Absolutely, not a problem! If you would like more pictures of mine just let me know and I will do what I can.

 

stock IC - I interpreted it as a stock chip

IC = intercooler

...IC is usually used for Integrated Circuit not Intercoolers

Dont you think the pipes will hit the ground if you go over speed bump or something???

 

In response earlier posted.....

 

as long as he dosent put lowering springs on or smaller tires,
he shouldnt bottom out on bumps. i have a custom y pipe that is very close to the ground but does not hit. it looks good but he had to do it different because i have the long tube hooker headers.. like doward said the piping will be ran tighter than those pics he gave us!

 

Yep. I'll run it tighter - I'll be running the 16" 245/50/16s, and yes, I will be lowering the car about 1" when I replace the springs.

Will it be a tight fit? You bet. Will it be worth it to see the as I nail 3rd, that BOV whooshes and the turbo screams, and I set sail past the 350 TPI Iroc? You bet!!!

Got boost? :hail::hail::hail:

 

You're a freak!!!:sillylol:

you plan on making this a "bolt on kit" and sending me one for free, right???:sillylol:

 

once he does it, i am going to do it too. (not exactly his design) but i just dont wanna be the first to do it.

One of my freinds online is basically a turbo expert. He says that the 16G turbo for 1st and 2nd Gen DSM's is almost a perfect choice for this motor. I will probably get that one unless he finds something better.

Also Doward, he says NOT to use a Blow off valve, instead get a Compressor Bypass Valve. Blow off valves dont work good for MAF.

He also says that you should expect far more than 200hp on 8-10 psi.

 

Actually, after I dyno it, I'm thinking of making a kit of it, and selling it.

Sell a 16G turbo, piping, intercooler, and injectors for like... $2500?

Sell just the piping for like $300-$400... I dunno yet. This is a royal PITA right now!

 

I'll hit a dyno afterward... Yeah, I know about the maf scenario - causes it to run rich for a second (MAF thinks more air is there than there is)

We'll see, we'll see... first the exhaust!

 

he says you should not put the turbo in the center, it will be too far away from the exaust manifold and the gas velocity will have slowed down by then and you wouldnt get as high boost, and you would have bad turbo lag.

He says to mount it as close the the passenger side exaust manifolds as you can. This will cut down and turbo lag and increase boost.

It doesnt matter if drivers side exaust manifold will be farther away, the 3 passenger side exaust ports combined with the 3 farther away driver side ports should be more than enough to spool it up quickly. (considering these turbos are meant for 4 cylinder engines.)

Also, he said to get a cam with Low duration, high duration is high on turbos because turbos have alot of backpressure. Make sure you have 1.6 rockers so you can get as high lift as you possibly can while still maintaining low duration.

 

That's why I've chosen a turbo that's known for super fast spooling, as well as the fact that velocity or no - 2.8L pushes harder than 2.0L of exhaust gas!

Um... I'm doing it the other way around. Longer passanger side than drivers. Trust me, I'm getting the exhaust there as quickly and efficiently as possible!

Check out a review that (I think) Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords did with cams vs boost. I think you'll see that if you stop looking at 'boost' as pressure, and instead as constant, then you'll see that you will build power regardless of duration/lift. Think of it like this - you ALWAYS are running 14.7 psi boost (atmospheric pressure). Adding FI just increases how much you're running (it's known as absolute pressure - I'll be running about 22.7 absolute)

 

One other thing... not disputing your friend's expertise, but if your turbo has a lot of backpressure, then the turbo you are using is too small.

Seriously. How do you think an air cooled Porsche gets away with a turbo?

My first upgrade after the heads/cam/exhaust/intake porting and all, will be either 20g turbo upgrade. (A 20g will be a very good match for the 2.8) Or, I'll go T4 (better for a 3.4 sized engine)

 

turbos have alot of backpressure compared to headers at low rpm.

