Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 1/13/2006 11:47:50 AM EDT
When you can have 8! I give you INCINER8OR !

Ok probably a dupe but I figured you guys and gals wouldn't mind seeing some car pron!





Engine Dyno vid

Hood in action vid

Walk around vid
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 3:02:29 PM EDT
did that guy just have 8 dsm t-25s laying around and a general lack of anything better to do or what?
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 3:21:48 PM EDT
what can he do with 8 that he couldnt do with say.. seven.

ill take that extra off of his hands
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 4:46:03 PM EDT
Nice 57, but I doubt it would run as good as a quality single or bi-turbo setup would. The most any real performance car I know of has is 4, and that was because they were running a V12. More than 2 turbo's on a V8 is just bling.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 11:58:52 AM EDT
What I want to know is what the FUEL set-up is on that...

Thats ALOT of air coming in...

Link Posted: 1/15/2006 5:45:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RRA-A2:
What I want to know is what the FUEL set-up is on that...

Thats ALOT of air coming in...




Not really they are small turbos. He'd make better power with jus a TRU Bi-Turbo setup, but im sure he did this for the WOW factor. that Dyno run wasnt impressive at all. Ive seen 400hp dodge neon running a single turbo with 21lbs of boost on a 2.4L motor. You never heard the exhaust, all you heard was the AIR being sucked into it. It was awesome. lol

(Bi turbo - two turbos that arent connect to each other)
(Twin Turbo - one feeds the other.)

Maserati had a tru BI TURBO setup. Dont think anyone else did.
Link Posted: 1/16/2006 1:23:59 PM EDT
IIRC, most of the boost is dumped and the engine sees a whopping 16 pounds. I think there was something like 25 feet of plumbing as well. If memory serves me correctly, he used a 700R4 trasnmission too.

He had an interview on some car show, and the guy wasn't the brightest crayon in the box to say the least. The company that built the car thought it was embarassing but did it for the money anyways.

It's a cool looking car, but the boost set up is nothing more than retarded.
Link Posted: 1/16/2006 3:09:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By die-tryin:

Originally Posted By RRA-A2:
What I want to know is what the FUEL set-up is on that...

Thats ALOT of air coming in...




Not really they are small turbos. He'd make better power with jus a TRU Bi-Turbo setup, but im sure he did this for the WOW factor. that Dyno run wasnt impressive at all. Ive seen 400hp dodge neon running a single turbo with 21lbs of boost on a 2.4L motor. You never heard the exhaust, all you heard was the AIR being sucked into it. It was awesome. lol

(Bi turbo - two turbos that arent connect to each other)
(Twin Turbo - one feeds the other.)

Maserati had a tru BI TURBO setup. Dont think anyone else did.


alpina did a biturbo BMW E34 5 series if memory serves
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 11:48:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/17/2006 12:02:42 PM EDT by killingmachine123]

Originally Posted By die-tryin:

Originally Posted By RRA-A2:
What I want to know is what the FUEL set-up is on that...

Thats ALOT of air coming in...




Not really they are small turbos. He'd make better power with jus a TRU Bi-Turbo setup, but im sure he did this for the WOW factor. that Dyno run wasnt impressive at all. Ive seen 400hp dodge neon running a single turbo with 21lbs of boost on a 2.4L motor. You never heard the exhaust, all you heard was the AIR being sucked into it. It was awesome. lol

(Bi turbo - two turbos that arent connect to each other)
(Twin Turbo - one feeds the other.)

Maserati had a tru BI TURBO setup. Dont think anyone else did.



It is all a matter of terminology. I have heard of aviation guys calling one turbo feeding another a staged setup. No offense intended, but I have only heard the term "twin turbo" described your way when someone did not know what they are talking about. You also left out sequetial turbos like those found on the supra twin turbo.

I will try to do some research and report back.


