Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » Turbo (Kinda non GMC but still)
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216953 is a reply to message #216900] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:08   |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
since 1992.
I have put on over couple hundred miles.
It has been featured in several magazines.
I will have it in MO at the International convention.
I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
> like to see.
>
>
> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
> --
> 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216954 is a reply to message #216953] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:13 |
 |
WD0AFQ
Messages: 7111
Registered: November 2004
Location: Dexter, Mo.
Karma: 207
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| jimk wrote on Sun, 04 August 2013 20:08 |
I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
since 1992.
I have put on over couple hundred miles.
It has been featured in several magazines.
I will have it in MO at the International convention.
I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
> like to see.
>
>
> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
> --
> 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
The joker don't run mufflers either. Passed me out in west Texas, climbing a hill, at 80 mph. Scared me and Teri to death. Thought we were being hit by a crashing jet plane from behind.
This is a true statement
Dan
3 In Stainless Exhaust Headers
One Ton All Discs/Reaction Arm
355 FD/Quad Bag/Alum Radiator Manny Tran/New eng.
Holley EFI/10 Tire Air Monitoring System
Solarized Coach/Upgraded Windows
Satelite TV/On Demand Hot Water/3Way Refer
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216956 is a reply to message #216953] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:09 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Correction: Couple hundred thousand or more.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
> since 1992.
> I have put on over couple hundred miles.
> It has been featured in several magazines.
> I will have it in MO at the International convention.
> I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
> powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
>
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
>> like to see.
>>
>>
>> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
>> --
>> 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216960 is a reply to message #216954] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:22 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan,
I was just testing the coach out to see that he Oldsmobile van with all the
parts weighing over 6,000 lbs had effected its ability to pull a hill.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Dan Gregg <gregg_dan@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> jimk wrote on Sun, 04 August 2013 20:08
> > I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
> > since 1992.
> > I have put on over couple hundred miles.
> > It has been featured in several magazines.
> > I will have it in MO at the International convention.
> > I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
> > powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
> > > like to see.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
> > > --
> > > 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GMCnet mailing list
> > > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jim Kanomata
> > Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> > jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> > http://www.appliedgmc.com
> > 1-800-752-7502
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
> The joker don't run mufflers either. Passed me out in west Texas, climbing
> a hill, at 80 mph. Scared me and Teri to death. Thought we were being hit
> by a crashing jet plane from behind.
>
> This is a true statement
>
> Dan
> --
> Dan & Teri Gregg
> Dexter, Mo.
>
> http://danandteri.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216961 is a reply to message #216953] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:23 |
Ronald Pottol
Messages: 505
Registered: September 2012
Location: Redwood City, California
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
How much boost do you run? Is is low boost with an absolute pressure sensor
so you don't loose power up in the mountains, or....?
Do you do burnouts at rallies?
How does the transmission handle it? Are there cooling issues? Ever stick
it on a dyno?
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
> since 1992.
> I have put on over couple hundred miles.
> It has been featured in several magazines.
> I will have it in MO at the International convention.
> I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
> powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
>
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
> > like to see.
> >
> >
> >
> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
> > --
> > 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Plato seems wrong to me today.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
1973 26' GM outfitted
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216965 is a reply to message #216961] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 20:40 |
sgltrac
Messages: 2797
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
More importantly, are you bringing it to Coos bay?
Todd Sullivan
Sully
77 royale
Seattle
On Aug 4, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Ronald Pottol <ronaldpottol@gmail.com> wrote:
> How much boost do you run? Is is low boost with an absolute pressure sensor
> so you don't loose power up in the mountains, or....?
>
> Do you do burnouts at rallies?
>
> How does the transmission handle it? Are there cooling issues? Ever stick
> it on a dyno?
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a 540 CAD with twin turbos, port injected, intercooled in m coach
>> since 1992.
>> I have put on over couple hundred miles.
>> It has been featured in several magazines.
>> I will have it in MO at the International convention.
>> I go for function and not much for show so it does not look flashy, just
>> powerful to get the coach and the minivan over the Rockies.
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM, anthony ezzo <ezzo@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nice feature,had to share everywhere I frequent.I thought you all would
>>> like to see.
>> http://bangshift.com/blog/car-feature-the-176mph-lsr-1970-cadillac-coupe-de-kill-caddy-powered-and-homebuilt.html
>>> --
>>> 77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
> --
> Plato seems wrong to me today.
