Single turbo, twin turbo?

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

If you like supras you should visit www.t04r.com lots of big hp supras with single and twin setups i think.

The MercedesBenz SL 65 AMG twin turbo V12 makes 612hp and a whopping 738 Torque lb-ft is that enough turbo for ya? yes I think so. Freaking awesome.

You forgot to mention that they limitted the output, because of the transmission.

 

[I6-4-eva]

Hiya! Meow! (='.'=)

WOW I6-4-eva! Thanks for that SUPRA LOVELY site! A bunch of ky00T Supras there to look and drool over! MOTIVATES ME! CANT WAIT! NEED BACHELOR and GET SUPRA AS GIFT!!! THANKS ALOT YOU MADE ME WANT TO RUSH!

No problem glad you liked it. Some of the most unique and most expensive supras found on there. I believe one member has the HKS 3.4 stroker kit which is big money $$,$$$.$$ Cha-ching.

 

[Emohawk]

The Supra has the variable sequential system described above.

No it doesn't, the turbos are both the same size and they run together to produce max boost.
As far as I know, the 535d is the ONLY car with variable sequential twin turbos.

 

[Taurine]

No it doesn't, the turbos are both the same size and they run together to produce max boost.
As far as I know, the 535d is the ONLY car with variable sequential twin turbos.

My apologies, the numerous website I have come across in the past must be incorrect then. The Series 6 Rx-7 has a turbo system identical to the car you are referring to and probably has had it well before the bmw.

 

[Jay]

it gets me to think that its better to buy the non-turbo supra than the twin turbo(2JZ-GTE) Just put a big turbo in the nonturbo and WALLAH! Save buncha money!

Ah, not a good idea. If you want a Supra turbo then its best to get a Supra turbo, bolting on a turbo isnt so simple as there are many other aspects you need to look at. Example Fuel system, ECU and other engine things, plus chassis and drivetrain differences . In the long run its best to get what you want in the first place.

 

[Jay]

The JZA80 Supra (MkIII) 2JZGTE engine has a sequential twin turbo system, One for low end response and the other kicks in and combines for top end power. It is not the variable sequential system.

*edit* added pic

 

[dkstz]

which episode is that? I havent watched Initial D in a while.

8th of the 4th stage.. it's the newest right now.

 

[McLaren'sAngel]

Ah, not a good idea. If you want a Supra turbo then its best to get a Supra turbo, bolting on a turbo isnt so simple as there are many other aspects you need to look at. Example Fuel system, ECU and other engine things, plus chassis and drivetrain differences . In the long run its best to get what you want in the first place.

Hiya! Meow! (='.'=)

Yea you are right about the Supras! I should just stick with what looks obviously better, the Twin Turbo Supra. 👍 Turbo is sure more expensive and much more eye candy with the engine and badge. 👍

By the way ViperGTSR01, I love your Skyline! I think its very ky00T!

Back to topic!

Are there such things as a Sequential Turbo Kit available as an aftermarket?

 

[Jay]

Hiya! Meow! (='.'=)

By the way ViperGTSR01, I love your Skyline! I think its very ky00T!

Thanks

 

[Emohawk]

My apologies, the numerous website I have come across in the past must be incorrect then. The Series 6 Rx-7 has a turbo system identical to the car you are referring to and probably has had it well before the bmw.

Well, your last point almost true. The 535d has just entered production, whereas the MkIII RX-7 isn't being made anymore. However, variable twin turbos are a newly implimented concept, the RX-7s turbos are the same size and run together to produce maximum boost

Ah, not a good idea. If you want a Supra turbo then its best to get a Supra turbo, bolting on a turbo isnt so simple as there are many other aspects you need to look at. Example Fuel system, ECU and other engine things, plus chassis and drivetrain differences . In the long run its best to get what you want in the first place.

If (IF!) you know what you're doing it's cheaper to build yourself a turbo Supra out of an NA one. Especially if you're going to be doing a big single conversion anyway (in that case you'd be replacing many of the things you got by paying the huge premium to get a turbo car anyway).

 

[Azuremen]

Certainly building a massive single Turbo outta an NA would be cheaper and easier, as you are no doubt going to be replacing the pistons and everything anyhow. However, the NA's no doubt run a higher compression ratio than the turbo engines, and so will not accept much boost well...

 

[Emohawk]

Yup.
2JZ-GE: 10/10.5:1
2JZ-GTE: 8.5:1

The 2JZ has a huge aftermarket, I can't imagine it would be hard to get some low comp pistons.
Piston swapping is included in my 'if you know what you're doing' clause .

 

[Jay]

If (IF!) you know what you're doing it's cheaper to build yourself a turbo Supra out of an NA one. Especially if you're going to be doing a big single conversion anyway (in that case you'd be replacing many of the things you got by paying the huge premium to get a turbo car anyway).

Yes agreed, if your doing a big overhaul you will replace most parts anyway.

But if your looking for a fairly quick Supra with some mods (eg exhaust intake etc) it would be better to get a factory twin turbo Supra as you get all the goodies like 6 speed manual with it.

 

[Jay]

However, the NA's no doubt run a higher compression ratio than the turbo engines, and so will not accept much boost well...

