Yupp, but i'm a "modern guy" and don't know much about those hybrids so i suggested GT-series turbos beacuse they are effective and their characteristics are well-documented. ;)

That being said, he supposedly peered into maps for those turbos and found out that T3/T4 hybrid was more effective than GT's at those low boost... so I can't argue with that.

I mean, it's not a rocket-science.

You take your engine displacement, decide how much boost you can safely run (depending on your C/R, fueling, tranny etc.) and calculate how much air is going to pass your engine at most.

Then you plot that into compressor map and see how you are doing. If you are into hot-rodding and don't mind worse responce then you choose (bigger) turbo that has good efficiency numbers at high RPM's. If you are willing to sacrifice some top-end power for driveabilty, you go for smaller one knowing that it will blow "hot air" if extended into high-rev/high-boost range 8on the right side of compressor map). Then you go out and try to find fitting model from finite range of turbochargers available on the market.

(...And then you find out that there is a mess of different "customized" designs made by small companies w/o any real documentation and it all gets muich worse).

I say:

3.0SC with Megasquirt EFI and 0.5 bar from T3/T4 hybrid is going to be a wonder of flexible and grunty engine. Don't expect any outrageous power outputs though...my guesstimate is around 260-270 hp... but that's as much as 3.6 Varioram delivers ;)

Your right tsuter. I originally didn't think a T3 turbine was big enough for my 3.0L, until I discovered T3 doesn't only come in the "standard" form, but also comes in the higher flowing Stage II & III turbines.

The "standard" T3 outlet is only 1.89" diam. Perhaps this is why you also think the T3 is too small. The stage III is at 2.22" diam which is larger than a T4 "N" turbine (2.07" dia).

Anyhow, we are all speculating on setups none of us has direct experience with (including me). I've decided to try the hybrid setup because I think it should work. If it doesn't, no big deal, I'll chalk it up as a learning experience and move on to a T4/T4.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained is what I say.

Cheers,

Started looking at how things are gonna fit together. Here is the current setup with backdated headers.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084034372.jpg


Here is the pipe that will feed the turbo. This pipe was given to me by a fellow Pelican a while back. The flange does not have th correct angle for my turbo. It needs to be parallel with the long pipe. I'm just gonna drill new holes and mount the turbo to the existing flange. The hole is big enough to feed th turbo even at an angle.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084034462.jpg

Here is the new muffler (if you can call it that) I currently have. I have two of these and can put them in series. Looks like it is gonna be loud.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084034615.jpg

Why is it gonna be loud you say? Here is why:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084034795.jpg

BTW that's my partner in crime in the background.
She asks "Is Porschey sick again, Dad?"
I say "no honey".
She replies "well, why are you always fixing him?":rolleyes:

Here is a pic of the turbo mounted:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084035060.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084035086.jpg

The wastegate flange needed to be moved as was interfering at the current spot. I'm now thinking, an internal wastegate would sure make things easier.

Anyhow more to come.

Cheers,

1. Internal wastegate is pretty neat thing to have, as it's cheaper, lighter and there is no need of welding extra tubing to it. Try to retrofit it in your turbo and give it a spin.

2. Turbo is very effective at muffling high-pitched sounds. You'll still have deep rumble problem so i suggest using one high-volume muffler instead of two small ones. They are unlikely to help.

Sure would be easier, but I don't think it's gonna work. The internal wastegate actuator would interfere with the turbo outlet. Below is a picture I found on ebay. You can see the actuator is exactly where the turbo outlet is on the picture I show above.



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1084037833.jpg

On most Garrett's, you can "re-clock" the compressor housing in 45-degree increments. Turbine housing can be re-clocked either in 90-degree increments or steplessly on some models.

With other words, you can rotate compressor housing 45 degrees clockwise and probably fit WG-actuator mounting. It's hard to see the rest so i don't know if that orientation is feasible from tubing point of view.

P.S. I don't reccomend those long headers unless you really want to keep your heat stock.

They are very very long, and exchangers will cool them down even more, leading to considerable lag and loss of efficiency. I believe that you can manufacture your own headers quite easily in case you can live w/o heat... (use Eberspächer instead)

Do something like this and just pull it together where it fits best:

http://www.itsfun.nu/itsfun2/itsfun2_91.jpg.

You don't have oil-scavenge pump so you must mount your turbo higher than lower valve covers in order to use gravity-drain of oil.

Equality of header-lengths isn't critical on turbocharged engines, but length itself is.

