I will reserve this post for questions I have as I generate ideas and continue purchasing items for this. If I find the asnwers first I will include them with the question. and if the answer is provided (and validated) I will alos add it and the name of who provided it to give proper credit where credit is do. THANK YOU for your help on this in advance!

-What is the recommended -AN line size for the oil lines to and from the turbos?

Usually people run a -4AN line for an oil feed.
I like running a 1/2" ID high temp rubber hose for return lines.
I'll get back in here when I have more time.
Regards, GSM

 

Ideas on current train of thought and items used.

Try to duplicate Hotlavaflows oil feed system for the TB0363 (T3 series turbo)
but cannot seem to find a pump to feed the system in my price range yet. (yep cheap turbos since this is a (for now) cheap project.

Do a single BOV on the SRI section of the piping.

Try to do a variation of Hotlavaflows mid-mount turbo setup, I think the additional piping before it hits the engine creates enough lag/spool time to gain better traction before kicking in. Prior to reading about this and realizing the space limitations for exhaust piping, additional heat in the engine bay, and turbo placement I did want to put them in the engine bay.

 

Usually people run a -4AN line for an oil feed.

I like running a 1/2" ID high temp rubber hose for return lines.

I'll get back in here when I have more time.

Regards,

GSM

 

Thanks buddy, it gives me a good place to start.

 

damn...... a FMIC just looks so good on a legend.....sure wish it was easier to go FI on a legend motor

 

yeah I agree, but I think once I have done it, and have learned the to do's and not to do's, it will be a well learned lesson. And as we are starting to see more people doing it more info as to making it easier and cheaper (or even available) is happening; so hopefully this project will leave me with something to contribute to the community in return as well like those that have attempted it thus far.

PS I actually got that baby to fit behind the bumper too, it is tucked out of view and still gets air
I was going to post a pic but the bumper was just too ugly to have to look at in a camera shot every time I view this thread. I gave the better 91-93 bumper to my wife.

 

Relocate the battery to the back and use the space to fit the turbo(s).

 

Yeah I considered that, but I also posted why I decided against it. I don't want any piping hanging any (if not much) lower than it currently is I have no desire to raise my car. The challenge will be mounting the turbos in a fashion that coinsides with this desire.

 

Heat? Mod your hood a little to increase air flow

 

Any specific reason for twin over single or vice versa?

~Dv8

 

Any specific reason for twin over single or vice versa?
~Dv8

Single vs. Twin Turbo - 3000GT/Stealth International Message Center
I went through some of the info from other sites and most of the info was either opinion based or from people who were less knowlegable of what they were talking about but I did like the info contained in these links.

This one was interesting, but I had a hard time telling who really knew exactly what they were talking about.
Twin Turbo vs. Single, difference? - HybridZ

I found this interesting

Spool vs. Turbo Size:
The Infamous Single vs. Twin Debate

When you think about spool on a turbo, there are a few considerations to observe. Firstly, you want is as low as possible, for obvious reasons. This brings up the dilemma of using a single turbocharger or twin turbochargers. There are ideas out there that may cause you to lean towards one setup or the either, but most can be dismissed with a real look at the issue. Here are some examples:

-Some people argue "one turbo gets all the cylinders' energy, twins gets half per turbo and significant exhaust pulses, which make the twins more inefficient". This is mostly invalid because modern turbine housings are radially split and tangential, so the exhaust pulses are calmed upon entry to the turbine, and more effectively handle unsteady energy flow. Also, inertia for the most part prevents any major transience with (heavily) pulsed exhaust energy.

