mic
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 10:45 AM |
|
|
turbo position on a manifold
i assume people make their own manifolds for bike engines that dont have turbos as standard. ive been looking at pictures  is there any reason why a
turbo cant be fitted to a normal manifold further down towards the end (see dodgy pic) or would that affect performance?? assuming clearance wasnt an
issue anyway!
cheers
www.retromods.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
takumi
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 10:48 AM |
|
|
No reason, just the response will be a tiny bit less.
I saw a vid on the net, about a company that turbo charges mustangs. --
They have the turbo almost at the back-box.! they had a seperate oil pump at the back for lubrication.
The long alloy pipes from the back to the front help drop the inlet air charge temperature so they didn't need intercoolers.
So it can work fine .
RobinHood 2B 2.0i pinto, Keihin 38mm Carbs, lightened flywheel, O'Mori remote filter kit, 10 row oil cooler. Modified head, 10.2cr, special
valves FR22 cam, 4- 1 header.
|
|
|
zzr1100rick2
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 11:14 AM |
|
|
I would think the exhaust gas speed would be relatively slow after all why do all drag racers put it as near the head as possible
just my two pence worth
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
Why would the exhaust gas speed be lower at the other end?
If I were to push your car with mine at 50mph, we would both be travelling at 50mph.
If exhaust is coming out of the manifold and is pushing the rest out, surely they would both be the same speed?
|
|
|
stevec
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
I think this is roughly what most people do.
It keeps the heat and gas speed up.
Steve..jpg)
|
|
|
zzr1100rick2
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 12:06 PM |
|
|
the exhaust primarys are of a smaller bore than the collector thus i think that the gasses slow down as they expand
plus lag would be awful
|
|
|
Volvorsport
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 12:18 PM |
|
|
most tubular manifolds that produce any real power are 400mm and longer . look at a cossie 2wd manifold and compare it with a 4x4 manifold , its not
just gas speed , its gas temperature aswell .
thermodynamically highest out lowest in , is the more efficient thermal (re fuel) engine , hence why short manifolds are used - but they produce more
torque at the expense of outright flow .
tubular manifolds run hotter , so its a case of diminshing returns .
BUT - an engineer will tell you its more important for spool time and producing boost to make the engine more effective (area under the curve) to use
its fuel more effectively .
BUT if youre going for outright power , flow is more important , as is reducing back pressure , and a tubular manifold will do that - but not to say
the one you show there IS the ideal tubular manifold .
www.dbsmotorsport.co.uk
getting dirty under a bus
|
|
|
mic
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 12:33 PM |
|
|
ok thanks guys the one i used in the picture was only to explain what i meant, i havent a clue to whether its tubular etc!
but it all makes sence
www.retromods.co.uk
|
|
|
richard thomas
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 02:48 PM |
|
|
Close as possible to the head so far as i am aware - hotter the gas the more energy it holds - not just about flow. Low backpressure after the turbo
though...
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 6/1/08 at 04:40 PM |
|
|
Just a quick question, does anyone know how much temperature exhaust gases lose from say exhaust port to say 3', 6' and 9'.
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