The backpressure at low RPM can cause exess air to flow back into the cylinder on the intake, thus decreasing low end power, thus making the turbo spool up slower.

http://www.grapeaperacing.com/GrapeA.../turbocams.cfm

 

Wow guys, who really gives a crap? As long as the turbo gets bolted to the engine and works, I don't think anyone cares that if the passenger side exhaust tube was 1.3803 inches shorter then the driver's side, and if the driver's side is tilted at an 18.62 degree angle, you'll feel a 3.09 percent decrease in the spool time. Once the thing is on and working, THEN you can tune it.

 

lmao, i agree with tom, lets not argue about how it should be done. Let him do it, then he can figure out to improve or make changes.

go doward go.
:lala:

 

I agree, just let him get it on there and working. The next guy who does it can refine things more, or later on Doward may try to refine more, the main thing now is to just get it on and run. Sounds to me like Doward has things fairly well planned out, I'm just gonna sit back and watch the build up and will only offer ideas if he asks at this point.
This isn't meant as a slam to anyone that has tried to give him pointers, but I just think at this point he's doing fine on his own, if this works well for him I have a feeling a year from now there will be some more refined turbo V6s running around, maybe even my GF's 85

 

Yeah I wasn't insulting anyone either. But that's the way these turbo projects have seem to gone- trying to make the system 100% perfect from the start, then they either get overwhelmed or (more commonly) just give up.

For instance, this whole chip burning thing- don't burn a chip!! Screw it! See how the computer does on it's own!

Big Hint from Tom's Secret Tips: Most import guys that put a turbo on -don't- get a chip reprogrammed for their car.

Makes ya wonder, eh? Consider that TomP's contribution to the turbo project.

 

you cant tune the position of the turbo after you have everything installed and working without redoing the whole system.

I dont mind if he does a sh1tty job, because when i do it, it will be almost perfect. I will have the most powerfull (non nitrous) 2.8L firebird around, and my dyno results will prove it

I just unbolted everything from the engine, im going to pull it this weekend. Send the heads to a machine shop to get them machined for roller lifters and larger valves.

Hopefully i can get the bottom end rebuilt before the heads come back in. After i get the heads, i will rebuild the top end.

Put the engine back in and then start fabricating my exasut manifold's and tubing.

I hope to have the whole shebang done in 2 months, probably less depending on how many hours i have to work at my job.

 

Yeap, when I put the supercharger on my miata I kept the stock ECU and didnt change any chip, now that I'm switching it to turbo it will have the same setup. Its not optimal but it worked pretty well.

 

If you do your own welding then you can play more with the turbo positioning after. As for it being a ****ty job, if he ends up happy with the results thats all that matters.

 

well im doing the chip. i have yet to here from redraif as to what she wanted to do. her motor had to much cam. this one is easy. im simply retarding timming when it gets to boost values and taking the lock down to 150grs/sec in the last maf table and sliding it to 225 grs/sec. better to let is read then stop at 150. anyways its nothing truly custom and hes getting his own software. this is just a safe guard to keep his *** out of trouble.
im noly charging him for the chip and the holder. not like $500 or anything $20 shiupping chip and holder and its got the mods he needs to get started on his own.

 

I know the 3.4thgens I have seen turboed, had stock ecus, or they didn't mention anything about that.

I also belive doward is doing this on a stock internal engine. If thats the case, no, it wont be the "best" or "most powerful". We all know that to make the engine the best, and most efficent, does take internal engine work. He just wants a turbo, be the first, the ginnie pig for the rest of us. I also understand hes doing this on a budget, and we all know internal engine work cost ALOT.


I say let him rip!!! :hail: :hail: :hail:

Well all be setting back foaming at the mouth while hes out

 

Doward...