ETA: from the banks website:

What kind of problems are likely when using two, staged turbochargers?
It is common to use different sized turbos when the turbochargers are "staged": that is, the compressor discharge from one turbo feeds the compressor inlet of the second, and the compressor discharge of the second feeds the engine. The most likely problem is extreme heating of the compressed intake air. A charge air cooler (intercooler) should definitely be used to cool the air coming out of the second turbo.

Also from the banks site, a picture of one of thier "twin turbo" motors. A chevy V8 if I am not mistaken.



Here is a bit from the ray hall website that talks a little about converting a sequential system into a traditional twin turbo setup.

www.turbofast.com.au/lexusturbo.html


Of course there will be some overlap in terms depending on design, and how they are implemented, but the three basic terms that I have outlined here are used in all of the turbo circles that I am in. Also, I would like to point out that bi-turbo is a viable term, but it is usually reserved for fancy pants foreign cars like the aforementioned maseratti. YMMV.
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 11:55:52 AM EDT
[tag for Turbo lovin' goodness]

: ( wish I owned a Turbo anything. A f*** VW Bettle turbo would be cool.

My questiom, WTF is with the whole turbo 4 banger shit? Why can't anyone Turbo a V6 anymore.

Supra
Grand National
AMG C32 (not a Turbo but a V6 Supercharged)

Link Posted: 1/17/2006 12:03:34 PM EDT
turbo lag=teh suck
Supercharged yumminess=teh cool
Nitrous=liquid gold and the best
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 12:05:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheMocoMan:
[tag for Turbo lovin' goodness]

: ( wish I owned a Turbo anything. A f*** VW Bettle turbo would be cool.

My questiom, WTF is with the whole turbo 4 banger shit? Why can't anyone Turbo a V6 anymore.

Supra
Grand National
AMG C32 (not a Turbo but a V6 Supercharged)




Nissan Skyline is a turbo 3.0L V6 IIRC. Unfortunetly they do not offer them here.

BTW, do not knock the 4 cylinder turbo engine. They work amazingly wheel in light weight cars.
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 12:10:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheMocoMan:
[tag for Turbo lovin' goodness]

: ( wish I owned a Turbo anything. A f*** VW Bettle turbo would be cool.

My questiom, WTF is with the whole turbo 4 banger shit? Why can't anyone Turbo a V6 anymore.

Supra
Grand National
AMG C32 (not a Turbo but a V6 Supercharged)





I think the 4cyl. turbo buisiness is due to the fact that it is cheaper to make a fast 4cyl from a manufacturing standpoint. They can move out and get good MPGs too.

I really want to see a I5 that is DOHC and turbocharged. You could lay down some wicked power with a good flowing head, fit it in a FWD or RWD car, and get some sweet milage to boot.
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 7:34:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Carb850:

Originally Posted By TheMocoMan:
[tag for Turbo lovin' goodness]

: ( wish I owned a Turbo anything. A f*** VW Bettle turbo would be cool.

My questiom, WTF is with the whole turbo 4 banger shit? Why can't anyone Turbo a V6 anymore.

Supra
Grand National
AMG C32 (not a Turbo but a V6 Supercharged)




Nissan Skyline is a turbo 3.0L V6 IIRC. Unfortunetly they do not offer them here.

BTW, do not knock the 4 cylinder turbo engine. They work amazingly wheel in light weight cars.



that's the 300zx, the skyline GT-R has the RB26DETT 2.6 liter DOHC twin turbo inline six
Link Posted: 1/17/2006 7:43:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By Carb850:
Nissan Skyline is a turbo 3.0L V6 IIRC. Unfortunetly they do not offer them here.

