Twin turbos would be possible but space is a primary issue. The only reason to do it is to improve spoolup, but you sacrifice complexity and weight. The single turbo solution is easier and can generate great results (think single-turbo Supra). Twin turbos are better suited to longitudinal 4-cyl boxer or V6 engines that tend to have more space and can be more efficient regarding exhaust manifolds and equal length tubing.

 

i remember hearing of eclipses being TT but i never saw a pic..but for a 4 cyl 2.0L a single turbo is most optimal.

-Steve

 

sequential turbo, smaller one just for anti lag etc. lol

if you blueprint it well, i'm sure it's worth the money, but why?

i'm sure it was twin scroll.

 

DUH, when you say twin turbo it sounds better.
also i saw a twin turbo manifold for a eclipse on ebay a while back so someone must have tried it on a 4g63 before.

 

Well, I have seen a Tri-turbo Supra... designed right it could work, but why?

 

I have seen the same thing....what the hell

 

How about the Chrysler ME Four Twelve supercar concept with the quad-turbo V-12?

The Bankspower.com 2500hp Quad-turbo power benz:
0-100mph in 1 sec. with 1/4 mile speed of 250mph
http://bankspower.com
http://bankspower.com/mercedes-pro-m...cedes-3-lg.jpg

 

I know the guy with the tri-turbo supra. It's amazing looking- and well engineered, but wouldn't ever be as fast as a single turbo supra. It was mainly done for marketing purposes- and to say "Hey I've done something no one else has done"

 

[QUOTE=ru4real]How about the Chrysler ME Four Twelve supercar concept with the quad-turbo V-12?

The Bankspower.com 2500hp Quad-turbo power benz:
0-100mph in 1 sec. with 1/4 mile speed of 250mph
http://bankspower.com
http://bankspower.com/mercedes-pro-m...cedes-3-lg.jpg[/

that banks car wont know what hit it after we race

seriously that is one sick machine. 4.5g's to -4g's. thats gonna cause a headache.