Sorry, just gotta add my 2 cents here. I read through this thread and I agree that constructive criticism is great! Unfortunately, most of the comments that were added were far from constructive. Instead, they merely stated ideas along the lines of "it's not worth it [to me]", "use one or the other [in my opinion]", etc. Instead, what this person seemed to be looking for was some kind of trial and error statistics, or a lack thereof. If it has been done before, don't simply state this, but provide the results. If it hasn't been done before, then just leave it at that. There are many more ways to get quad TBs though then just going through RPW or making your own. Many companies specialize in quad TB, just not for this engine. Using their experience and assistance, one could theoretically design a system with a combination of parts that are already out there.

Not intending to hijack your thread, I'm in the process of designing a mainfold, drive system, bracketry, etc. to bold an Eaton supercharger on one of my cars. Everyone I've discussed this with says to go turbo instead, but they either haven't personally looked into the charachteristics of the 4th and 5th generation Eaton units, don't have any fabrication and design skills of their own, or both. For my setup, I'm going to personally design my own intake manifold and have a foundry cast it for me. When it's all said and done, I'll have an install that's far cleaner than a turbo setup, will work with my driving much better, and should come in cheaper than I could get a turbo "kit" for.

So, with the long story coming to an end, I say go for it if you're thinking of pursuing this. Maybe you don't want to race, but just want to step away from the heard. Take your time though...the expensive part usually comes from people rushing things and overlooking an important issue. I know what it was like to be an E-3 with a wife and a kid though, so just work at it as you can. If you'd like to discuss some of the details of how quad TBs work or why one idea might be better and/or worse than another, shoot me a message.

 

Good points and good input. That's what we need to see more of on this board. You wonder why everyone has the same stuff, its because they are ridiculed most of the time for wanting something different. So I think the only input allowed in this thread now is if it helps, no more posts saying it won't work or to try something else.

 

This is how you know it both works and makes great power (pay particularly close attention to the last link):

http://users.techline.com/hceline/wrx/115-1596_IMG.JPG

http://users.techline.com/hceline/wrx/115-1597_IMG.JPG

http://users.techline.com/hceline/wrx/115-1598_IMG.JPG

http://users.techline.com/hceline/wrx/115-1599_IMG.JPG

/thread

 

another guy was asking about an eaton type blower on here the other day. but he definately didnt have the plan you have. he bought it because it was a good deal. sorry getting off topic though. i really think an efficient supercharger setup would be a good thing for our cars. yeah it would be easier to buy a turbo kit from one of the companies on here. i can definately find a supercharger cheaper than a turbo and the upkeep would be cheaper than a turbo. personally i think a centrifugal blower would be easier than the eaton but you seem to have a good plan in mind. i was measuring yesterday and i really dont have much room to work with in between the crank and the frame. i was planning on using a cog pulley but it would have to be no more than 4 inches thick. idk im still contemplating. any imput would be helpful. i also was thinking of a system that would work alot like the timing gears on a small block, idk more ideas. we will see. i also have to find a reputable shop at my next duty station because im only here for another 5 months. let me know what you guys think.

 

HKS wasnt the only place or group that spent time experimenting with turbocharged ITB's. Another well known company did and you may have heard of them, Nissan? The motor was the RB26DETT. Brent Rau or Sean Glazar (I cant remember now) also experimented with ITB's and a turbo on their 2nd Gen Eclipse racecar. It is far from a new idea and is also very streetable.

Edit- Before I am thought an A-hole, while the tech is sound I was trying to show a little dry humour.

 

Unfortunately, I'm not as familiar with the Lancer engine compartments, although I hope to get somewhat acquainted with them once I get to England...I figure I'll see what I might be able to "steal" from them for my Eclipse. It looks like I'm lucky enough to have enough clearance between my engine and firewall to put the Eaton. I got the idea from a guy I met up with when I was stationed in Delaware and still owned my Jeep. He designed an intake which allowed him to bolt an Eaton in his Wrangler, and he also worked some with putting centrifugals in there as well. I know with the Eaton on the 6cyl he was able to pull the front wheels off the ground!

If it would help, I can point you in the direction of a machine shop which allows you to download CAD software (which gets updated often), and allows you to design a part, spec out the tooling, materials, etc., and even get a quote with shipping. Let me know if you want the link.

 

That's all fine and dandy but there are some important questions that need to be answered. Firstly how much did that cost? Something tells that if HKS did it, it wasn't cheap. Secondly, how easy was it? Again, if it was HKS, probably not easy. Thirdly, what about tuning? What about streetability? No one has said it's outwardly impossible, instead people (like me) have said that unless you plan on making a true race car, it's not worth it. If you're shooting for 400 hp, sure go nuts but if all you want is a 250 hp lancer, the money is better spent elsewhere.

 

Agreed...for the most part. I personally plan on making well over 400 hp (at least that's what I'm shooting for), but as stated earlier I'm not going turbo or quad TB. I basically agree with everything you said except the "unless you plan on making a true race car, it's not worth it" part. Although I do plan on racing my car some, it's not going to be a race car. For me, fabrication and modifying my car is my hobby. So, to ME, it doesn't matter how much it costs (it just might take a little longer) or how hard it is (just more of a challenge for me). Some people play sports, others play music, I look at a car and say to myself "what could I make that into?"

 

This is on an eclipse though right? 400 hp on an eclipse is way different than 400 hp on a lancer, for one no one has ever made 400 hp on a lancer.

 

Streetability was covered. Stock from Nissan the RB26 came with ITB's and 2 turbos. Anytime someone turbocharges a BMW they are ITB and at least one turbo. Turbo bikes are all ITB and a turbo.

