TurboDodge.com MarketPlace Shelby Registry Contact Us

Advertisement - Remove these ads today by clicking here.
 

Go Back   TurboDodge.Com - Turbo Dodge forum for Turbo Mopars, Shelbys, Daytona, SRT-4, PT Cruiser, Omni and more! > Turbo Dodge Technical Chat > Engine - Turbo

Engine - Turbo Modifications and upgrades to maximize your Dodges turbo output.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools

Old 02-05-2005, 04:45 AM   #1
Lag: GOOD FOR OMNI?  
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: VENTURA CO.> CALIFORNIA

My Ride: 86 GLHS
Engine: 2.2 Turbo Intercool
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 788
Feedback: (0)
I have heard lag is good for l body because they are so light. Is this true? I am thinking about upgrading to a big turbo can I go bigger because of this? What's the biggest I get away, and still have at least 14 pounds of boost by 3600-3800 rpm? I want to be able to put these 52 lb/hr injectors to work!
BLASINTEBO is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2005, 04:52 AM   #2
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: VENTURA CO.> CALIFORNIA

My Ride: 86 GLHS
Engine: 2.2 Turbo Intercool
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 788
Feedback: (0)
I will be running:

Ported polish head with roller cam

Ported polish manifold or TU header (God willing)

3 inch dump / Cut out with elect butterfly

Spearco Intercooler or NPR (probably NPR)

Original 2.2 T1 Block

Cast Crank

TII rods

Forged Pistons

Stage V 87 Cal from FWDPERF, in conjunction with adj fuel pressure regulator
BLASINTEBO is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2005, 12:50 PM   #3
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sterling heights, MI

My Ride: 91 R/T-66 pontiac
Engine: T3 2.2/ 4bbl 389BB
Induct: Turbo + Nitrous
1/4: 13.940

Posts: 3,134
Feedback: (4)
i am pretty sure lag isnt good for any car, unless the other guys car has it
glht_omni is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2005, 12:57 PM   #4
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: South Carolina

My Ride: 1986 Shelby Charger
Engine: 2.2 pseudo TII
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 1,564
Feedback: (0)
Doing that is just going to make you lose traction in an omni later. You're best bet with an L-body would be to set up a boost setup that uses lower boost in low gears, and high boost in 3rd, 4th, and 5th.

Remember, if you wait until 3800 for boost to hit, you are killing 1/6th of your possible powerband.
The S is Silent is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2005, 01:12 PM   #5
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Spokane, WA

1/4: 0.000

Posts: 1,476
Feedback: (0)
people that have lag just dont know how to drive a turbo car.
ive got a big honkin turbo on my car and i dont complain about lag at all.
put in a big turbo, it gives fantastic power gains in the upper rpms.
with the cummins holset turbo I am using, i get 20 psi by 3500.
xrattiracer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2005, 03:04 PM   #6
 
Naturally Aspirated
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: VENTURA CO.> CALIFORNIA

My Ride: 86 GLHS
Engine: 2.2 Turbo Intercool
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000

Posts: 788
Feedback: (0)
cumming holset... wow those are big I saw one on ebay. I never thought boost would come on so early with one of those....

I want thinking a little lag was good for an Omni because GLHSKEN said that.
BLASINTEBO is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

» Quick Nav
- Home
- Classifieds
- Timeslips
- Gallery
- Vendors
-- Directory
- Tech Articles
- Donate
Sponsors
remove ads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1
Cell Phones | Loans | Credit Card Consolidation | Credit Card | Unblock Myspace


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 AM.

Page generated in 0.31593 seconds with 13 queries