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Sully
77 Royale basket case.
Future motorhome land speed record holder(bucket list)
Seattle, Wa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216970 is a reply to message #216964] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 21:37 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Todd,
I hope to bring it to Oregon, but I'm going to be pressed for time as I
will be leaving the MO International convention on 26th Sept. back to our
shop and empty the coach and reload with stuff for Western States.
Maybe I'll just take catalogs and no parts.
Since I let our guys do the work on the coach, I think they will do it the
way I have done and not lay the speedo cable on the exhaust pipe.
Last time, it was my fault as I did not reconnect the tube when it blew off
and allowed one turbo to over rev fo 50 miles, thinking it would not damage
anything. It did, the turbo shaft sheared and blew oil all onside the tubes.
Turbo on a gasoline engine operates differently than on a diesel. as diesel
do not have vacuum or throttle plates.
Until I push my throttle past 2inches of vacuum, it is hard to feel the
turbo effect.
Once the throttle opens up to where It gets to 0 vacuum, then we go into a
positive pressure mode. Them all hell brakes out as my foot can control the
pressure that the 2 turbos can deliver.
At sea level, I can handle up to 8 psi, at altitudes above 5,000 ft, I can
shove my foot in more to 12-18 psi.
Since my inter cooler is not full size, the heat of compressed air gets hot
enough to where it can dilute the volume of air.
The EFI can only do so much, so we have a special fuel pressure regulator
that operates at idle 30 psi, and goes to 45 at 0 vac, and 65-75 at 5-15
psi boost pressure.
Transmission has a modification to where the clutch pack has more volume of
fluid going there to help firm it up, and not increase the line pressure.
This mod was done by an transmission instructor in 1992 and when Manny T
started doing the trans, I had him take it apart so he could see what was
done.
I run a wafer style trans cooler along with the Rockwell pan with internal
and external cooling fins,
You'll see a picture of a burn out we did in 1993 in the articles.
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216984 is a reply to message #216970] |
Sun, 04 August 2013 23:30 |
sgltrac
Messages: 2797
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ship the sh:t to coos bay but drive the cadditurbo. I want a ride!
Todd Sullivan
Sully
77 royale
Seattle
On Aug 4, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> Todd,
> I hope to bring it to Oregon, but I'm going to be pressed for time as I
> will be leaving the MO International convention on 26th Sept. back to our
> shop and empty the coach and reload with stuff for Western States.
> Maybe I'll just take catalogs and no parts.
> Since I let our guys do the work on the coach, I think they will do it the
> way I have done and not lay the speedo cable on the exhaust pipe.
> Last time, it was my fault as I did not reconnect the tube when it blew off
> and allowed one turbo to over rev fo 50 miles, thinking it would not damage
> anything. It did, the turbo shaft sheared and blew oil all onside the tubes.
> Turbo on a gasoline engine operates differently than on a diesel. as diesel
> do not have vacuum or throttle plates.
> Until I push my throttle past 2inches of vacuum, it is hard to feel the
> turbo effect.
> Once the throttle opens up to where It gets to 0 vacuum, then we go into a
> positive pressure mode. Them all hell brakes out as my foot can control the
> pressure that the 2 turbos can deliver.
> At sea level, I can handle up to 8 psi, at altitudes above 5,000 ft, I can
> shove my foot in more to 12-18 psi.
> Since my inter cooler is not full size, the heat of compressed air gets hot
> enough to where it can dilute the volume of air.
> The EFI can only do so much, so we have a special fuel pressure regulator
> that operates at idle 30 psi, and goes to 45 at 0 vac, and 65-75 at 5-15
> psi boost pressure.
> Transmission has a modification to where the clutch pack has more volume of
> fluid going there to help firm it up, and not increase the line pressure.
> This mod was done by an transmission instructor in 1992 and when Manny T
> started doing the trans, I had him take it apart so he could see what was
> done.
> I run a wafer style trans cooler along with the Rockwell pan with internal
> and external cooling fins,
> You'll see a picture of a burn out we did in 1993 in the articles.
>
>
>
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Sully
77 Royale basket case.
Future motorhome land speed record holder(bucket list)
Seattle, Wa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #216986 is a reply to message #216984] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 00:19 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Todd,
Be there when I pull in to unload the parts.
After you help me, then I will take you for a ride.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Todd Sullivan <sgltrac@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ship the sh:t to coos bay but drive the cadditurbo. I want a ride!