I am thinking you will probally hit the 200hp mark.
It is said that each pound of un intercooled boost is about 10hp at the flywheel or about 7-8hp at the wheels.
I also read somone that adding an intercooler will increase hp by 20-35%.
Since its a smaller intercooler lets say 20%.
8psi of boost
8psix10hp = 80hp
80*1.20 = 96hp/flywheel added.
I dunno if u have a 2.8 or 3.1 didnt read.
So ur at ABOUT:
135 + 96 = 231hp/flywheel
I am guessing you will dyno at about 190hp +/- 15hp.

Cool.

I am gettting a thirdgen again.
I CANT STAND COMPACT CARS!

 

*sighs* I really hate to have my own thread locked, but Lee7, you just pissed me off, so here goes.

[rant]

First off, what proof do you have of what you're doing? Who in the hell are you to come in here and bash me, when I'm working on the ONE thing that EVERY ONE ON HERE has dreamed of?

A couple points - Tell me why you're having your heads machined for roller lifters.

Excuse me, I need to raise the ol' BS flag here -


Ahh... much better...

Anyone that knows anything about a roller cam'd engine will tell you -

1) The lifters aren't in the head. Machine the heads till you got a pile of cast iron dust, and guess what? Still can't use roller lifters.

2) You don't have anything machined for lifters. You use a bar system, or a stock-style spider system to keep the lifters from spinning in the valley.

Ok, ok... lets assume you made a huge typo, and you really meant you were getting roller lifters. Can you tell me what you'd need to check next? I'd think you should have no trouble answering that one. Or does your precious Grape Ape's Racing ***** not answer that one? (more on your grapeape site in a moment)

Shall I even get into the fact you'll need a totally custom built billet roller cam? How are you gonna keep the cam from walking? Yeah, another big

Can't tune the position of the turbo? Step away from the crack pipe son. You see, when you make your own exhaust, out of your own steel piping, you have this funny ability to rip it all back out - and do it again. Gonna do it once, and I can damn sure do it again.

Turbo causes massive backpressure vs headers? Wow. Bluntly man, you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. There's a thing known as the surge line on a compressor flow map. Look at it - the ONLY way you have super backpressure at low rpm, is if you don't have enough gas to push the turbine. That's known as using TOO big a turbo. You'll never get enough pressure to spin the turbine worth a darn, and make boost, until waaaay up in the RPM range. It's all about turbo efficiency. A well matched turbo will have a little backpressure at idle, and will not create an insane amount of pressure at full boost vs max powerband rpm. (say 8psi @ 5400 rpm for me)

If you honestly think you'll have the most powerful 2.8 Fbody, you're sadly mistaken. My ultimate goal is the fastest 2.8 FBody on the planet. I will have it.

Fastest 2.8 Firebird? Sure, you can have that. But know you'll be second to the black '88 Camaro.

Ok, Grape Ape Racing. First off, how much credibility can you give a racing site named after a cartoon?

Read this -

Turbo motors place a large flow demand at low valve lifts, and roller cams cannot accelerate the valve opening as fast as a flat tappet. They do catch up and pass a flat tappet after about 20° or so, but up until that point the favor goes toward the flat tappet cam.

That's a quote from that site, and it's flat wrong. A roller cam and a flat tappet hydraulic cam, with the exact same spec duration @ .050" and lift, when compared will find this -

The roller cam has more lift overall, than the flat tappet. Roller cams allow for a MUCH steeper slope than a flat tappet. Why in the world do you think they make more power? They open faster (steeper ramp) and open longer at more duration. It's a dome, vs a inverted V for crying out loud!

Another quote -

On the exhaust side, it's not the springs that put the loads on the cam lobes. The problem there is that there is still so much cylinder pressure trying to hold that valve closed. This puts tremendous pressure on the exhaust lobes.

OMG.. If you've got zero valve lash (like all good little engines) then when the valve is closed, and the cam is off the lobe, there is no pressure on the cam - just the spring holding the valve shut! 'Tremendous pressure on the exhaust lobes' ? Pass me a hit of whatever that guy's smokin'! The only pressure on the exhaust lobe, is that of overcoming the spring pressure. Once that is achieved, the valve opens, and the air is shoved out from the upward movement of the piston (the exhaust stroke).

