Those Who Have Turbo' An Ra
Apr 8, 2009, 07:51 PM
#48
Just to answer a few quick questions about EGT for those interested. I had a kit equipped with an aftermarket turbo kit in at the shop. The manifold was cracked in so many places we're going to build him a proper one as soon as I can get a 16G flange.
I took advantage of the ruined manifold and installed 4 EGT probes in the runners. This was running a 5th injector setup. I reset the ECU and here is what I saw first run.
Cyl 4 Cyl3 Cyl 2 Cyl 1
1480F 1430F 1440F 1290F
Since this is the guy's 3rd engine since he installed the kit I did some steady state testing to see if I could pinpoint the problem. The map he's running was the one supplied by the kit manufacturer. After a total of 12 pulls and maybe an hour on the dyno the fuel trims were significantly different and here is the 2nd to last stat. It's not really fair to look at AFRs because each cylinder is significantly different from the next. This run was about 13.5:1 crazy lean!
1580F 1570F 1520F 1390F
I unplugged his ECU for a minute and last pull back to 11.7:1 AFR... hmmm...
1500 1450F 1450f 1300F
The owner of the car is not on any forums but I will ask if he's OK with me posting his sheets. I think it was at 6psi. Put down 210whp.
Now, what does this tell you? It tells you that the first cylinder runs significantly richer than the 4th. I haven't had our prototype car on the dyno yet but I can tell you that with all the probes installed on it the results were within 10-20 degrees of each other.
Finally, in my case the probes were installed close to the head. This was the only place I could install all 4 the same distance. If they were in the collector then the results would have been about 50-100 degrees cooler. If after the turbo then subtract another 100-200 degrees.
I took advantage of the ruined manifold and installed 4 EGT probes in the runners. This was running a 5th injector setup. I reset the ECU and here is what I saw first run.
Cyl 4 Cyl3 Cyl 2 Cyl 1
1480F 1430F 1440F 1290F
Since this is the guy's 3rd engine since he installed the kit I did some steady state testing to see if I could pinpoint the problem. The map he's running was the one supplied by the kit manufacturer. After a total of 12 pulls and maybe an hour on the dyno the fuel trims were significantly different and here is the 2nd to last stat. It's not really fair to look at AFRs because each cylinder is significantly different from the next. This run was about 13.5:1 crazy lean!
1580F 1570F 1520F 1390F
I unplugged his ECU for a minute and last pull back to 11.7:1 AFR... hmmm...
1500 1450F 1450f 1300F
The owner of the car is not on any forums but I will ask if he's OK with me posting his sheets. I think it was at 6psi. Put down 210whp.
Now, what does this tell you? It tells you that the first cylinder runs significantly richer than the 4th. I haven't had our prototype car on the dyno yet but I can tell you that with all the probes installed on it the results were within 10-20 degrees of each other.
Finally, in my case the probes were installed close to the head. This was the only place I could install all 4 the same distance. If they were in the collector then the results would have been about 50-100 degrees cooler. If after the turbo then subtract another 100-200 degrees.
Apr 9, 2009, 06:32 AM
#50
Oh yeah, one other thing I forgot to mention... My EGT gauge came out of an old cessna. It is very accurate just not very precise. Relative to each other you can easily tell that as RPMs (and airflow) go up so does the cylinder bias.
I've been criticising single point water/meth/tolulene injection systems for years on this point. Same problem exists with a single injector. The fuel spray is not as quick to change directions as the air so it tends to bias the cylinder at the end of the manifold.
I've been criticising single point water/meth/tolulene injection systems for years on this point. Same problem exists with a single injector. The fuel spray is not as quick to change directions as the air so it tends to bias the cylinder at the end of the manifold.
Apr 10, 2009, 07:07 AM
#53
No, it was a production kit. Probably running 6 psi because of the cracked in many places manifold. I asked the customer about posting the dyno sheets but he has asked that I don't post anything more. I think the kit will be for sale.
Apr 22, 2009, 02:11 AM
#58
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Nampa, Idaho
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a question on the manifold used, a buddy of mine drives a boosted integra and said that because the wastegate comes off of only one of the header pipes rather than in the center where they all meet.. it doesnt release or perform as better. i dont know a whole lot im just curious to see what you all have to say and maybe try and explain it to me a lil..
Apr 28, 2009, 07:02 AM
#59
Yes the manifold pictured above is not exactly designed for performance. I've had some very busted up knuckles having designed an externally wastegated manifold with a proper collector and common wastegate. There is not a lot of room unless you want to start replacing fans and such.
Apr 28, 2009, 07:37 AM
#60
The design is good for over 500hp easy. There wont be enough backpressure to make a differense since the size of the waste gate is perfect. It will release the pressure inside the exhaust to were you won't notice even if you did change the position. No need to try and hack down RRM. I would like to see someone come up with something that is over 500hp turbo. Goodjob on the turbo system RRM and I am sure everyone is having fun with their turbos. GoodJob RA owners.