>
> Todd Sullivan
>
> Sully
> 77 royale
> Seattle
>
> On Aug 4, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Todd,
> > I hope to bring it to Oregon, but I'm going to be pressed for time as I
> > will be leaving the MO International convention on 26th Sept. back to our
> > shop and empty the coach and reload with stuff for Western States.
> > Maybe I'll just take catalogs and no parts.
> > Since I let our guys do the work on the coach, I think they will do it
> the
> > way I have done and not lay the speedo cable on the exhaust pipe.
> > Last time, it was my fault as I did not reconnect the tube when it blew
> off
> > and allowed one turbo to over rev fo 50 miles, thinking it would not
> damage
> > anything. It did, the turbo shaft sheared and blew oil all onside the
> tubes.
> > Turbo on a gasoline engine operates differently than on a diesel. as
> diesel
> > do not have vacuum or throttle plates.
> > Until I push my throttle past 2inches of vacuum, it is hard to feel the
> > turbo effect.
> > Once the throttle opens up to where It gets to 0 vacuum, then we go into
> a
> > positive pressure mode. Them all hell brakes out as my foot can control
> the
> > pressure that the 2 turbos can deliver.
> > At sea level, I can handle up to 8 psi, at altitudes above 5,000 ft, I
> can
> > shove my foot in more to 12-18 psi.
> > Since my inter cooler is not full size, the heat of compressed air gets
> hot
> > enough to where it can dilute the volume of air.
> > The EFI can only do so much, so we have a special fuel pressure regulator
> > that operates at idle 30 psi, and goes to 45 at 0 vac, and 65-75 at 5-15
> > psi boost pressure.
> > Transmission has a modification to where the clutch pack has more volume
> of
> > fluid going there to help firm it up, and not increase the line pressure.
> > This mod was done by an transmission instructor in 1992 and when Manny T
> > started doing the trans, I had him take it apart so he could see what was
> > done.
> > I run a wafer style trans cooler along with the Rockwell pan with
> internal
> > and external cooling fins,
> > You'll see a picture of a burn out we did in 1993 in the articles.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jim Kanomata
> > Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> > jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> > http://www.appliedgmc.com
> > 1-800-752-7502
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #217006 is a reply to message #216986] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 08:25 |
sgltrac
Messages: 2797
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deal
Todd Sullivan
Sully
77 royale
Seattle
On Aug 4, 2013, at 10:19 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> Todd,
> Be there when I pull in to unload the parts.
> After you help me, then I will take you for a ride.
>
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Todd Sullivan <sgltrac@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ship the sh:t to coos bay but drive the cadditurbo. I want a ride!
>>
>> Todd Sullivan
>>
>> Sully
>> 77 royale
>> Seattle
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Todd,
>>> I hope to bring it to Oregon, but I'm going to be pressed for time as I
>>> will be leaving the MO International convention on 26th Sept. back to our
>>> shop and empty the coach and reload with stuff for Western States.
>>> Maybe I'll just take catalogs and no parts.
>>> Since I let our guys do the work on the coach, I think they will do it
>> the
>>> way I have done and not lay the speedo cable on the exhaust pipe.
>>> Last time, it was my fault as I did not reconnect the tube when it blew
>> off
>>> and allowed one turbo to over rev fo 50 miles, thinking it would not
>> damage
>>> anything. It did, the turbo shaft sheared and blew oil all onside the
>> tubes.
>>> Turbo on a gasoline engine operates differently than on a diesel. as
>> diesel
>>> do not have vacuum or throttle plates.
>>> Until I push my throttle past 2inches of vacuum, it is hard to feel the
>>> turbo effect.
>>> Once the throttle opens up to where It gets to 0 vacuum, then we go into
>> a
>>> positive pressure mode. Them all hell brakes out as my foot can control
>> the
>>> pressure that the 2 turbos can deliver.
>>> At sea level, I can handle up to 8 psi, at altitudes above 5,000 ft, I
>> can
>>> shove my foot in more to 12-18 psi.
>>> Since my inter cooler is not full size, the heat of compressed air gets
>> hot
>>> enough to where it can dilute the volume of air.
>>> The EFI can only do so much, so we have a special fuel pressure regulator
>>> that operates at idle 30 psi, and goes to 45 at 0 vac, and 65-75 at 5-15
>>> psi boost pressure.
>>> Transmission has a modification to where the clutch pack has more volume
>> of
>>> fluid going there to help firm it up, and not increase the line pressure.