If there were any real pressure, the piston would not move upward. It would compress the air, and bounce back, resulting in probably a bent crank.

/rant

Back to the topic at hand - Exhaust is going to be ordered Saturday, and the boost gauge/A pillar pod ordered Wednesday. For now, I'm still awaiting Rich's response to cleaning my injectors (when to send them in)

 

LOL, as much as I'd LOVE for that to be true, please remember that an engine is nothing more than a big air pump. 8psi boost is about 54% more air into the engine. Not accounting for density, but assuming I can get the air down to ambient temperature (ha, yeah right - no intercooler is THAT good, with no pressure loss!) then we can figure as such -

135hp (stock) + 1.54 (54% more air) = 207.9hp - I'm aiming to hit 200hp with it, before I port/polish the heads/intake/exhaust/etc, and the new cam setup.

I'll dyno it, tho! It'll be sweet! I'm REALLY anxious to see the torque levels produced, since the air/fuel mixture will burn longer - producing more torque on the crank!

 

Funstick, yes, thanks! I'll be sure your name is in there when she rolls out, and I do a big celebration!

Not doing a totally custom prom... just more of adding a safety net, till I get my own equipment!

 

Not trying to rain on anyone parade- Its just that I'm looking for 220-240 HP naturally asperated- I will easily breach 200.

Doward, what if you were to use a passenger side header on the drivers side of the car and run the turbo off that towards the front? Just a thought.

 

Lifters are in the block, sorry i wasnt thinking right. But in order to use roller lifters you must machine the block, you cant just swap them in on our blocks.

I didnt say you CANT change the position of the turbo after its already been installed, i just meant that it would be very impracticle to have to redo all of your plumbing. Why not do it right the first time?

I never said Turbos cause massive backpressure vs heads. (if your turbo is too small it might) i just said that Turbos have more backpressure because of it having to spin the turbo, its not as free flowing as headers. I never mentioned the word massive. I think you are exagerating.

I am not trying to flame you or anything, i am just trying to provide constructive critisim, but it seems you do not like that much.

The cam you ordered will not work right with a turbo, its duration is way too high. I ordered the same one as you, and i am going to send mine back and get a custom ground one with high lift and low duration.

I am running the Iterator on Dyno2000 to find the perfect cam profile for a T04 turbo, which is slightly larger than a 16G.

Right now i have found one that will make 432hp @ 6500 (474 @ 7500, but i highly doubt our engines, even when built, can rev that high.)

This is with ported heads, and roller lifters. You would of course, need a rebuilt bottom end for this much power... i am not even sure the block can handle it.

and FYI, the cam you ordered only makes 353hp @ 6000 rpm

 

wait, it looks like my recent itterator batch has just finished. This is the outcome:

 

*sighs*

Give it a whirl, see where it goes... that's the best advice I have.

We'll see when it's all said and done. I do take constructive criticism well.... saying I'm doing a 'sh1tty' job isn't constructive.

 

One thing I will point out on your batch test. Peak hp means squat. Avg power over the 1320 is what matters. HP sells parts, Torque wins races.

You've got no power on hand until 4k! Your torque band is going to blow with that cam setup.

Like I said, go for it, tho. Run the dyno, then run the 1/4 mile. I said I'd be faster, not make more peak power :sillylol:

 

that graph doesnt show torque, i will take a sshot of the torque right now.



unfortunatly, the itterator can only run a test for HP or Torque, not both at the same time. After some work, i will find a happy medium.

 

You also realize you're going to need heads that'll flow almost 350cfm, right? The numbers game almost never matches up with real world applications.

I'd really advise against it, tho... I don't want you to **** your $$ away. But if you really think it'll work, go for it, and we'll see how it all turns out!