ITB's can come from motorcycles, it is common practice on Hondas and VW's to raid streetbikes for their intake manifolds. Then all you need is an airtight plenum to bolt to the airhorns instead of a factory airbox (as a motorcyle would have). You wonder about how it drives on the street, have you ever rode a streetbike? Did you notice any driveability issues like hesitation or bogging? Or did you instead (if it was running right) have crisp clean throttle response because each port has a smaller throttle plate instead of one large one. What this would do when turbocharged, is reduce Tip-in boost obstruction and make it just as responsive as a streetbike with added benefit of boost.

IF something is worth it or not is endlessly debatable. There are no right or wrong answers whether the car is making 250whp or 2500whp. Prices are generally well under 600 dollars for the ITB's themselves, then you need a lower manifold and a plenum. This means in english a stock intake cut at the flange with a piece of plate TIG'd to it so you can mount the ITB's. Then you need an airtight box. Maybe another 200 if you dont get raped or have a friend that can weld even less.

If I was doing it would be worth it to me becuase I know that throttle tip in while building boost can have bog issues and/or the car feels like its stuttering before it goes WOT. I would have a more responsive engine that wouldnt require being beaten on as much to get the driving feel I wanted, not to mention that off throttle modulation would be incredibly easier. Then again I took apart my old WRX with 7 months of driving and 6600 miles in that same album. I like challenges.

 

I'm still not convinced on streetability. What works on some cars doesn't work on all cars and a lot of it comes down to the tune. Streetbikes are made to use ITBs, the lancer is not. The same goes with the RB26, if it's coming from Nissan they will have spent thousands doing the the R and D to get it to work right.

 

How about this, all engines use air and fuel. I have proved there are plenty of examples of engines that use aftermarket ITB's. There are examples of turbo ITB cars on cars that were neither ITB/Turbo or one or the other before being driven on the street. Now its your turn to list reasons why you dont think its streetable. An example of what NOT to post is:

"I just am not convinced it would be streetable". I have worked on everything with wheels you can think of for the last 17 years, and been racing since I was 5. I have driven/or rode 2 examples I listed. Prove me wrong with hard data and not opinions.

 

If you're trying to "win" the discussion by impressing me or listing your accomplishments, I'm sorry, but it won't work. Here's the main reason I'm not convinced, you have simply listed examples, you haven't actually given us any information on the examples. Now I am sure you are right, but I would still like to info. As far as we know those people spent 30000$ getting the setup to work. As I said what works on one car might not work on them all. Case in point, nitrous. Using your logic I could probably list dozens of cars that can run fine on 100 shots of nitrous. Unfortunately our weak 4G94 engines can barely handle a 40 shot of nitrous. Someone said that they recall it taking 6 months to get a car tuned to use both ITBs and a turbo. Logically this means it was neither cheap nor easy. By my reasoning, if it takes 6 months to get the tune right, it's probably a very sensitive system which to me draws into question it's streetability. What happens if the weather changes? What happens if its 30 degrees one day and -20 the next?

 

I've always understood the BMW's to be individual throttle butterflies not bodies Now I can't say exactly what that would mean explicitly to this kind of setup, but it is worth looking into. I'm not sure how the Nissan RB does it.

 

ITB's mean individual throttle butterflies in an individual throttle runner, BMW's as well as the other listed examples use these.

I am not trying to win anything. Your statement is its not "streetable". I provided examples of cars that have them on the street from the factory. You want information on each of these examples as to how it works? Its basic automotive engineering there is no "information" to give that you wouldnt already know. I have driven a turbo ITB BMW and it felt seamless like a factory BMW. I have ridden a turbo 600 F4i and it was seamless if not a little peaky. I was offering that into evidence as far as streetability. I honestly could care less what you think of my "accomplishments" or actual experience in the matter thats not why I mentioned them.

Data for an RB26-

Air goes in through a MAF into the turbochargers. From there your typical actions take place (compression, intercooling, travelling through pipes) then it heads into the intake manifold. The only difference between ITB's and a single throttle body is where they are located. One is before the plenum the others are after the plenum. The TPS sensor is mounted to the throttle shaft regardless of TB location or locations, the IAC might be mounted to the manifold rather than the TB, but basically its the same.

As far as tuning you're exhibiting a classic case of pot meet kettle (where is the information for your example?). You list one possibly fictional example of a tune that took 6 months to figure out. ITB enthusiasts often will use Megasquirt or something similar and have the car tuned in less than a day. Adding boost doesnt change how the car is tuned just the amounts of fuel and spark used. If it took 6 months its because whoever was doing it wasnt sure how to tune in the first place. ITB's dont cause sudden issues as you think they do. As long as there is sufficient forethought in ITB mounting design the only thing that I have ever run into is getting a good solid vaccum source since there isnt a plenum under vaccum. The use of a vaccum log (4 ports, one in each runner tied together) usually is enough to fix this.

Bringing up something totally unrelated like nitrous just clouds the issue. I am not debating the power potential a 4G94 might have, or how strong it is. This is simply from a tuning standpoint as far as I understood the original issues/statements.

To answer your question about temperature, if most of the factory components are retained it wont matter what the temp is one day to the next. Mitsubishi has temperature and barometric correction control in the ECU software.

If I were doing this I would use the stock MAF, a 16G most likely, retain all the factory sensors, the aforementioned ITB setup, and then tune it with the stock ECU. It isnt the black magic you think it is, I am just trying to clear up the misunderstandings you seem to have. As a matter of fact I have been looking into this for my car since I saw that HKS LMP motor almost 4 years ago. I have been doing research the whole time, and when I saw the title of this thread it naturally piqued my curiosity.

Here is an example of a motorcyle ITB'd VW that drives great, uses Megasquirt, and if he wanted it would have a turbo and still have excellent throttle response:



I still have yet to get hard data supporting them being "unstreetable" and only seem to be recieving more opinions.