>>> This mod was done by an transmission instructor in 1992 and when Manny T
>>> started doing the trans, I had him take it apart so he could see what was
>>> done.
>>> I run a wafer style trans cooler along with the Rockwell pan with
>> internal
>>> and external cooling fins,
>>> You'll see a picture of a burn out we did in 1993 in the articles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim Kanomata
>>> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
>>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>>> 1-800-752-7502
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Sully
77 Royale basket case.
Future motorhome land speed record holder(bucket list)
Seattle, Wa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Turbo [message #217037 is a reply to message #216900] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 11:24 |
habbyguy
Messages: 896
Registered: May 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Karma: 3
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Speaking of turbos, has anyone here seen the STS "rear-mounted" turbo systems? There's vanishingly little info on their website, and nothing at all that makes me think they might have something for a GMC motorhome... but the concept is intriguing.
Basically, the premise is that instead of mounting the turbocharger just south of the exhaust manifold, before anything else in the exhaust system, it's mounted waaaaaay back, in the case of the STS systems, taking the place of the rear muffler altogether (though from what I've read, somewhat unsuccessfully in terms of quieting down the exhaust).
It seems that there could be an application for us here somewhere - a large (turbo-diesel-size?) turbocharger mounted about 20' behind the engine (after the exhaust Y's into one pipe), with a long intake tube routing the compressed intake air back up to the engine compartment. This would have the secondary benefit of letting the compressed intake air cool down a lot (in essence, it's a simple, cheap intercooler). The disadvantage of this kind of system is that you'd lose a lot of the immediate power that's available by having the turbo sandwiched between the intake and exhaust manifolds - but that doesn't mean squat to us anyway... if it takes a second to "spool up", it won't really matter - well, unless you're lined up against Jim K's twin-turbo monster on a dragstrip... 
The advantages are that the turbocharger won't be glowing orange while you're climbing over Dead Man's Pass (they really DO that, BTW), but it will live back where the heat and environmental conditions are MUCH simpler to deal with. I'm thinking such a system might be a cheaper, sort of easy way to give our aging carburetor-fed engines the boost they need at altitude so they can continue making the same sort of power they do at lower altitudes (in effect, "turbo-normalization", which is used to allow airplane engines to deliver meaningful power at altitude, but not necessarily provide any additional power at lower altitude).
Just thinking out loud here... I've considered using an "electric supercharger", and feel that it would be possible to create enough boost (by driving an industrial turbine with AC power generated from either the generator or a large inverter) to make a difference, but I don't think it would be a big enough difference to warrant the effort (my best thumbnail estimates is that it might effectively give your engine the performance it might expect at an altitude a couple thousand feet lower... not insignificant, but hardly night and day). But using an exhaust-driven compressor would be a whole different animal, and (I think...) rear-mounting it would keep the whole system a lot happier and simpler (no need to run water and/or oil through the turbocharger after shutdown to keep the bearings alive, for example).
But this is all way above my pay grade in terms of engineering or turbocharger experience (which is limited to my current VW 1.8 liter turbocharged wagon, which is an amazing little beast that can leave the MUCH bigger V6 in the dust).
Mark Hickey
Mesa, AZ
1978 Royale Center Kitchen
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #217044 is a reply to message #217037] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 11:36 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well, the turbochargr is essentially a heat recovery device, so the closer it is to the source of hot gas, the better it works. And, the closer to the intake manifold, the less lag you'll have. Although lag isn't likely to be a concern in a GMC, the thing defines 'lag' anyhow. I'd be interested in your experience with this, I don't think it's fer me though.
--johnny
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 8/5/13, Mark <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Turbo
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Date: Monday, August 5, 2013, 4:24 PM
Speaking of turbos, has anyone here seen the STS
"rear-mounted" turbo systems? There's vanishingly
little info on their website, and nothing at all that makes
me think they might have something for a GMC motorhome...
but the concept is intriguing.
Basically, the premise is that instead of mounting the
turbocharger just south of the exhaust manifold, before
anything else in the exhaust system, it's mounted waaaaaay
back, in the case of the STS systems, taking the place of
the rear muffler altogether (though from what I've read,
somewhat unsuccessfully in terms of quieting down the
exhaust).