 

these test were done on "Low Performance Ported Valves" with 1.72 intake and 1.42 exaust. (i think thats stock)

Although our heads probably flow better than Low Performance heads (from what the Dyno2000 manual says, Low Performance meens very crappy, like honda civic heads or something)

 

Actually, Civic heads flow pretty well... but I've had enough of this. You've obviously got your mind made up. Do your setup, I'll do mine, and we'll who's faster at the end of the day.

Run what ya brung, and hope ya brung enough!
I'm off to bed guys!

 

Ok, your the one being stuborn not me. Your cam that you ordered was made for an NA setup with no forced induction in mind, where valve overlap is a good thing, in the world of forced induction, too much vavle overlap is a bad thing.

Im the one who is freind with a turbo/import expert, i am the one running the itterator testing to find the best cam design.

What are you doing? trying to stick to a budget and use parts not made for forced induction.

We will see who pumps out the most hp, and who runs faster in the quarter mile. (That is if the block can handle 500+ hp )

Think of this as "freindly competition"

 

ok, after some tinkering around, i think i have found almost a perfect cam.

412hp @ 6500 rpm and 353 ft/lbs @ 5500.

not bad for a 2.8L v6, but still not as much as those Turbo 4cyl DSM's are pumping out





as you can see in the bottom pic, very little valve overlap.

 

Man my moneys on doward, hes makin a from scratch Turbo set up that when done and works EVERYONE on this board,if they choose, can afford and duplicate.

Your talkin about a setup that we can take and buy an already turboed car by the way it sounds.

Your talkin all this stuff and like doward said you have no proof of doin(outside of "CompDyno" testin)

ANYONE can make Dyno2000 print outs..

I think when he is done he'll have a well bugeted turboed 2.8

Like i said my moneys on Doward all the way!!!

 

i am backing downward, however, i do know a little about turbos (mostly learned from half ***** brother, and video games) and he is onto somthing with this cam thing, to much valve overlap is bad. alltt the air you push into the engine you blow out the exhaust. not that it is going to make a huge difference, but the less valve overlap the better for forced air.

LEE7 why wold you purchase a cam you were not sure about. you said you got the same cam but were returning. dude. you gotta be carefull. many places don't like returns. you need to do more research before you make a purchase like that.

also i would just like to say that i meant no disrespect by my comments. just rying to help you guys build the best turbo monsters possible.

 

On second thought, I'm going to stay out of this, noticing it's already a flame war.

 

i always buy "crap" online hehe. Summit takes returns.

I buy so much crap online it doesnt really matter what all i buy, as long as i can get it paid off. (and i can)

 

Do you realize hat GM never got that kind of HP out of their 2.8 60*V6 experimental race motors?

Do you know how long that motor will last with that much crank pressure- I'll give you a hint- you may make it up to 6500 rpm's ONE time and then kaboom.- You need to learn more about engine internals

 

TechSmurf - You're a smart guy!

Lee7, I'm not gonna argue with you, man. You do your thing, and I'm gonna do mine. We'll see how it goes, and when you get yours all set, we'll meet up and run 'em, and settle this all, ok?

I meant this post to be a thread that I could keep everyone updated on at least one turbo project under way. Please, don't screw that up.

 

Great Idea, and hope it goes well. I know very little, but offer any help I can.

 

And thats a good idea, whenever I get a notice in the email that there is a new post in this thread I come here to look pretty quick, unfortunatly the last few posts haven't had any updates. Maybe anyone else who is doing their own turbo project should just have their own thread about it, HINTHINTNUDGENUDGE

I'll go back to waiting for the next update.

 

UPDATE! My project isn't moving because I don't have a wastegate yet! Woohoo!!!! Nor do I have the steel to build my flanges this weekend.. but I'm going to try to find the steel I need in Tucson, so that may yet get done on schedule.

