| From | Message |
Brent Haskell
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/06/2002
20:31:20
|
 Subject: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Who makes a turbo for a 2000 and do they have a web site and how much are they? and this is for a V6 thanks
|
D
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/06/2002
22:30:30
|  RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
turbo's are in the works....
www.speedtweaks.net
|
bernd
*GenIII*
4/07/2002
00:41:08
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
That would be myself and Tom (SpeedTweaks). The turbo for the V6 was postponed due to a minor difficulty with my engine (I cracked the block).
The 2000 R/T is underway and is starting to take shape as well. :)
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/07/2002
13:11:03
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Is the 4.7L next, after the 5.9?
|
bernd
*GenIII*
4/07/2002
15:28:36
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Yup...along with the 3.9L.
Both the 3.9L and 4.7L are single systems (no need and/or advantage for a twin system on them).
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
YA
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
02:32:12
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
What about for the Gen. II 5.2? Tom's truck?
|
bernd
*GenIII*
4/08/2002
09:30:05
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
He's going to play around with his truck (Twin System) after the proto-type is done.
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
15:24:46
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Awesome, we're all anxiously waiting for those turbos!
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/08/2002
16:40:57
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
>>>Both the 3.9L and 4.7L are single systems (no need and/or advantage for a twin system on them).<<<
::taken from maximum boost::
advantage of 2 over 1: Offers superior manifld design. <~~ 1 key to high power output. Don't get the bad heat loss from the cross over pipe from one side to the other. (heat is party what powers the turbine) Greater control of turbine at low boost pressures. Stability of boost at high boost pressures. Exhaust gas flow area for waste gates can be dramatically larger. Greater turbine discharge area is the result.<~~ good thing. The engine heat is divided between 2 turbos instead of 1, allowing each to operate with less heat input. The heat absorbed into the materials is proportional to the temp. of the gases and their mass flow rate. The temp in each remains the same but the flow rate is halved, thus offering lower operating temp, so life expectancy will improved.
Disadvantages of 2 over 1: COST! <~~ big one. Synchronizing the 2 wastegates. <~~ says this is a minor problem. but doesn't say anything else. I can see maybe the clocking and the pipe routing, (hopefully minor again) but the routing sounds no more difficult than the cross pipe to the single turbo.
Bernd, i AM NOT saying you're wrong. I am not ther person to do it, as i have little to no expertise, but that's quite a few reasons from 1 paragraph in max. boost. i'm trying to learn this stuff so i can play too, and now i'm confused. Two, what i consider expert, sources giving somewhat different info. help me out here.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
17:15:01
| Not OPTIMAL conditions
IP: Logged
Message:
I think that Corky was talking about trying to reach optimal conditions to obtain optimal results (in racing/specifically prepared engines). I don't think the engines that come in our trucks will fall into the "optimal" category. Without basically starting over from scratch, these engines aren't going to handle the kind of boost that Corky is talking about making.
The truth of the matter is that a daily driver isn't going to be able to use the maximum amount of boost anyway. Unless you have a nice supply of 115 octane fuel (or better) at your disposal.... it's not gonna happen. If you can't use all the boost, than all this talk about highest efficiency, greater boost pressures and greater discharge area is all for nothing anyway. You might be able to brag that your turbo system is capable of making 25 lbs of boost..... but if the engine grenades at 15 lbs - then you are just fooling yourself, and paying a bunch of money doing so. I would relate it to buying a larger discharge valve for a Nitrous bottle so it could flow enough at one time for a 400 hp shot. If the engine blows up with a 200 shot, than the extra expense for a 400 shot set-up is money out the window. Kinda like going for twin turbos when a single will make more than you can use.....
|
bernd
*GenIII*
4/08/2002
18:33:05
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Don't forget that cubic inches also comes into play on the typw of turbo system. While some production vehicles so come with twins, the single on the smaller displacement engine (yes..even the 4.7L falls into this category) will do the job.
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
Tom Slick
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
18:33:06
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Dr0p0ff - another quote from Corky Bell's book "Over 350 CID, twin turbos become a virtual necessity. Do not accept the idea that twin turbos are inherently more powerful, as too many other factors are involved."
Plus, the 4.7L is a dimensionally larger than the 5.2L and 5.9L engines, making it tougher to put twin turbos in the engine compartment.
3.9L engines will perform just fine with a single turbo...just look at all the Grand Nationals running 12's and faster!
