$1000 Rear Turbo build Thread

1LoudLS said:
chemical cooling would be great for a track car where your only using it for a short time, but I would think it would get old having to keep one more tank full in the LS on a street car. i definitely wouldn't want to on if it was a DD
Click to expand...

I've built air to water intercooler setups for mustangs, Nissans, Hondas, Chevys etc. It's actually quite efficient if you use the right size coolant tank and exhange
 
G-RELL said:
BUMP lol... i needed a laugh this morning... ( i love the "final" pics)
Click to expand...

LOL! I saw this and thought "holy crap, this isn't dead yet?"

I double checked the final pics.....just maybe needs a little duct tape to get rid of the leaks, it would be fine after that.............:shifty:
 
lol i occasionally visit his youtube channel to see if there are any updates. I hope he didn't blow up his car.
 
1LoudLS said:
chemical cooling would be great for a track car where your only using it for a short time, but I would think it would get old having to keep one more tank full in the LS on a street car. i definitely wouldn't want to on if it was a DD
Click to expand...

Since I already have a five gallon methanol fuel cell in my trunk with plumbing attached I've found it to be no big deal of any kind.

KS
 
but as your car sits now as you drive it all the time, is it NA or boosted?

using it every once in a while while the bottle is on is one thing and just having it sitting there while turned off, but using it 100% of the time you're driving for chemical cooling instead of a installing FMIC or liquid to air heat exchanger doesn't make sense to me on a turbo car since you're going to be going through it all the time on a daily driver. will it work? sure, it will probably work great, but where the problem is, in having two tank to have to keep filling all the time, not to mention that its not as easily accessible at every gas station like premium fuels you stop at when you're tank is low.
 
One of the very best features of a turbo is that it is a 'demand' item. The overwhelming majority of the time, the turbo is 'idling' or free-wheeling, and providing no boost. When your foot on the loud-pedal creates conditions such that boost is called-for, the manifold pressure ramps up.

Very low boost doesn't require ANY sort of cooling. Bringing on the methanol spray with a Hobbs switch at 2-4 pounds---mine is adjustable---will mean that normal driving around the city brings the spray into function-mode for a few seconds---or less--- per day. Five gallons of methanol will last for a number of weeks. Consumption rate is no problem.

Back in the '60s Oldsmobile briefly sold a turbo'd F-85 with such a spray system. As a marketing ploy they sold a mix at the dealer that accomplished the sort of program we're talking about. A friend who had one bought 'rubbing alcohol' by the case at the drug store because it was much cheaper and accomplished the same thing. The factory reservoir couldn't have held much more than a quart.

KS
 
cammerfe said:
One of the very best features of a turbo is that it is a 'demand' item. The overwhelming majority of the time, the turbo is 'idling' or free-wheeling, and providing no boost. When your foot on the loud-pedal creates conditions such that boost is called-for, the manifold pressure ramps up.

Very low boost doesn't require ANY sort of cooling. Bringing on the methanol spray with a Hobbs switch at 2-4 pounds---mine is adjustable---will mean that normal driving around the city brings the spray into function-mode for a few seconds---or less--- per day. Five gallons of methanol will last for a number of weeks. Consumption rate is no problem.

Back in the '60s Oldsmobile briefly sold a turbo'd F-85 with such a spray system. As a marketing ploy they sold a mix at the dealer that accomplished the sort of program we're talking about. A friend who had one bought 'rubbing alcohol' by the case at the drug store because it was much cheaper and accomplished the same thing. The factory reservoir couldn't have held much more than a quart.

KS
Click to expand...

I think I rarely get into the turbo on the 535....... I know.... A shame, isn't it?
 
cammerfe said:
Back in the '60s Oldsmobile briefly sold a turbo'd F-85 with such a spray system. As a marketing ploy they sold a mix at the dealer that accomplished the sort of program we're talking about.
Click to expand...

so auto manufactures tried this, then quickly got rid of it, and haven't gone back to it in the last 50 years...


you would think a system like that would be in widespread use by now if it was such a good option?




for me, if I was going to spend that kind of money for the system, I would just rather spend the same money on an intercooler, put it in and be done with it... never have to check to see how full the tank is, never have to go out and buy more juice, never have to worry if it fails...

there is a reason intercoolers are used on 95%+ turbo'd cars out there. doing something better is one thing, but doing something different just to be different with ANY added amount of inconvenience doesn't make sense to me. dont get me wrong, I do believe those systems have their place..., but thats mostly at a track or if you're going balls in with a powerstroker and a intercooler alone just won't cut it when youre running the brake sh!t tune.
 
1LoudLS said:
so auto manufactures tried this, then quickly got rid of it, and haven't gone back to it in the last 50 years...


you would think a system like that would be in widespread use by now if it was such a good option?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. The OEMs make quite a few mistakes on otherwise viable technology because they did it wrong whether by incompetence or design (on purpose). The most glaring would be the Olds diesel. Had they used the next size larger bolt size on the heads, and put them in a quarter inch longer, the Olds diesel would have been a dependable, reliable car and diesel cars would be a lot more common today. People who still run the Olds diesels fixed them by doing just this, and when turbocharged they run pretty well too. Yep, GM put out a full size car that got around 30-35MPG in the 1970s, and screwed it up, and this screwup turned a whole generation off the idea of a diesel car. I've often wondered if the OEMs and oil companies aren't cross-invested in each other from how they act, which is why they'd not want highly efficient diesels back then when diesel was half the price of a gallon of gasoline, and why they are making them now when diesel costs more per gallon.

So far as the injection system in this post, it might be a good idea, but I imagine it didn't fly if the car is liable to blow up if it runs out of the fluid and is run hard due to warranty concerns. A failed pump in this case would blow the engine. Not saying it would blow up, just that if it were liable they wouldn't want to take the chance of having to replace an entire engine if a (then) five dollar pump failed on what is not a necessary system under normal circumstances.
 
Good analysis! From my own viewpoint, the use of the methanol is a no-brainer. Not only does the methanol cool the incoming charge, it also richens the mix and in so doing it makes sure that there is no detonation. And as an oxygen-bearing fuel it allows the engine to make extra power. There's literally no downside except the necessity to check the methanol fuel cell once a week or so and add as necessary.

KS
 
Telco said:
.....back then when diesel was half the price of a gallon of gasoline, and why they are making them now when diesel costs more per gallon..
Click to expand...

Actually, it's more because there are more diesels on the road today than ever yet the infrastructure hasn't kept up. Simply, much higher demand with supply that can't keep up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 110 (members: 0, guests: 110)
Back
Top