BTW, do not knock the 4 cylinder turbo engine. They work amazingly wheel in light weight cars.



that's the 300zx, the skyline GT-R has the RB26DETT 2.6 liter DOHC twin turbo inline six




Yeah, that is
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 4:57:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 5:27:46 AM EDT by VoodooChile]
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 5:11:44 AM EDT
Taggage
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 7:25:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor



and probably rear wheel drive only too, I want a inline 6 and awd
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 8:34:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor



and probably rear wheel drive only too, I want a inline 6 and awd



+1 Wasn't the R34 an AWD car? I think that version of the skyline was the pinacle of the nameplate.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 8:41:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor



and probably rear wheel drive only too, I want a inline 6 and awd



+1 Wasn't the R34 an AWD car? I think that version of the skyline was the pinacle of the nameplate.



As heavy as it will probably be (like the R34) AWD will probably be the only way to get the mind bending performance out of it..I can't imagine Nissan will take a step back and compromise on this car like they did the 350. Doesn't really matter since I won't be in the market for one until the kids get out of the house ...and that's a loooongg way away.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 9:46:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor



and probably rear wheel drive only too, I want a inline 6 and awd



+1 Wasn't the R34 an AWD car? I think that version of the skyline was the pinacle of the nameplate.



you could get the R34 in a few different trims, one with the 2 liter rb20 inline six turbo, another (gt-st if memory serves) with the 2.5 liter rb25det single turbo inline six but rear wheel drive only, then the GT-R with the rb26dett twin turbo 2.6 liter and all wheel drive.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 6:05:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
But the Skyline will be here in a few years (called the GTR) and from what I hear the new version will have a Twin Turbo V-6...probably using the 350Z motor



and probably rear wheel drive only too, I want a inline 6 and awd



+1 Wasn't the R34 an AWD car? I think that version of the skyline was the pinacle of the nameplate.



you could get the R34 in a few different trims, one with the 2 liter rb20 inline six turbo, another (gt-st if memory serves) with the 2.5 liter rb25det single turbo inline six but rear wheel drive only, then the GT-R with the rb26dett twin turbo 2.6 liter and all wheel drive.



[monty pytons holy grail] Who are you that are so wise in the ways of science? [/monty pytons holy grail]
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 2:45:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/19/2006 2:51:41 PM EDT by olds442tyguy]
Actually when they switched over to the R34, the GTS-T name was dumped in favor of GT-T. It also got the new NEOS motor which was basically a cylinder head and cam upgrade. All R33 and R32 single turbo 2.5's were GTS-T's though. All GT-T's and GTS-T's are rear wheel drive only.

Also, the RB20 was only offered in very few R32's IIRC. The standard Skyline motor after that was the RB25DE which was offered in the GTS. The RB25DET came in the GTS-T, and the RB25DET NEOS came in the GT-T. The RB26DETT came only in the GTR as stated.

There were also some R32 AWD non turbo models with some goofy designation, but the exact name has slipped my memory. GTS-4 seems right, but I'm not sure so don't quote me.

Also, you guys are forgetting the quickest turbo GM production vehicle ever made. I'll give you some hints that may remind you of what it was.

Turbo 4.3 V6.
Full time AWD.
285 hp.
365 torque. (Dyno tests have shown real world numbers to be about 425 or so.)
Two seater.
Quarter miles times typically averaging 13 seconds flat.
0 - 60 in 4.2 seconds.
You could have it in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.
It was made for only one year in the early 90's, but was followed up by a larger five passenger model which stems the "ty" in my name.
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 3:00:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By TheMocoMan:
[tag for Turbo lovin' goodness]

: ( wish I owned a Turbo anything. A f*** VW Bettle turbo would be cool.

My questiom, WTF is with the whole turbo 4 banger shit? Why can't anyone Turbo a V6 anymore.

Supra
Grand National
AMG C32 (not a Turbo but a V6 Supercharged)





I think the 4cyl. turbo buisiness is due to the fact that it is cheaper to make a fast 4cyl from a manufacturing standpoint. They can move out and get good MPGs too.

I really want to see a I5 that is DOHC and turbocharged. You could lay down some wicked power with a good flowing head, fit it in a FWD or RWD car, and get some sweet milage to boot.