-You get more exhaust pressure with a single than twins, which spools it faster. This can be eliminated because exhaust pressure is not really dependant on the turbo, moreso the manifold. Additionally, exhaust pressure does not have a direct effect on exhaust energy. While it IS an indirect effect on exhaust pressure, nothing is going to add energy to the exhaust flow, especially making the engine pressurize the exhaust more. This not only makes the engine and turbo less efficient, it is useless. Looking at the thermodynamic equation for energy in a fluid flow:

Q + ∑mi(hi + 1/2 (Vi)2+ gZi) = ∑me(he + 1/2(Ve)2+gZe) +[m1(u1+1/2(V1)2+gZ1)-m2(u1+1/2(V2)2+gZ2)] + W

Where Q = heat transfer rate to the control volume
mi=mass exhaust flow in
me=mass of exhaust flow out
m1=initial mass of gas in the control volume (turbine housing)
m2=mass of gas in turbine at the end of the control volume process examination
h= enthalpy (1 = initial, 2=final, I=flow in, e= flow out)
u = internal energy (same conditions stated above)
V= velocity
Z= vertical height
g=force of gravity (9.807 m/s2)
W=work rate by the control volume

This shows that exhaust pressure does not directly affect the energy of the gas; it would increase the velocity of the inflow, but also increase the outflow, which would negate the effect since the mass flow rate should not change. Wastegates do not affect this since they exit the flow before the turbine. Arguing the pressure increases the heat may also be argued because of the same reason. The inflow enthalpy and outflow enthalpy are affected the same way: more heat in means more heat out. While is not equal out perfectly because of turbine performance, it is not enough to affect the thermodynamic flow of the turbine. Examine this closer and you might notice that increasing the pressure (by the ideal gas condition) with the (required) decrease in volume of the gas under inspection will have a very minimal effect. Raising the pressure by 1 bar (a lot) in a 40mm ID pipe (primary) requires a bit smaller then a 35mm pipe to keep the temperature constant. This is a 23.4 % decrease in pipe diameter, which is a LOT. This means that you would have to decrease pipe diameter by more than 23 percent to see any effect increased heat by increasing pressure by 1 bar. At 3 bar (44psi) of exhaust pressure, a 1 bar increase in exhaust pressure at an exhaust gas temperature of 600 degrees Celsius (873K) requires a radius decrease of ~10%. At 1000C (1273K) the radius must decrease of 11%. Thusly, you can see that a mere 100-degree increase in temperature requires a much larger change in radius that desirable. 100 degrees might net you some good energy on the inflow, but it will also increase the energy of the outflow. The difference might be 2%, which is a negligible gain.

Ideal gas formula:

PV=mRT
PV/T = constant
P1V1/T1=P2V2/T2 which yields the equations:

V2(T1) =(T1+100)*P1*V1 P1, P2, V1 known

and
P2T1
P2(T1)=(T1+100)*P1*V1 P1, V1, T1 known
T1*V2

Conclusion: more exhaust pressure is not as desirable as you'd like to think. As you will read, with forced induction you fit the exhaust size to the maximum torque output of the engine. Exhaust/intake pressure rations can be observed also. The effectiveness of aggressive valve timing can be absolutely eliminated if the exhaust pressure ratio is high. More on that later.

Now back to the turbo spool comparison:

There are two reasons to argue a single vs. twin turbos. If you compare the mass moment of inertia for a solid disc, you get 1/2*m*R2 on the axial axis based at the center of the circle (fig. 1) (call this z) and 1/4*m*R2 on the radial axis (x and y). For a circular cone (or circular cone section), the mass moment of inertia is 3/10*m*R2 along the axial axis centered at the center of the base circle (fig. 2), is 3/10*m*R2. The same is true for a cone sectioned by cutting it along the z axis with a plane parallel to the XY plane. Now observe the mass. In such a cone, with a constant density and a constant trim turbine wheel, the relationship of radius to mass is:

trapezoid: A = H*(R1+R2)
trapezoidal cylinder (frustum of right circular cone): V = pi*H*(Ra2 + Ra*Rb + Rb2)/3
Trim of turbine wheel: [inducer/exducer]2 =(I/E)2 = I2/E2
for the frustum, call the inducer Rb and the exducer Ra.
mass = volume * density
so, M1/M2 = (V1*p)/(V2*p)
with equal density, M1/M2=V1/V2

Now lets double the size of the turbine wheel (since trim is equal, the exducer doubles as well as the inducer.

