383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo - Moparts Forums

Register Log In Moparts Forums Unlawfl's Race & Engine Tech 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo

Print Thread

Page 2 of 2

1

2

Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo [Re: gdonovan] #1041647 08/25/11 11:55 AM 08/25/11 11:55 AM
Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,255 IL furious70 top fuel
furious70 top fuel Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,255 IL	Quote: 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. Would be interested in hearing more here, have you done custom intake work that revealed this? I have not so I can't disprove, but on the surface it would seem easy to make a turbine sizing choice that would completely override any tuning in the intake (i.e. stick a bigger turbine side on this theoretical engine we are using and the manifold may still produce a low rpm TQ bulge the bigger turbo is going to cause a mountain of TQ above that range) 70 Sport Fury 68 Charger 69 Coronet 72 RR

Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo [Re: furious70] #1041648 08/25/11 02:29 PM 08/25/11 02:29 PM
Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 22,696 Bitopia J jcc If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
jcc If you can't dazzle em with diamonds.. J Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 22,696 Bitopia	Quote: completely override And the previous use of the word "negate" is what is causing the confusion and derision here. An analogy here would be like saying replacing a 10 guage wire with a 2 gauge wire would "completely" reduce any wire resistance. It of course it would not, it would only reduce resistance. However the poster who has experience with turbo motors and tuning and was favorable in turbo manifold tuning results, and the across board fact that nearly every well designed turbo motor has a tuned/ram effect intake for its intended rpm range, I still stand behind my previous statements here. 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] #1041649 08/25/11 11:31 PM 08/25/11 11:31 PM
Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,255 IL furious70 top fuel
furious70 top fuel Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,255 IL	well, if you like to nitpick, the 2g wire, depending on the application, can reduce the resistance to a point of negligibility. To use the non-word you chose , irregardless it would be very interesting to see actual testing results from this rather than the conjecture most of us have to offer. Tom Vaught over on TMF would be a good guy to ask about this, being a career boost engineer. Last edited by furious70; 08/25/11 11:32 PM. 70 Sport Fury 68 Charger 69 Coronet 72 RR

Re: 383 Sonoramic Twin Turbo [Re: furious70] #1041650 08/28/11 11:57 PM 08/28/11 11:57 PM
Joined: May 2006 Posts: 441 duluth mn. dragula426 mopar
dragula426 mopar Joined: May 2006 Posts: 441 duluth mn.	" irregardless it would be very interesting to see actual testing results from this rather than the conjecture most of us have to offer. " i agree.... a friend of mine and myself are working on a similar build right now. keep us posted on your build. 6800144-belvturbo.jpg (91 downloads) http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk261/Vanillamtrsprts/Byron%202008/298.jpg

Page 2 of 2

1

2

Moderated by Al_Alguire, Hotwheelsjr, moparts, not_a_charger, RangerDan440, tboomer

Hop To

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1