Actually the turbo I have (Turbonetics) has infinite rotational resolution on the compressor and turbine housings. I had a look again and rotated the compressor and it looks like it might be able to fit. The only way is to try.

The internal wastegate does solve alot of problems. No need for extra flange and welding on main pipe. No extra wastegate pipe or wastegate muffler. Cost is significantly less too.

I'm only worried that running low boost requires alot of exhaust bypassing the turbo and the internal wastegate may not be big enough to handle this. I guess the only way is to try it.

I really need my heating for spring/fall so I can't get rid of my headers. I maybe able to block the cooling air if lag is significant. I'll deal with that later.

It looks like the oil outlet is almost parallel with the bottom of the valve cover, so this is not good as is. I'm gonna see if I have room to put a spacer to lift the turbo higher up. The alternative is to run the oil to the oil drain plate where the pump can suck it up?

One other thing. Since I have EFI there is no need to run the intake back into the engine compartment. I'm wondering if I can just put an airfilter directly on the turbo intake. Being out of the engine it is also a cold air intake. Some cover would have to be made to protect it from water and dirt. Hmm........

Naah, I run "Super 60" T3 with base boost set @ 0.5 bar w/o problems. If it isn't diesel-specced turbo with smaller wastegate i doubt you'll have problems.

Here are few hints:

1. Oil entry at turbo bearing assy shouldn't tilt more than 15 degrees from vertical per Garrett specs.

2. Oil will not push itself upwards from turbo drain...with other words, you cannot rely on oil pressure after bearing to evacuate oil and push it upwards. It won't happend... if "water level" is higher up than approx inch under oil drain from turbo you will have an expensive mosquito-killer.

So oil-drain from turbo must be of gravity-type...either into small sump (se picture above) where it can be sucked from by scavenge pump or into lower cam cover (it needs to sit above!).

Dissobey any of those things and you will have a smoker.

Yes you can. It's common practice for performance tweekers to connect filter directly to turbo. Some sort of dual conical K&N-type filter will work w/o problems. You need to fit it so it doesn't suck dirt and/or hot air.

Looks like I can raise the turbo about an inch. Once the car is off the ramps I'll see the exact height difference from the valve cover.

The only other thing remaining is the oil feed line and the turbo outlet to the throttle body.

I think this is going to come together fairly quickly.

I said it before and I will say it again: those retro-style long headers aren't optimal on turbocharged car. 930-style exchangers would be better, custom welded shorty-headers would be best. It doesn't need to be expensive, you could cut of the pipes on old exchangers and weld new pipes on it.

Using those long headers will somewhat negate the positive effects of using small turbocharger and light boost as they prolong lag and push boost treshold upwards in rev-range.

If I would do it , I would try to use euro-exchangers with custom made Y-pipe and a turbo with integral wastegate sitting as high up as possible.

Thermodynamically and flow-wise, your setup is very bad. That T-connection of turbo is not good. Pulse will just flow trough the tube past the "T" and pressurize other side, then bounce back etc. There will be some weird effects. Yes, It will provide boost but it will be far from optimal.

Unfortunately heating is a must. I live in Canada. I'm not interested in all the hassles of those gas burning heaters just to have a little less lag. It's all about compromises....

Is there a baffle directly under the turbo flange in that cross pipe?
Something needs to prevent the flow from each bank slamming together in the middle of the cross-over pipe.

Goran - Bruce A. has a picture in his book of a 930 using the old style SSI configuration heat exchangers. They were considered an upgrade from the terrible stock US configuration. Not optimal but an acceptable compromise for those needing heat.
The Euro stock 930 echangers wrap around the back of the engine in the same manner as the stock SC configuation. This is a lot of tube length. And yet the Euro is considered much better than the US and nearly equal to aftermarket 930 header/echangers such as B&B. I don't get this unless the entire stock package is not very sensitive to tube length. Ideas?

By the way Tony, I used one of those "cherry bomb" mufflers on my 930. It's loud as hell. Love the sound of the turbo spool but I sure couldn't make a trip with that drone.

I wonder if a setup could be designed that runs the turbo off the headers close to the engine, and then has a heat exchanger for the heat downstream from the turbo.

It could also all for more room to mount the turbo, if it was closer to where the long twisted part of the SSI-style headers and the heat exchanger itself are under the car. I have been contemplating twin turbos, and finding quickly that real estate is precious between the back of the engine and the bumper.

Olivier

That's a good idea Oliver!
I'm doing a TT mock-up right now. Header design is where I'm at. It shouldn't be too difficult to slieve the muffler for heat. The possition is right, it would just take longer to receive the heat in the car using that configuration.