V1= pi*h*(E12 + E1*I1 + I12)/3
V2= pi*h*(E22 + E2*I2 + I22)/3
set I2=2*I1 and E2=2*E1 ::
V2= Pi*h*(4E12 + 2*E1*2*I1 + 4*I12)/3
so M1/M2=V1/V2=>cancel terms =>(1+1+1)(4+2*2+4) = (3/12)=1/4

Thusly, doubling the radius results in4 times the mass.

This roughly simulates a turbine wheel, as close as simple calculations will go. Now if you take 1 large wheel and two small ones of half the diameter you get 1/4 + 1/4 = 1/2 versus 1. It is half the mass. This becomes even more important when you implement the mass moment of inertia. For a frustum of a right circular cone (solid of revolution of a trapezoid), the mass moment of inertia is 2/10*m*R2

If R2 is 2* R1, and hence mass 2 (large turbo) = 4*mass 1 (smaller turbo), then

I1= 3/10 * m1 * R12 and
I2= 3/10 * 4*m1* (2R1)2 = 3/10*4*m1*4*R1 = 3/10*16*m1*R1

So I1/I2 = 1/16. That means the large single turbo has 16 times the inertia. Inertia is the property of mass that is defined as "resistance to change in movement". Like the old saying goes: "An object in motion tends to stay in motion, and object at rest tends to stay at rest".

This makes single turbos look slow and laggy. But wait, there's more.

Lets talk efficiency. Tolerances in a turbo are pretty much the same regardless of size. What this means is that the error can be twice as much area, which can be twice the percentage of error. This affects smaller turbochargers a lot more than larger one. This, as expected, results in 4 times the efficiency loss due to clearances. The big single makes "better boost" then the twins.

Hence, the twins will spool faster, but once spooled, the single is more efficient. If you're driving a street only car and spool is your first concern, then twin turbochargers will suit your application better. If you are racing and know that you will not fall out of the powerband, and thus spool, the single will be a better choice.

Also keep in mind another adage, "spool only exists in 1st gear and there is [among other methods] a simple solution in a bottle!" The use of tuning to decrease spool time will be addressed in another article, as well as actual turbine performance and efficiency.

The examples used here are simplified for ease of calculation, but will work for any scenario. You probably aren't going to have a turbine wheel twice the size of another, but interpolation and some calculations give a result that says a turbine wheel about 15% bigger has twice the inertia.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This site was less informative but I liked the layout
Twin Turbo Lexus SC400 "Project Lextreme SC470TT"

 

WHat about that?

 

This is a perfect illustration for my question, because I think I over thought ot forgot something regarding the X-pipe. Why would I put the X-pipe be between where the exhaust enters the turbos vs. between where the exhaust exits the turbos and makes its path toward the muffler(s). The reason I ask is because I would think that the pressure is equalized in the intercooler before it enters the intake manifold (which is essentially a y-pipe)?
Also putting up additional pics of the piping (other than the intake) is going to be futile until I know whether or not the 350 headers will work.

 

^^^^^

Thats one of the coolest/funiest photos I've seen on this forums!:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

-Ed

 

haha that is comedy, I was actually going to ask if someone had attempted dropping the engine in this way and had obx headers? Stock headers have clearance issues.

 

Here is the strongest consideration in the radiator department. Seems the cooling system should be beefed up a bit when the cars performance is beefed up.

Quick Facts:
MSRP: $419.99
• 100% High-Quality Aircraft Grade Aluminum
• Two Row Design
• 1.3 Rated Radiator Cap
• 25%-30% Increase in Cooling Ability

Product Notes:
An ideal upgrade to the stock OEM radiator, JVT Racing aluminum radiator will give your vehicle a cooler, more efficient running engine. The stock OEM fan will work with this radiator.

Row - 2
Thickness - 1.75"
Length - 26"
Height - 14.5"
Purchase Includes: JVT Racing Radiator, JVT Racing 1.3 Bar Radiator Cap + RMA Form Included.

Killer price eBay Motors: JVT Racing 2 Row Aluminum Radiator Integra 90-93 DA MT (item 230263187898 end time Jun-24-08 20:39:33 PDT)

 

^^^^^

And I just put in a Koyo radiator? :-( But is there any real benefit for NA Legends?