That has been done before in a production car. Audi S2 and older S4s
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 7:45:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
Actually when they switched over to the R34, the GTS-T name was dumped in favor of GT-T. It also got the new NEOS motor which was basically a cylinder head and cam upgrade. All R33 and R32 single turbo 2.5's were GTS-T's though. All GT-T's and GTS-T's are rear wheel drive only.

Also, the RB20 was only offered in very few R32's IIRC. The standard Skyline motor after that was the RB25DE which was offered in the GTS. The RB25DET came in the GTS-T, and the RB25DET NEOS came in the GT-T. The RB26DETT came only in the GTR as stated.

There were also some R32 AWD non turbo models with some goofy designation, but the exact name has slipped my memory. GTS-4 seems right, but I'm not sure so don't quote me.

Also, you guys are forgetting the quickest turbo GM production vehicle ever made. I'll give you some hints that may remind you of what it was.

Turbo 4.3 V6.
Full time AWD.
285 hp.
365 torque. (Dyno tests have shown real world numbers to be about 425 or so.)
Two seater.
Quarter miles times typically averaging 13 seconds flat.
0 - 60 in 4.2 seconds.
You could have it in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.
It was made for only one year in the early 90's, but was followed up by a larger five passenger model which stems the "ty" in my name.



I was always told that the vette would run down a syclone at the end of the 1/4. I would love to have one, but I am stuck with my GLH-T.
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 8:26:59 PM EDT
The ZR1 would drive past it shortly after the end of the quarter. The standard LT1 Vettes took slightly longer.

For those of you wondering what the hell a Syclone is, it was a limited production GMC truck that still holds the record for being the quickest off the show room floor.

Link Posted: 1/20/2006 4:34:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
Also, you guys are forgetting the quickest turbo GM production vehicle ever made. I'll give you some hints that may remind you of what it was.

Turbo 4.3 V6.
Full time AWD.
285 hp.
365 torque. (Dyno tests have shown real world numbers to be about 425 or so.)
Two seater.
Quarter miles times typically averaging 13 seconds flat.
0 - 60 in 4.2 seconds.
You could have it in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.
It was made for only one year in the early 90's, but was followed up by a larger five passenger model which stems the "ty" in my name.



Wow! I had no idea. I remember the Cyclone and knew it ran pretty well but had no idea it had that much grunt. Did it have an intercooler?
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 6:43:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Carb850:

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
Also, you guys are forgetting the quickest turbo GM production vehicle ever made. I'll give you some hints that may remind you of what it was.

Turbo 4.3 V6.
Full time AWD.
285 hp.
365 torque. (Dyno tests have shown real world numbers to be about 425 or so.)
Two seater.
Quarter miles times typically averaging 13 seconds flat.
0 - 60 in 4.2 seconds.
You could have it in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.
It was made for only one year in the early 90's, but was followed up by a larger five passenger model which stems the "ty" in my name.



yes, it was ICed. Air to water IIRC.

Wow! I had no idea. I remember the Cyclone and knew it ran pretty well but had no idea it had that much grunt. Did it have an intercooler?

Link Posted: 1/20/2006 12:09:59 PM EDT
Correct Killingmachine.

Another thing coincidental about the Syclone/Typhoon torque ratings was that they were exactly the same number of the torque rating on the 700R4 transmission. Obviously, many SyTy's have transmission issues.

They're definately sleepers, but I'd have to say GLH-T's win out in the sleeper department. I got to ride in one that runs 12's. I figured it was just another 18 second Mopar compact when I got in, but I was in for a hell of a surprise. Riding in a fast Omni is just down right scary.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 1:42:28 PM EDT
There is a dude with a 10sec. Dodge K car. Its a true sleeper for sure.

www.thedodgegarage.com/

check out the vid clips to the left of screen (they are ZIP files)
Top Top