It seems that there could be an application for us here
somewhere - a large (turbo-diesel-size?) turbocharger
mounted about 20' behind the engine (after the exhaust Y's
into one pipe), with a long intake tube routing the
compressed intake air back up to the engine
compartment. This would have the secondary benefit of
letting the compressed intake air cool down a lot (in
essence, it's a simple, cheap intercooler). The
disadvantage of this kind of system is that you'd lose a lot
of the immediate power that's available by having the turbo
sandwiched between the intake and exhaust manifolds - but
that doesn't mean squat to us anyway... if it takes a second
to "spool up", it won't really matter - well, unless you're
lined up against Jim K's twin-turbo monster on a
dragstrip... ;)
The advantages are that the turbocharger won't be glowing
orange while you're climbing over Dead Man's Pass (they
really DO that, BTW), but it will live back where the heat
and environmental conditions are MUCH simpler to deal
with. I'm thinking such a system might be a cheaper,
sort of easy way to give our aging carburetor-fed engines
the boost they need at altitude so they can continue making
the same sort of power they do at lower altitudes (in
effect, "turbo-normalization", which is used to allow
airplane engines to deliver meaningful power at altitude,
but not necessarily provide any additional power at lower
altitude).
Just thinking out loud here... I've considered using an
"electric supercharger", and feel that it would be possible
to create enough boost (by driving an industrial turbine
with AC power generated from either the generator or a large
inverter) to make a difference, but I don't think it would
be a big enough difference to warrant the effort (my best
thumbnail estimates is that it might effectively give your
engine the performance it might expect at an altitude a
couple thousand feet lower... not insignificant, but hardly
night and day). But using an exhaust-driven compressor
would be a whole different animal, and (I think...)
rear-mounting it would keep the whole system a lot happier
and simpler (no need to run water and/or oil through the
turbocharger after shutdown to keep the bearings alive, for
example).
But this is all way above my pay grade in terms of
engineering or turbocharger experience (which is limited to
my current VW 1.8 liter turbocharged wagon, which is an
amazing little beast that can leave the MUCH bigger V6 in
the dust).
--
Mark Hickey
Mesa, AZ
1978 Royale Center Kitchen
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #217081 is a reply to message #217044] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 16:03 |
Ronald Pottol
Messages: 505
Registered: September 2012
Location: Redwood City, California
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The closer to the exhaust valve, the better, so I'd stick with one per
bank, and really, you want fuel injection, and a knock sensor.
On Aug 5, 2013 9:36 AM, "Johnny Bridges" <jhbridges@ymail.com> wrote:
> Well, the turbochargr is essentially a heat recovery device, so the closer
> it is to the source of hot gas, the better it works. And, the closer to
> the intake manifold, the less lag you'll have. Although lag isn't likely
> to be a concern in a GMC, the thing defines 'lag' anyhow. I'd be
> interested in your experience with this, I don't think it's fer me though.
>
> --johnny
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 8/5/13, Mark <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Turbo
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Date: Monday, August 5, 2013, 4:24 PM
>
>
>
> Speaking of turbos, has anyone here seen the STS
> "rear-mounted" turbo systems? There's vanishingly
> little info on their website, and nothing at all that makes
> me think they might have something for a GMC motorhome...
> but the concept is intriguing.
>
> Basically, the premise is that instead of mounting the
> turbocharger just south of the exhaust manifold, before
> anything else in the exhaust system, it's mounted waaaaaay
> back, in the case of the STS systems, taking the place of
> the rear muffler altogether (though from what I've read,
> somewhat unsuccessfully in terms of quieting down the
> exhaust).
>
> It seems that there could be an application for us here
> somewhere - a large (turbo-diesel-size?) turbocharger
> mounted about 20' behind the engine (after the exhaust Y's
> into one pipe), with a long intake tube routing the
> compressed intake air back up to the engine
> compartment. This would have the secondary benefit of
> letting the compressed intake air cool down a lot (in
> essence, it's a simple, cheap intercooler). The
> disadvantage of this kind of system is that you'd lose a lot
> of the immediate power that's available by having the turbo
> sandwiched between the intake and exhaust manifolds - but
> that doesn't mean squat to us anyway... if it takes a second
> to "spool up", it won't really matter - well, unless you're
> lined up against Jim K's twin-turbo monster on a
> dragstrip... ;)
>
> The advantages are that the turbocharger won't be glowing
> orange while you're climbing over Dead Man's Pass (they
> really DO that, BTW), but it will live back where the heat
> and environmental conditions are MUCH simpler to deal
> with. I'm thinking such a system might be a cheaper,
> sort of easy way to give our aging carburetor-fed engines
> the boost they need at altitude so they can continue making
> the same sort of power they do at lower altitudes (in
> effect, "turbo-normalization", which is used to allow
> airplane engines to deliver meaningful power at altitude,
> but not necessarily provide any additional power at lower
> altitude).