Duner - thanks! Btw, got your e-mail, will be getting in touch with you once the twin-turbo kit is done...been working on the turbo manifolds :-)
Later,
Tom "Slick"
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/08/2002
18:44:11
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Heh.. all 3 of ya! thanks guys! learn new stuff everday, that's what i'm tryin for anyways! :o)
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/08/2002
18:53:51
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
btw.. Tom, in that same paragraph is says "An engine with flow capabilities greater than 300cfm (roughly 180cid) can benefit from two turbos."
"Do not accept the idea that twin turbos are inherently more powerful," and i didn't, just asking
LOL.. i'm not lookin for a debate.. i choose my fights a little more wisely than that! :o)
Sgt G
|
CW
GenIII
4/08/2002
18:57:07
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
You guys are a bad infulence I just ordered that book. :)
2001 4.7 RC 5sp 3.92 LSD
Click on thumbnail for mods.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
19:04:59
|  Bad Influence?
IP: Logged
Message:
Hahahaha, that's us!
I need to get my copy of that book back!
I loaned it out to a buddy of mine and it hasn't returned yet.
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
19:05:27
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
What about the twin turbos that are delayed and come on at different times (RPM wise) like lets say 4200 the second starts up, etc??
|
Tom Slick
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
19:17:41
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Sgt G - No debate here either... :-)
Honestly, either configuration, single or twin(parallel or sequencial) can work just fine for pretty much any engine, as long as the turbo(s) is/are matched to the engine for the performance desired.
Later,
Tom "Slick"
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2002
20:00:11
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
After this you all gotta get like a more turbo orineted cam goin'! What better way to match a turbo with an engine than a cam!
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/08/2002
21:16:47
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
stockish cams werk well with turbos xplikt. ::whips out book:: and i read.. "a proper engin has a short-duration, low-overlap cam, generally referred to as an economy cam" thus sayeth.. tha good book. amen.
the reverend, Sgt G :o)
|
bernd
*GenIII*
4/08/2002
22:28:41
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
"engine with flow capabilities greater than 300cfm" - You're talking about airflow...not actual Cubic Inches.
On the cam, hehehehe...we've got the grinds. ;)
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
LI Blackdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
05:09:29
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
a turbo board with no coment from me on it!!! how could this be???
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/09/2002
09:02:23
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
LOL blackdak
bernd, cfm is based on displacement and max RPM right?
so we've got this: above 350, 2 are neccessary. below 180, 2 would be stupid. (or impractical, same thing) inbetween 180 and 350 is the grey area that's left, and it depends on space available, and cost. duner doesn't seen to think it'd be all too easy to cram 2 turbos under the hood. i don't have my truck around to look at, nor do i have his level of experience, so i can't argue. (not saying i wouldn't if i had my truck around!) i appreciate the 'schoolin' guys. i'm hoping to be an expert at this stuff someday
Sgt G
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
14:10:59
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
I see no reason why you do not want a twin turbo on a smaller engine perfromance wise. It is much harder to tune and set up but doesn't it all depends on what you are going for? You can't have power everywhere, it depends on your application and where you want to apply the oomph. With some good tuning and a lot of time and money, I see no reason why someone couldn't put a twin on a smaller enigne, specially if it's sequencial. It just doesn't seem economical in the slightest. What if your single turbo is too big, or too small? Like Tom said, it's all in how it being matched up.
You can always make room in an engine if you need too when things do not fit.
Hey Bernd, do we get bigger injectors with the kit, or it's one of those things where we don't have to have it, but it would help a lot and IS reccomended?
You think Mark can setup a non N/A engines forum for us ;)
|
LI Blackdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
14:24:24
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
i e-mailed that last light
a forced induction forum
|
Dr0p0ff
GenIII
4/09/2002
14:30:01
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
ARE there upgrades for 4.7 injectors?
Sgt G... again
|
Double D
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
15:03:53
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
You Guys need to check out the turbo technology web sight.
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
15:36:11
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
Nitrous should be included on that forced induction...that's why I say non N/A..
|
LI Blackdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
17:26:08
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
but nitrous is not always non N/A...just when u hit it.
call it Forced Induction & Nitrous
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
17:39:35
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
How about the "POWER ADDER" forum?
|
LI Blackdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2002
17:42:12
| RE: Turbos on a 2000
IP: Logged
Message:
you mean the performance forum duh-ner...j/k
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
