Custom turbo questions

[83ford]

Found this I'm not sure what kit it is but it is a ats

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

 

[G. Mann]

Exactly what my earlier post was about, when I said we are living with design choices driven by what was available in 1985.

My suggestion that someone build a set of welding jigs to make exhaust manifolds with up pipes like the 99 and up PSD 7.3 has for IDI's. That would give choices of using a lot of the newer turbos, if the intake manifold was replaced with intake manifold like used on the 99 and up 7.3's...

Design the pipes to join with V band clamps so removal or replacement was easier, Clock position of down pipe could be made better and pipe larger.. etc etc..

Any takers on the idea?

I'm convinced the reason we don't get much boost on IDI systems is because they are so poorly designed and use "antique" turbos.. Also, the flow rates are not matched for the size needed on tubing to maximize work energy drawn from exhaust gasses..

 

[IDIoit]

and then a valley pan is needed,
from what i remember, when i broke down my old 6.9,
making a valley pan is gonna be a royal PITA,
may need an adapter to seal it up.
lotsa work.

 

[Black dawg]

Exactly what my earlier post was about, when I said we are living with design choices driven by what was available in 1985.

My suggestion that someone build a set of welding jigs to make exhaust manifolds with up pipes like the 99 and up PSD 7.3 has for IDI's. That would give choices of using a lot of the newer turbos, if the intake manifold was replaced with intake manifold like used on the 99 and up 7.3's...

Design the pipes to join with V band clamps so removal or replacement was easier, Clock position of down pipe could be made better and pipe larger.. etc etc..

Any takers on the idea?

I'm convinced the reason we don't get much boost on IDI systems is because they are so poorly designed and use "antique" turbos.. Also, the flow rates are not matched for the size needed on tubing to maximize work energy drawn from exhaust gasses..

THe available turbos are old technology, but arent poorly matched to these engines. They easily make the boost that was intended. I do agree the exhaust side on most of them is poor though. I have always thought a system mocked after a psd would be cool, but there just isnt nearly the room in the v (even with NO intake) to get the turbo far back and low. But after many years of driving these trucks I have learned to accept them for what they are, I tried for too many years to make them run like modern stuff.

 

[Greg5OH]

R&D was telling me with an S line turbo, his cam, 180cc pump and stage 1 injectors his buddy keith was laying down over 400whp/800 torque. thats what the 2014 superduty is putting down!

 

[IDIoit]

R&D was telling me with an S line turbo, his cam, 180cc pump and stage 1 injectors his buddy keith was laying down over 400whp/800 torque. thats what the 2014 superduty is putting down!

but, at what cost?

 

[Greg5OH]

im sure not cheap. the turbo probably close to 1k, pump is 1700, injectors are 312, then piping, intercooler, studs etc.

so its a premium of approx 2k over a "standard" turbo build id say.

his 130cc is listed at $1000. Mel charges only $8xx for a 130 cc pump.
R&D site says the 130 is 300whp/550wtq capable.

Anyone know what Mels fuel curve is like on the 130cc? R&D says "Flat fuel curve only dropping to 100cc at 4k RPM" and "110CC at 2800 rpm"

 

[G. Mann]

Valley pan question.

I believe the stock valley pan could be used with a custom intake that was made of a plate for each bank with short tubes welded on, then silicone coupling hoses [short ones] then tubes to go either to the compressor, or intercooler. If designed right, the turbo could be mounted forward of where they are with IDI banks or others. Drain tube would go from turbo to the valley pan for return oil.. CDR .. well.. several locations are possible for that..

If the turbo up pipes were V band clamps and the compressor side was a short silicone hose into aluminum or stainless tubing, removal of turbo would be way simple..

If the intake manifold was laid out right, I believe you could have access to glow plugs, injectors, and return lines without interference with the Turbo.

Just a thought.. I still think the present turbo systems for IDI's are old designs and don't use the 30 yrs of turbo advances.. The same displacement 7.3 PSD runs much more boost, with better response. IDI engines move the same amount of exhaust hot air, we just aren't pulling the work energy out of it with the present systems.. and Turbo is a two part system, Exhaust and compressor.. both have to be designed for the right balance to get work energy.

I used to do this for jet engines.. same rules of physics apply.. just scaled for the 6.9/7.3 .

 

[Greg5OH]

the PSD is also DI, has different cam profiles, and slightly differnt compression too

 

[G. Mann]

Good point on the DI/computer control for the PSD, which gives tighter control of injection timing, which makes the PSD 7.3 meet EPA emission controls better... However.. the engine still displaces the same Cubic inches of air flow as the IDI, and makes the same heat energy [very very close, I'll bet].

A turbo is a heat energy to work energy conversion device. It uses the energy in the hot exhaust gases to drive the turbine wheel, which makes work energy, which is used to drive the compressor wheel to compress air [all work energy, on both sides of the turbo]. Just how much heat energy the exhaust gases have to convert to work energy depends on the flow path from the source [combustion chamber] to the turbine wheel, hot side. If the tube is longer, or has more bends, some of the energy is lost at those places rather than being available to apply to turning the turbine wheel.

The work energy produced by the turbine wheel to drive the compressor wheel likewise must be used wisely on the "cold side" of the turbo. If there are twists and turns in the compressed air path, that cause turbulent flow, the compressor "feels it" by requiring more work energy to move the same amount of air. The old "hat section" is a nightmare from the jet engine design standpoint. The intake manifold design really doesn't follow the good principles of fluid dynamics of flow either..

So for the same flow rate from the combustion chamber of the PSD vs IDI .. I see a lot of loss of energy transfer.. which is why, I believe, 3 to 8 PSI of boost is about all we get from the IDI turbo systems...

Just my thoughts.. yours may be different..

 

[Greg5OH]

3-8 pai is because of the turbo design itself. I havent measured what my hx35 puts out yet but im sure it will be 20psi+. I know another guy om FTE with an hx35 was seeing 35psi. Ots anout the turbine and compressor soze ratios, fin design eyc as sure you know from jet engines. The stock chatgers leave much to be desired looking at their maps

 

[Black dawg]

Never seen one of these turbo kits that would only make 3-8 psi.

 

[IDIoit]

my ATS produces 10 psi max

 

[FORDF250HDXLT]

my banks snap the boost right up to about 9.5 on log truck (didn't alter the WG) and chip truck peaks about 13 psi with the WG tweaked.

 

[sjwelds]

See 13 psi regularly (would see more if I messed with the WG)

Info on setup in signature

JM2CW