>
> Just thinking out loud here... I've considered using an
> "electric supercharger", and feel that it would be possible
> to create enough boost (by driving an industrial turbine
> with AC power generated from either the generator or a large
> inverter) to make a difference, but I don't think it would
> be a big enough difference to warrant the effort (my best
> thumbnail estimates is that it might effectively give your
> engine the performance it might expect at an altitude a
> couple thousand feet lower... not insignificant, but hardly
> night and day). But using an exhaust-driven compressor
> would be a whole different animal, and (I think...)
> rear-mounting it would keep the whole system a lot happier
> and simpler (no need to run water and/or oil through the
> turbocharger after shutdown to keep the bearings alive, for
> example).
>
> But this is all way above my pay grade in terms of
> engineering or turbocharger experience (which is limited to
> my current VW 1.8 liter turbocharged wagon, which is an
> amazing little beast that can leave the MUCH bigger V6 in
> the dust).
> --
> Mark Hickey
> Mesa, AZ
> 1978 Royale Center Kitchen
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
1973 26' GM outfitted
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #217099 is a reply to message #217081] |
Mon, 05 August 2013 20:53 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Preignition on a turbo is something you need to work on as the pressure
rises and temperature climes.
I have a partial retard programed into the computer along with enrichment
of the fuel .
We went with smaller turbo on each side as one large one would not fit too
easily.
I have no turbo lag at all.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Ronald Pottol <ronaldpottol@gmail.com>wrote:
> The closer to the exhaust valve, the better, so I'd stick with one per
> bank, and really, you want fuel injection, and a knock sensor.
> On Aug 5, 2013 9:36 AM, "Johnny Bridges" <jhbridges@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, the turbochargr is essentially a heat recovery device, so the
> closer
> > it is to the source of hot gas, the better it works. And, the closer to
> > the intake manifold, the less lag you'll have. Although lag isn't likely
> > to be a concern in a GMC, the thing defines 'lag' anyhow. I'd be
> > interested in your experience with this, I don't think it's fer me
> though.
> >
> > --johnny
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Mon, 8/5/13, Mark <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Turbo
> > To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> > Date: Monday, August 5, 2013, 4:24 PM
> >
> >
> >
> > Speaking of turbos, has anyone here seen the STS
> > "rear-mounted" turbo systems? There's vanishingly
> > little info on their website, and nothing at all that makes
> > me think they might have something for a GMC motorhome...
> > but the concept is intriguing.
> >
> > Basically, the premise is that instead of mounting the
> > turbocharger just south of the exhaust manifold, before
> > anything else in the exhaust system, it's mounted waaaaaay
> > back, in the case of the STS systems, taking the place of
> > the rear muffler altogether (though from what I've read,
> > somewhat unsuccessfully in terms of quieting down the
> > exhaust).
> >
> > It seems that there could be an application for us here
> > somewhere - a large (turbo-diesel-size?) turbocharger
> > mounted about 20' behind the engine (after the exhaust Y's
> > into one pipe), with a long intake tube routing the
> > compressed intake air back up to the engine
> > compartment. This would have the secondary benefit of
> > letting the compressed intake air cool down a lot (in
> > essence, it's a simple, cheap intercooler). The
> > disadvantage of this kind of system is that you'd lose a lot
> > of the immediate power that's available by having the turbo
> > sandwiched between the intake and exhaust manifolds - but
> > that doesn't mean squat to us anyway... if it takes a second
> > to "spool up", it won't really matter - well, unless you're
> > lined up against Jim K's twin-turbo monster on a
> > dragstrip... ;)
> >
> > The advantages are that the turbocharger won't be glowing
> > orange while you're climbing over Dead Man's Pass (they
> > really DO that, BTW), but it will live back where the heat
> > and environmental conditions are MUCH simpler to deal
> > with. I'm thinking such a system might be a cheaper,
> > sort of easy way to give our aging carburetor-fed engines
> > the boost they need at altitude so they can continue making
> > the same sort of power they do at lower altitudes (in
> > effect, "turbo-normalization", which is used to allow
> > airplane engines to deliver meaningful power at altitude,
> > but not necessarily provide any additional power at lower
> > altitude).
