
I was joking around, Warren got it, why couldn't you?
Anyhow, back to our scheduled program-
What about using the slip fit and using springs like we do on our Motorbikes. We use Titanium systems and they don't leak. There mounted solidly and don't snap or fatique crack?
|
  |
I would expect more from a Moderator.
Calling People Names? I think that is against the "Rules of TurboDodge.com".
So consider this a warning. Next time it is a ban.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 03:32 AM
|
#107
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frank
Its a catch 22 though. Its the same type of example as some motorcycles. Some like the twin fire to keep the wheel from slipping in a turn, while others like spaced out firing because they think that the torque is more controllable in a turn.
Same thing here... they both provide benifits, but they dont really effect you either way.
Frank
|
  |
I was only talking about how pulses strike the turbine blade, not how the motor makes actual hp. People were talking about using divided housings and all that. I just know that separating the pulses allows each to make a good "slap" at the turbine blade rather then have them "blah" together.
People were using some wrong ideas about "evening out flow" which may be great for power or whatever, but is not relevent to the idea behind helping a turbo spool by keeping exhaust pulses as separate as is possible. Obviously if they never meet......they will be farther separated. I guess one problem is that some say these divided housing turbines dont flow very well. I dont know a thing about that and I'm pretty sure its not a big deal. .
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 03:38 AM
|
#108
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
Just build a hanger that can move around with the turbo......but support its weight.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 04:59 AM
|
#109
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1991 Daytona Shelby
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TrboVan
I would expect more from a Moderator.
Calling People Names? I think that is against the "Rules of TurboDodge.com".
So consider this a warning. Next time it is a ban.
|
  |
What are you doing in this thread? You baited him with your stunts. You knock it off. Simon, please ignore him and dont respond any more. Bryan, dont respond in this thread unless its technical.
Frank
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 02:02 PM
|
#110
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MN
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frank
What are you doing in this thread? You baited him with your stunts. You knock it off. Simon, please ignore him and dont respond any more. Bryan, dont respond in this thread unless its technical.
Frank
|
  |
If you are going to delete posts then delete ALL of the BS ones including yours.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 03:31 PM
|
#111
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
My Ride: 1995 Dodge Avenger
Engine: 3.15L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
That is one nice piece of art
Why use 304L though and not 321? Less prone to cracking from thermal cycles even in 16gauge compared to 304L.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 04:09 PM
|
#112
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Dakota
My Ride: 84 Chrysler Laser
Engine: 92 com. blk. 2.2
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 10.600
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SANDMAN
That is one nice piece of art
Why use 304L though and not 321? Less prone to cracking from thermal cycles even in 16gauge compared to 304L.
|
  |
Because I happened to have a pile of 304L mandrel bends and straights in stock.......321 would have been my first choice but man that stuffs expensive. Besides, I want to test my design in something cheap first, I may want to build something completely different.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 04:23 PM
|
#113
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Rochester, MI/UNO, Lima, OH
My Ride: 1986 Shelby Charger
Engine: 2.2 SOHC
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
Warren, have you ever thougth about pulling all the tubes over to the drivers side to locate the turbo facing forward just above the tranny? Access to it for piping (a REAL intake!! Although I think you already have that covered) and exhaust routing would be easy, as well as changes easy too. It would only require a slight lengthening of the last tube section.
Is there any reason you wanted to keep it near the stock location?
Aaron Miller
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 04:28 PM
|
#114
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
My Ride: 1995 Dodge Avenger
Engine: 3.15L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2.2=8
Because I happened to have a pile of 304L mandrel bends and straights in stock.......321 would have been my first choice but man that stuffs expensive. Besides, I want to test my design in something cheap first, I may want to build something completely different.
|
  |
Tell me about it, you nearly have to sell your left testicle to get material. I ran into the same problem when I built a 420A turbo header. If you think the piping is $$ try getting flange material........ 2nd mortgage, then the other testicle.
Looks great though, if I had a TD I'd nab one BUT ALAS I am a V6 junkie
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 05:31 PM
|
#115
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Abbotsford, BC, Canada
My Ride: 1989 Turbo Caravan
Engine: 2.5L 8V Sohc
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.400
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2.2=8
Besides, I want to test my design in something cheap first, I may want to build something completely different.
|
  |
If you run it and don't like, I would like to be first in line for the free tossing away of the header,
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 05:42 PM
|
#116
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Dells in Wisconsin
My Ride: '89 Daytona Shelby
Engine: 2.2
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by turbovanman
If you run it and don't like, I would like to be first in line for the free tossing away of the header, 
|
  |
heh ... that'd be like the Friday after Thanksgiving in Walmart.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 08:19 PM
|
#117
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Here, there..everywhere.
My Ride: 2003 SRT-4
Engine: 2.4 DOHC Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
Absolutely one of the most beautiful pieces I seen for any car, much less at TD. Almost seems too nice for the car  I've been looking back at some of your other post's and the level of workmanship is amazing. Great looking parts, you should compile all of the pictures you have and put them in one post for everyone to gaze at and drool.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-29-2005, 09:20 PM
|
#118
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ravenna, Ohio
My Ride: 89 Spirit ES
Engine: 2.5 STD TII 20psi
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.726
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TurboGLH
Absolutely one of the most beautiful pieces I seen for any car, much less at TD. Almost seems too nice for the car  I've been looking back at some of your other post's and the level of workmanship is amazing. Great looking parts, you should compile all of the pictures you have and put them in one post for everyone to gaze at and drool.
|
  |
++++++++++++1
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
11-30-2005, 11:33 AM
|
#120
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Dakota
My Ride: 84 Chrysler Laser
Engine: 92 com. blk. 2.2
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 10.600
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TrboVan
Warren,
I am not sure, maybe I missed it, but are you going to be placing EGT probes anywhere?
Thanks
Bryan
|
  |
Yes I'm planning on it, but that will be last. Don't yet know where or how many to weld in.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
 |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Quick Nav |
|
» Quick Tech |
|
» Market Place |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|