Yes, depending on how much power your after you can allways go for a aftermarket thicker head gasket to reduce compression ratio.

 

[skip0110]

This post references a fair bit back in this thread, here is your fair warning.

Sequential setups on a V engine would be silly and fairly useless considering the complexity of piping needed to work.

The piping on such a setup is nothing compared to the piping on the STS remote-mount turbo systems for LS1 and LT1 engines. These mount the turbo (and wategate, etc) all the way at the back of the car, replacing the muffler, and pipe the pressurized air back the full length of the car to the engine bay. The benefit, they claim, is that the long pipes carrying the pressurized air eliminate the need for an intercooler, and the mounting of the turbo lowers heat buildup within the engine bay.

Article: http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/

But, with all that pipe between the turbo and the engine, I would image that turbo lag would be immense. Well, according to the page listed, miraculusly it is not. Since the tube is always filled with pressurized air (is it?), there is no lag, since air in at the turbo end means air out immediately at the engine side.

Lag or no lag, it certainly performs, boosting a F-body's stock 313 hp to 463 hp at 7 psi boost.

I thought this was a very interesting and innovative type of turbo system, and this thread reminded me of it.

 

[I6-4-eva]

This post references a fair bit back in this thread, here is your fair warning.

The piping on such a setup is nothing compared to the piping on the STS remote-mount turbo systems for LS1 and LT1 engines. These mount the turbo (and wategate, etc) all the way at the back of the car, replacing the muffler, and pipe the pressurized air back the full length of the car to the engine bay. The benefit, they claim, is that the long pipes carrying the pressurized air eliminate the need for an intercooler, and the mounting of the turbo lowers heat buildup within the engine bay.

Article: http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/

But, with all that pipe between the turbo and the engine, I would image that turbo lag would be immense. Well, according to the page listed, miraculusly it is not. Since the tube is always filled with pressurized air (is it?), there is no lag, since air in at the turbo end means air out immediately at the engine side.

Lag or no lag, it certainly performs, boosting a F-body's stock 313 hp to 463 hp at 7 psi boost.

I thought this was a very interesting and innovative type of turbo system, and this thread reminded me of it.

There is a similar setup for the toyota Tundra or Tacoma I forgot. Pretty cool.

 

[JNasty4G63]

The piping on such a setup is nothing compared to the piping on the STS remote-mount turbo systems for LS1 and LT1 engines.....Lag or no lag, it certainly performs, boosting a F-body's stock 313 hp to 463 hp at 7 psi boost.

Yea, I've seen those setups before. But, what I was talking about was a 2-turbo, sequential setup on a V engine. Yes, the piping required on those LS1s like that is immense. But, think of having 2 turbos under the hood, each with different spool and boost characteristics, and having to regulate both in sequence. That was what I was talking about. Thats why you never see a sequential 2-turbo setup on a V engine. The piping, electronics, and luck required to make something like that work wout be insane.

Hilg

 

[McLaren'sAngel]

Hiya! Meow! (='.'=)

This could be a bit old but here is a Lingenfelter C5 Twin Turboed!

1,100 HP

1/4 mile: 8.95

Street Legal!

http://www.lingenfelter.com/LPEinmedia.asp

Look at the bottom of the page to see CorvetteFever! Click on it to get in on the screen. its a PDF file

or HERE for short!
http://www.lingenfelter.com/images/CF427TT_eprint.pdf

 

[enuttage]

However, variable twin turbos are a newly implimented concept, the RX-7s turbos are the same size and run together to produce maximum boost

I don't want to make a habit of digging up long dead threads, but this should be clarified.

The turbos are the same size, but do not run together the entire time. The RX-7 (the FD3S) had sequential twin turbos, not parallel turbos (thought they can be fabricated to act in parallel), so the primary turbo spools pretty much constantly, while the secondary didn't kick in till around 4500rpm. 'Maximum' boost wasn't the reasoning, it was continuity of boost and low-end power.

Back to the original question:

I believe the reasoning behind the dialogue in the Initial D episode goes like this...

If the single-turbo RX-7 had to let off throttle to slow down (enough) in a corner, it would take a few moments to respool the (theoretically) larger turbo in order to gain the full benefits of boost. During that off-throttle time period, the twin turbo FD still had full use of at least the primary turbo, and therefore the acceleration advantage over the slower spooling, larger turbo.

That being said, that'd have to be either one hell of a tight turn, or one huge single turbo. Or both . Had the single turbo dude been a great driver, he could've left-foot braked through the turn while keeping the rpms (and therefore boost) up, having on-demand power coming out of the turn. He, like myself, apparently was not that good.

On top of that, when full boost does kick in at full throttle with a single turbo, you'd better not be in a tight turn and expect to maintain traction. Even the twins had issues when the secondary kicked in. A single turbo exacerbates this condition.

My single turbo FD was on full boost by around 3200rpm, and was producing nice power from about 2900rpm and up, all the way to redline. Mine was ball bearing, and smaller than some singles that folks run. My car produced less horsepower (a measely 450+) and top end than these guys, but better low rpm power.

Just thought this needed a little clarification.

-E