Quick Spool Turbine Housing Flapper Valve - Need help!
- Thread starter Alky V6
- Start date
If I see a 33% improvement with this device, I may be in some real trouble.
We'll find out this weekend.
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
DailyDrifter
The Slow and the Curious
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
I wished I lived in CA, I would love to learn from someone who thinks outside the box, and knows how to take in idea and turn it into a useful thing (I'm not saying I cant but I just dont have the tools or machinery to get that advanced ). Anyways it looks top notch, and if it works like it does in the video on the car you should be in good shape. Great work Donnie, let me know if your planning on moving to the east coast
). Anyways it looks top notch, and if it works like it does in the video on the car you should be in good shape. Great work Donnie, let me know if your planning on moving to the east coast Very nice job Don, but you should think of sealing the shaft with piston ring type of seal, something used on a turbine shaft to seal the oil. The shaft will leak since you have about 30-40 psi backpressure at that point. By using a piston ring maybe 2 of them stacked you can insert high temp anti-seeze from Jet products (2500F) and it won;t get pushed out by the backpressure.
I've seen the sound performance one leak black soot out of the shaft, after a short time of use.
I've seen the sound performance one leak black soot out of the shaft, after a short time of use.
Preliminary report. Just starting to analyze the data.
Before the valve, I was lucky to muster a 1.6x 60 foot with a very unsafe n/f ratio tune.
After the valve with the same unsafe n/f tune: 1.556 60 foot.
After richening the n/f ratio on the nitrous tune, and still using plenty of nitrous retard: back to a 1.63 60 foot.
Still plenty of tuning to do.
The time that the valve was set to operate was 2.0 seconds. That included a time span of about .940 seconds pre-launch, with the nitrous activated for the last .465 second of that pre-launch time.
The car launched out of the hole with a more consistent pull, instead of a hit, lay down, then a spotty pull to turbo boost. With all that I have going on with the car with all the systems and such, the launch felt seamless. A nice, smooth launch.
I wonder if the valve, offering a different exhaust backpressure when closed, had more of an effect on how the nitrous worked rather than having any significant affect on spooling the turbo. At first glance, it doesn't appear that the rpm to map point relationships changed much through the initial low boost region (0 to 8 psi boost).
Before the valve, I was lucky to muster a 1.6x 60 foot with a very unsafe n/f ratio tune.
After the valve with the same unsafe n/f tune: 1.556 60 foot.
After richening the n/f ratio on the nitrous tune, and still using plenty of nitrous retard: back to a 1.63 60 foot.
Still plenty of tuning to do.
The time that the valve was set to operate was 2.0 seconds. That included a time span of about .940 seconds pre-launch, with the nitrous activated for the last .465 second of that pre-launch time.
The car launched out of the hole with a more consistent pull, instead of a hit, lay down, then a spotty pull to turbo boost. With all that I have going on with the car with all the systems and such, the launch felt seamless. A nice, smooth launch.
I wonder if the valve, offering a different exhaust backpressure when closed, had more of an effect on how the nitrous worked rather than having any significant affect on spooling the turbo. At first glance, it doesn't appear that the rpm to map point relationships changed much through the initial low boost region (0 to 8 psi boost).
I'm glad someone trustworthy has built one of these..The Sound performance one has gotten more questions then answers..
Brake-boosting my 35r on my DSM without nos isn't happening so far..I'm hoping a device like this would help greatly...The 2.0 4G63 doesn't put out enough low end torque to spool larger turbos with an automatic..
Have you tried it without the nos yet ? Great work !!
Brake-boosting my 35r on my DSM without nos isn't happening so far..I'm hoping a device like this would help greatly...The 2.0 4G63 doesn't put out enough low end torque to spool larger turbos with an automatic..
Have you tried it without the nos yet ? Great work !!
Lately, I've been concentrating on the 'nos' fuel table. After I have all the systems timed and tuned properly, I'll go back to the 'no nos' fuel table and get an answer for you. The work on the 'nos' fuel table is teaching me a lot. Some of it will be useful with the 'no nos' fuel table.
I do all my tuning at the track so it may be awhile before I get an answer for you.
And, thanks for the compliment. I really appreciate it.
The boost valve definitely is making a difference.
Last night at the track I started leaving the spool valve on longer than the one second at the last testing. This time 2.5 seconds. I havent' studied the datalogs in detail yet, and I don't want to post any inaccurate data, but I'm pretty excited and just wanted to give a heads up.
All tests before, it would take until around 5750 rpm to reach 146 kPa boost. I had one pass last night where 146 kPa was reached by 5,000 rpm!
I also finally got an exhaust back pressure reading for my current combination. 22-23 exhaust back pressure to obtain 280-288 kPa (26-27 psi) boost pressure. Amazing. That is better than the 1:1 holy grail. Actually, it's .85:1.
Last night at the track I started leaving the spool valve on longer than the one second at the last testing. This time 2.5 seconds. I havent' studied the datalogs in detail yet, and I don't want to post any inaccurate data, but I'm pretty excited and just wanted to give a heads up.
All tests before, it would take until around 5750 rpm to reach 146 kPa boost. I had one pass last night where 146 kPa was reached by 5,000 rpm!
I also finally got an exhaust back pressure reading for my current combination. 22-23 exhaust back pressure to obtain 280-288 kPa (26-27 psi) boost pressure. Amazing. That is better than the 1:1 holy grail. Actually, it's .85:1.
I compared a couple passes that were with and without the boost valve assist.
http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/al...advancement-fuel-delivery-15.html#post2286571
http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/al...advancement-fuel-delivery-15.html#post2286571
And what would a good 1/8 mile be for a 224ci with a 2440rpm stall T/C?
224 ci in your weight car with the right 91, properly set up 5.20s to 5.30s but your going to have to fight with it. Like I said before Don I feel the turbo is too big for your application
Adam Connell
Monster Truckin since 87'
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2006
Man Don your car makes me wanna build a nice little budget turbo LSX V8 regal on methanol... It blows me away how far you can take these cars on "stock" suspension. The only reason I even want the 8 is that I can grab a 5.3 or 6.0 for cheap and the stock short block will take me farther than I even want to go. I can find decent regal bodies down here in Texas for cheap too.
College kids are not known for being rich ya know haha!
Do you run an intercooler?
College kids are not known for being rich ya know haha!
Do you run an intercooler?
Yes! I'm a firm believer in intercooling blown methanol configurations, when rules allow it. It allows you to run a leaner mixture by not having to use so much fuel for combustion cooling. In my particular application, I lose a lot of power when I richen beyond 4.63:1.