> >
> > Just thinking out loud here... I've considered using an
> > "electric supercharger", and feel that it would be possible
> > to create enough boost (by driving an industrial turbine
> > with AC power generated from either the generator or a large
> > inverter) to make a difference, but I don't think it would
> > be a big enough difference to warrant the effort (my best
> > thumbnail estimates is that it might effectively give your
> > engine the performance it might expect at an altitude a
> > couple thousand feet lower... not insignificant, but hardly
> > night and day). But using an exhaust-driven compressor
> > would be a whole different animal, and (I think...)
> > rear-mounting it would keep the whole system a lot happier
> > and simpler (no need to run water and/or oil through the
> > turbocharger after shutdown to keep the bearings alive, for
> > example).
> >
> > But this is all way above my pay grade in terms of
> > engineering or turbocharger experience (which is limited to
> > my current VW 1.8 liter turbocharged wagon, which is an
> > amazing little beast that can leave the MUCH bigger V6 in
> > the dust).
> > --
> > Mark Hickey
> > Mesa, AZ
> > 1978 Royale Center Kitchen
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Turbo [message #217118 is a reply to message #217099] |
Tue, 06 August 2013 07:23 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Several automakers use smaller dual turbochargers to beat lag. They're closer to the intake and there's less mass iin the spool to get spinning. Normally, engines designed for turbocharging have the ratio knocked down a bit to exclude knocking. Adding a turbo to a normally aspirated engine wants some fiddling - as you're doing - with timing retard and enrichment to help. It would help if you could oil spray the pistons as well. I got a fully floated LA engine, I wonder could you open up the passages some and then drill the top of the rod where the pin goes through and get some cooling that way...
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach.
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 8/6/13, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Turbo
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2013, 1:53 AM
Preignition on a turbo is something
you need to work on as the pressure
rises and temperature climes.
I have a partial retard programed into the computer along
with enrichment
of the fuel .
We went with smaller turbo on each side as one large one
would not fit too
easily.
I have no turbo lag at all.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Ronald Pottol <ronaldpottol@gmail.com>wrote:
> The closer to the exhaust valve, the better, so I'd
stick with one per
> bank, and really, you want fuel injection, and a knock
sensor.
> On Aug 5, 2013 9:36 AM, "Johnny Bridges" <jhbridges@ymail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Well, the turbochargr is essentially a heat
recovery device, so the
> closer
> > it is to the source of hot gas, the better it
works. And, the closer to
> > the intake manifold, the less lag you'll
have. Although lag isn't likely
> > to be a concern in a GMC, the thing defines 'lag'
anyhow. I'd be
> > interested in your experience with this, I don't
think it's fer me
> though.
> >
> > --johnny
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Mon, 8/5/13, Mark <mark@habcycles.com>
wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Turbo
> > To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> > Date: Monday, August 5, 2013, 4:24 PM
> >
> >
> >
> > Speaking of turbos, has anyone here seen the
STS
> > "rear-mounted" turbo systems? There's
vanishingly
> > little info on their website, and nothing at
all that makes
> > me think they might have something for a GMC
motorhome...
> > but the concept is intriguing.
> >
> > Basically, the premise is that instead of
mounting the
> > turbocharger just south of the exhaust
manifold, before
> > anything else in the exhaust system, it's
mounted waaaaaay
> > back, in the case of the STS systems, taking
the place of
> > the rear muffler altogether (though from
what I've read,
> > somewhat unsuccessfully in terms of quieting
down the
> > exhaust).
> >
> > It seems that there could be an application
for us here
> > somewhere - a large (turbo-diesel-size?)
turbocharger
> > mounted about 20' behind the engine (after
the exhaust Y's
> > into one pipe), with a long intake tube
routing the
> > compressed intake air back up to the engine
> > compartment. This would have the
secondary benefit of
> > letting the compressed intake air cool down
a lot (in
> > essence, it's a simple, cheap
intercooler). The
> > disadvantage of this kind of system is that
you'd lose a lot
> > of the immediate power that's available by
having the turbo
> > sandwiched between the intake and exhaust
manifolds - but
> > that doesn't mean squat to us anyway... if
it takes a second
> > to "spool up", it won't really matter -
well, unless you're
> > lined up against Jim K's twin-turbo monster
on a
> > dragstrip... ;)
> >
> > The advantages are that the turbocharger
won't be glowing
> > orange while you're climbing over Dead Man's
Pass (they
> > really DO that, BTW), but it will live back
where the heat
> > and environmental conditions are MUCH
simpler to deal
> > with. I'm thinking such a system might
be a cheaper,
> > sort of easy way to give our aging
carburetor-fed engines
> > the boost they need at altitude so they can
continue making
> > the same sort of power they do at lower
altitudes (in
> > effect, "turbo-normalization", which is used
to allow
> > airplane engines to deliver meaningful power
at altitude,
> > but not necessarily provide any additional
power at lower
> > altitude).