The way I'm planning on doing this involves building only a custom passenger's side manifold, and bringing the driver's exhaust gas around via a modified stock Y-pipe at first, and a custom pipe with about 5% better flow potential when it gets budgeted. Hence when mine does move, it's going to be a rather quick job of the exhaust half, and as I have no intercooler yet, the intake will be pretty quick too. Water will come in the form of a TB bypass.. two birds with one stone. Oil is my only current plumbing concern.

My concerns with the injection system at present are my own doing, as I lack the equipment for prom burning, the funds for larger injectors, and the concern for my motor to keep me from doing it

 

No offense, but anything can work out on paper or a computer. It's the real world stuff that counts. (Has anyone ever, EVER seen me estimate horsepower for a person's engine?)

Again, we're going with nitpicking... which cam, which lifters, screw it guys, full speed ahead, keep doing what you're all doing. Besides; if you do the perfect setup for the first time, that leaves you with nothing to work on! Cars aren't meant to be finished, in my opinion. Once someone finishes the turbo project (whether it be Doward, TechSmurf, or Lee), then the ideas for improvements can come.

 

Im just waiting to see which one of these guys finish what they started.

I think tomp is absolutely right...got to get it working before starting to tune it...

 

yeah, i guess you are right, power on paper is alot different then power on the ground.

But, I have run Dyno2000 through some tried and true engine setups when i first got it, and the Dyno2000 came very close to the engine setups in real life. So i know for a fact that Dyno2000 is fairly accurate.

I am actually taking the time to find the best parts for the job, and the best way to impliment them.

What is Dower doing? using parts designed with no thought of forced induction in mind. Sure his setup will probably work, and will probably make at least 250hp, but with a simple cam designed for forced induction, he could be making massive power.

I am completely rebuilding my 2.8. This meens crank, pistons, connecting rods, exaust manifold, valve springs, etc. I am trying to make this the strongest 2.8L i can. In fact, i was even going to make a thread asking if V8 Pistons and Connecting rods will work on our V6's.

And i am pretty damn sure, if some Aluminum block DSM 4cyl can make over 600hp, i feel that if you built the 2.8 block right, it should handle at least 400.

Basically the only thing standing in the way of making massive power from the 2.8's, is how strong the engine block is, and we will certainly find out.

Doward, i wish you all the luck in the world, a 2.8L turbo FBody is a really cool idea, alot more unique than all the 350's. But if you are building your engine on a budget, and not using parts that are designed for forced induction, you will never make as much power as an engine designed for forced induction.

 

yeah, because we all know anyone who uses parts not designed for forced induction, and ALOT of guesswork, will ALWAYS have a more powerfull engine.

WTF is so wrong with actually doing research and buying parts DESIGNED for turbo's instead of buying parts made for NA setups?

Sure his setup will probably run fine on a stock, or mildly modified engine, which alot of people can do, and make mild power.

My design would require a total engine rebuild with stronger parts, and alot more work involved. But the outcome will be greater.

Yes, its true that most people, if they could. Would buy Dowards setup or duplicate it, because its less expensive, and involves less work.

In fact, if i made a turbo setup, i wouldnt even want people to duplicate mine, i like the idea of being one of a kind.

And yes, ANYONE can print out Dyno2000 results, but from my experience, Dyno2000 is pretty damn accurate. So in theory, if you can make a setup in Dyno2000, you should be able to build an engine with the exact specs that you put in Dyno2000, and if you ran it thru a real life dyno, you should see comparable results.

The only thing Dyno2000 doesnt tell you is if your block will stand up to the power or not. Dyno2000 assumes that your block will never break, it is up to the end user to decide if the setup will blow up 20 feet down the track.

Whether the block can stand up to the power or not is the only competition in my mind. Because i already know, that if the block holds up, i will beat Dower in a race. (unless he changes his current design.)

And its not like when i first get my setup complete, i am not going to be running 15 PSI of boost right off the bat. I will set the boost really low (like around 4) and then work my way up gradually. When i think i have come close to the blocks limits, i will back down a little and keep it there.