Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: 72sat]
#1041629
07/28/11 11:28 AM
07/28/11 11:28 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255 IL
furious70
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255
IL
|
I don't know what the 61 front subframe looks like but it might not be that bad. You might be able to use the 62-65 B body rear dump logs flipped side to side to face forward, mount the turbos there, run the downpipe under all that, and run the cold side up and back to each carb. Would be cool looking for sure!
70 Sport Fury 68 Charger 69 Coronet 72 RR
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: NANKET]
#1041632
07/28/11 03:15 PM
07/28/11 03:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
It would look great, but the turbos would over ride the somoramic effect of the manifold, not really worth the trouble. There is enought plumbing on a factory set up before adding any turbo. The control arm mount is near the front exhaust ports so not much hope of backwards manifolds fitting.
what about rear mount turbos?
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: lewtot184]
#1041635
08/20/11 11:48 AM
08/20/11 11:48 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540 Milwaukee WI
TRENDZ
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540
Milwaukee WI
|
I think the trick with this set up would be synchronization. There is no common tract. The carb on the left could be seeing 5psi and the carb on the right could be seeing 15. Also, the left carb would be fed by the right turbo and vice/versa. Not things that can't be overcome, but something to think about. I think it would be a neat set up.
"use it 'till it breaks, replace as needed"
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: TRENDZ]
#1041636
08/20/11 02:35 PM
08/20/11 02:35 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,916 usa
lewtot184
master
|
master
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,916
usa
|
Quote:
I think the trick with this set up would be synchronization. There is no common tract. The carb on the left could be seeing 5psi and the carb on the right could be seeing 15. Also, the left carb would be fed by the right turbo and vice/versa. Not things that can't be overcome, but something to think about. I think it would be a neat set up.
the intakes were designed with a balance tube. if they're not deleted everything should work.
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: lewtot184]
#1041639
08/21/11 10:01 PM
08/21/11 10:01 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
Quote:
difference between pressure and vacuum
Well first, air fuel mixture inside an intake is never a complete vacum, it always has mass, it is also under most conditions moving, and the primary basis of the the long ram was using momentum of the above to extra pack the cylinder as the intake was closing. However there are a number of other variables, way over my head, regarding sonic pulses that also are the black magic of intake manifold design. They are both effected and tuned according to many variables, including cross section, surface roughness, geometry, wet or dry, fuel density, temperature, velocity, cam timing, compression, etc, etc. The main effected variable in turboing regarding ram manifold tuning would be a charge density increase, and maybe related varibale would be increase back pressure from the turbo, but I suspect that is more a cam timing variable. Therefore based on my simple explanation versus yours, I complelety disagree with your comment that a long ram intake "negates" the power adder.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: jcc]
#1041640
08/22/11 11:57 AM
08/22/11 11:57 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 28,068 Irving, TX
feets
Senior Management
|
Senior Management
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 28,068
Irving, TX
|
I think he meant that the power adder negates the benefit of the long ram.
We are brothers and sisters doing time on the planet for better or worse. I'll take the better, if you don't mind. - Stu Harmon
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: jcc]
#1041642
08/23/11 12:35 PM
08/23/11 12:35 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255 IL
furious70
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255
IL
|
I think 'negate' is a very poor word here. The more appropriate word IMO is 'override'. The turbos will override any ram effect with their greater ability to create increased pressure.
Whether the turbos would have any effect on the intake pulsing when the intake tract is under vacuum would be a very interesting question however. It would be in the same list of questions as 'were the long rams tuned only at WOT or at partial load'
70 Sport Fury 68 Charger 69 Coronet 72 RR
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: Fury Fan]
#1041644
08/24/11 11:26 AM
08/24/11 11:26 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255 IL
furious70
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,255
IL
|
That's going to happen in every engine though, right? It's just these manifolds were tuned for a specific range.
70 Sport Fury 68 Charger 69 Coronet 72 RR
|
|
|
Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo
[Re: furious70]
#1041646
08/25/11 06:58 AM
08/25/11 06:58 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,847 Oakdale CT
gdonovan
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,847
Oakdale CT
|
Quote:
I think 'negate' is a very poor word here. The more appropriate word IMO is 'override'. The turbos will override any ram effect with their greater ability to create increased pressure.
Based on what I know from turbocharging 2.2 and 2.5 engines I can assure you even at high boost pressures the runner tuning still impacts the engines operating range.
If anything it tends to magnify the effect.
|
|
|
|
|