> >
> > Just thinking out loud here... I've
considered using an
> > "electric supercharger", and feel that it
would be possible
> > to create enough boost (by driving an
industrial turbine
> > with AC power generated from either the
generator or a large
> > inverter) to make a difference, but I don't
think it would
> > be a big enough difference to warrant the
effort (my best
> > thumbnail estimates is that it might
effectively give your
> > engine the performance it might expect at an
altitude a
> > couple thousand feet lower... not
insignificant, but hardly
> > night and day). But using an
exhaust-driven compressor
> > would be a whole different animal, and (I
think...)
> > rear-mounting it would keep the whole system
a lot happier
> > and simpler (no need to run water and/or oil
through the
> > turbocharger after shutdown to keep the
bearings alive, for
> > example).
> >
> > But this is all way above my pay grade in
terms of
> > engineering or turbocharger experience
(which is limited to
> > my current VW 1.8 liter turbocharged wagon,
which is an
> > amazing little beast that can leave the MUCH
bigger V6 in
> > the dust).
> > --
> > Mark Hickey
> > Mesa, AZ
> > 1978 Royale Center Kitchen
> >
_______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: Turbo [message #217148 is a reply to message #216900] |
Tue, 06 August 2013 11:32 |
habbyguy
Messages: 896
Registered: May 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Karma: 3
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think there are two divergent discussions about turbocharging going on here...
First is the "traditional turbocharging" approach, where the turbo is mounted as close to the intake and exhaust manifolds as possible, and includes everything associated with effectively increasing the compression of the engine (timing control, water and/or ethanol injection, beefing up the internals, etc., etc., etc.). I understand all that, but - Jim K's fire-breathing monster excluded - don't think it's all that applicable to the average GMC.
My goal isn't to create a giant boost in power, but simply to allow my coach to breath normally at high altitude - effectively "lowering the apparent altitude", so my coach would run the same at 10,000 feet as it does at 2,000 feet. I could care less about any lag, even if it's measured in several seconds. I'm not worried about detonation, breaking engine internals (since I won't be making more power than "normal"), or injection of water or ethanol.
Accordingly, it seems that a rear-mounted turbo might be a good solution, since it lives a MUCH easier life than the one mounted right behind the exhaust manifolds, glowing orange during full-throttle operation (and all that goes with that, including plumbing for cooling and lubrication that can keep up with those insane conditions). I'm picturing a large turbo mounted near the rear of the coach, most likely controlled via an exhaust cut-off (or more accurately, a bypass that would allow the exhaust to flow around the turbo until you needed it). I understand I might not get quite as much boost as a manifold-mounted unit, but that's really not a problem as long as I can "pump up the air" to approximate sea level operation.
Essentially, I don't feel I need to do anything at all to improve the performance of my GMC at low altitude - it runs just fine, and will cruise easily faster than anyone in their right mind would want to drive it. But it really suffers going over the high-altitude passes near Flagstaff, AZ, and I'd love to have nearly the same power there as near my home a couple hours south (and 6,000 feet lower). While I'll probably be installing the fuel injection system I bought before too long, turbo-normalizing the carburetor-fed motor should not only return much more power at altitude, but I'd guess a whole lot better gas mileage as well (since the carb would be back to operating with a relatively higher vacuum level).
Mark Hickey
Mesa, AZ
1978 Royale Center Kitchen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Turbo [message #217152 is a reply to message #217148] |
Tue, 06 August 2013 11:43 |
Keith V
Messages: 2337
Registered: March 2008
Location: Mounds View,MN
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think an electric clutch equipped supercharger AKA Mad Max would be the way to go. Tho a paxton not a roots...
and just a small one....so much easier to plumb
Keith Vasilakes
Mounds View. MN
75 ex Royale GMC
ask me about MicroLevel
Cell, 763-732-3419
My427v8@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Nov 05 01:47:41 CST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05781 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