-Ed

 

to keep it cooler? That would be my best guess and the side benefit would be a longer lasting engine.

 

Hmm post whoring in my own thread I guess that's ok. well there was a last minute change of plans and I decided to go with a Visteon/C&R Racing radiator the quality and size was right, and the price could not have been better in comparison to what it was though the JVTR was close this had a SPAL slimline fan pre-mounted to it and free shipping so I jumped on it. It was in the special sale section of an Ebay store, but there was a Blowout sale going on that had the same radiator for only 15.00 more + shipping if anyone is interested here is the link. CorSport Online Store: Visteon (I have no affiliation)

Info from visteon
------------------
DIMENSIONS: 18" X 26.5" X 2"
DESCRIPTION:

Designed for hard core racing and ultimate street performance, Visteon Performance Radiators are handcrafted using advanced racing cores and heliarc welded aluminum stock - just like the radiators used in NASCAR racecars.

The tanks are expertly fabricated by hand from die-cut, aircraft quality polished .060 aluminum. Each radiator is built with welded fan mounts and comes complete with an electric fan, drain plug and radiator cap. Every model is assembled and tested for superior heat rejection.

The result is radiators that drivers can depend on to keep their high performance engines cool when it really counts.

PART #: VISTEON - 7008

 

ooohhh shiny

 

T-man... those are some awesome radiators, turbo or not. I'm confused. Which one did you get? JVT Racing or Corsport? What do you need to support the radiator in place? With OEM supports? What about sensor/switch... etc?

I'm due for a new cooling upgrade. Wanna know options before I go with Koyos.

 

What about sensor/switch... etc?
I'm due for a new cooling upgrade. Wanna know options before I go with Koyos.

Just noticed that the last pic looks like it is temp sensor ready and since it is a Honda/Acura model it will hopefully be plug and play in this aspect.

 

Hmm for the price I am happy with the C&R/Visteon which is the one I went with there is a place where a sensor bung can be welded in I will entertain that when it arrives. As for the mounting custom mounting will be required, just as it would for any other All aluminum radiator, they simply don't make one for our car. But it allows the advantage of selecting from many other cars (with minor fabrications)

 

Telion and whats77inaname you guys are not cool you guys never let me in on anything :lol: well i guess the cats ripped out of the bag, hang in there master T u shall reap the benefits soon enough!

 

Well to be honest, there was a time that I would not have said anything about the ideas I am working on out of fear of being flamed, but then I realized through the supercharger project that it is slow and long and limiting the people that I share the idea with merely limits the possibilities of the project and the amount of excitement I experience in sharing my vision with others. I had become bored with it all together at one point and then decided to post up about it to regain my desire to complete through the interest of those who would have an interest in it, all of you :angel:. Yet still it is in a stage where all I can do is wait and my desire to learn had a need which is now being filled by the tt idea. Had I not felt this way I would keep the SC, the tt and teh radiator ideas on the downlow till they were done and tested. So with the exception of small or specific detailed information you know what I know, and close to the timeframe inwhich I know it. hmm time for the warning; meaning that none of this is proven to be successful or to yield positive results yet, but that is all part of being an innovator.

 

i understand struggles and failures retries and sleepless nights headaches tears... all the more reason to once and a while get your d1ck wet always focuses me anyway... and the flame thing, not you T i dont think anyone hear would do that to u but if someone does i got your internet back :lol:

 

lol, thanks buddy.

Once the radiator arrives I will post up similarites differences and degree of difficulty to get it in on the downside I can't really seem to find it in very many places online.

 

The cooling system in our race car runs at 24psi. I would run it at a higher pressure if it were not mounted so close to the driver.

Chris

 

Good to know, I will probably keep the radiator pressure close to stock till read more about this specific area, but I guess I better do some reading. If you have any links to suggested material that would be great!

 

^^thats why we have PM so u can tell me these things but it seems like wen they doubt u , u come out stronger and shut them up how about another ... bet u cant make your car RWD :lol: