• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

2 turbos? Sequential turbo- looking for advice

A

architectom

New member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Location
Stonington, CT
Has anyone had specific experience with sequential turbos, on a b23/230- my build is a B23, and I'm interested in going in this direction: I'm not turbo expert but I have a friend who builds v8 twin turbo set-ups helping with the planning; hoping to learn from other's experience with set-up and sizing both turbos. Maybe some insight on recycling a porsche, subaru, or mazda setup?
 
See! A "stupid" question is never only asked once- I'll stick to a couple of engineering minds and some experience rather than the internet, and get back to you if we can make it work.
 
^ the welding is not a problem- it's just so messy- Saab has a better resolved set-up which is on the 9-3 1.9 engines, I assume one of those would be harder to come-across, but then I do know the owner of a former dealership. Not to be brash, but look at the maze on that b230 vs. the well resolved, and compact design of the turbos on the late model motor.
 
I think the better question is what are you trying to accomplish?

The twin turbo setup from the T6 was two same sized turbos. A twin-turbo RX7 is a compound setup.
 
architectom said:
Has anyone had specific experience with sequential turbos, on a b23/230- my build is a B23, and I'm interested in going in this direction: I'm not turbo expert but I have a friend who builds v8 twin turbo set-ups helping with the planning; hoping to learn from other's experience with set-up and sizing both turbos. Maybe some insight on recycling a porsche, subaru, or mazda setup?
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to bet one dollar($1 USD) that your friend does not build sequential twin turbo V8's.
More likely that they are a parallel setup with one turbo for each side of the V8.
fivealive said:
Wow that is weird. I'm not a fan of that exhaust flange (three studs in pretty weird places), and with two 13B's (fairly small turbos) I'm not sure you'd be doing yourself much good over just a regular 15g, 16t, 18t, or other relatively common Volvo turbo.

By the time you upgraded the turbos on that thing, you would have been better off just taking a basic welding class at the community college and building your own mild steel exhaust manifold and downpipes.

You can get exhaust flanges for volvo engines at http://r-sport.org so you don't have to make those, and then just weld it up.
Click to expand...
13B is the Mazda engine that setup was attached to, not the turbo type.
Stock turbos on a 13B-REW would be Hitachi HT-12.
doucheNozzle said:
I think the better question is what are you trying to accomplish?

The twin turbo setup from the T6 was two same sized turbos. A twin-turbo RX7 is a compound setup.
Click to expand...
But they were still the same size, as mentioned above they were both Hitachi HT-12's.

Onetrillionrpm said:
what about a nice twin scroll setup?
Click to expand...
What about almost anything besides a sequential setup?

I don't see what's appealing about having to pay for twice as much of everything when a good modern ball bearing turbo is going to be easier to install and control.

When I lived in orlando the only people who had FD RX7's that still had the twin turbo setup were those that didn't have the money to upgrade or had no interest in really going fast.

All that being said I have a thread buried somewhere in the for sale forum where I'm selling a pair of the turbos off of an S80 T6.
 
architectom said:
The Rx-7 twin turbo is probably the one that intrigues me most:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/MAZDA-RX7-R...Parts_Accessories&hash=item232c48f1af&vxp=mtr
it appears that turbo manifold could be re-cycled, with an adapter plate, and that any number of turbo pairs could be mounted to it. This reduces the menagerie of plumbing involved above.
Click to expand...


Except the full engineering resources of Mazda: Revenue Increase ?2.3 trillion (FY 2011)[1]
Operating income Increase ?23.8 billion (FY 2011)[1]
Net income Decrease ?-60 billion (FY 2011)[1]
Employees 38,987 (as of March 31, 2011)

could not manage to make them work worth a damn.

It is sacrilege to dare to ask but screw it I'll ask:

What is the current correctly sized single turbo major faults that can only be solved by undertaking something that a company with just a bit more resources could not manage to make work?
Or, is this like the previous 247 times people got excited about twin, triple, quad and more turbos, really just fap fap fap fap fap fap ?:blah:

Note: in real life I have looked over the three twin turbos manifolds in a pile at my friend's shop, and first thing interesting was the turbine housing were cast in, both...That means that's the turbo you must use. rhe second thing was the more than 15 bds big nasty cracks running all thru them...
Mazda had a better idea, evidently..
 
The mazda FD twin setup was actually very good it just could not hold up to the extreme EGT's that the rotary engine produces.. On a standard piston engine it might be fine.. The HT-12 turbos were not very good turbos honestly but there are options for bolt in upgrades.. www.bnrturbos.com

The twin setup on the supra was very good actually the only complaint was when you turned the boost up the surge of the second turbo coming online was much more noticeable but considering Toyota never intended the boost to run above that range its hard to complain..

I prefer the simplicity of a single turbo setup.. We want it all fast spool and great top end but its all about finding a compromise and honestly most of us will be happy with a slightly upgraded t3 60/63..

-Sam
 
When one can make things very amusing indeed with one properly sized turbo for the power goal.......

Why go out of your way to create expensive scrap?

Accept that the turbo sized for XXX power will wake up at YYYY. Program the EMS right and drive accordingly when you wish to be a savage.

The Big turbo in the rallycar makes the three disc clutch slip on engagement.... :omg:
 
RoadRacer4Life said:
The mazda FD twin setup was actually very good it just could not hold up to the extreme EGT's that the rotary engine produces.. On a standard piston engine it might be fine.. The HT-12 turbos were not very good turbos honestly but there are options for bolt in upgrades.. www.bnrturbos.com

The twin setup on the supra was very good actually the only complaint was when you turned the boost up the surge of the second turbo coming online was much more noticeable but considering Toyota never intended the boost to run above that range its hard to complain..

I prefer the simplicity of a single turbo setup.. We want it all fast spool and great top end but its all about finding a compromise and honestly most of us will be happy with a slightly upgraded t3 60/63..

-Sam
Click to expand...

Not trying to start a big argument---since this is major wank-fest thread in it's inception and no point anybody getting butt-hurt over pointless keyboard wanking, but curious: You are telling us about the "very good" twin turbo set ups from your own ownership and mods of those two cars? Or a close friend who had and ran them?

And since even n.a. Mazda make a LOT of heat--and Mazda knows this, and the single turbo things made a LOT more lotta heat, it seeeeeeeeems to me that the fact that they constantly suffered multiple cracks in the elaborate cast iron manifold cum turbine housing morphodite thang, constantly melted the PLASTIC blue solenoid POS change-over thang---located behind the exhaust manifold (Good thinking there Kejiburchi!) constantly melted junk because they were (duh) HOT----how can that be considered "actually very good"?
These are things I watch 3 very sharp guys fight.

And Supra, one good friend in Hong Kong said "That stuff never worked worth a damn, happiest day owning the car was when we threw that junk away and mounted one nice turbo...." Runs a nice hot-rod shop, no fool.

Why would these owners say these things?

I am confuse.
 
I will agree with John here, being an old Toyota guy here, the twin Supra turbo setup was a nightmare. Sickening from the single CT26 setup of the 7M torque monster. All they really had to do with the JZ motor, was cam lobe changes, change the damn confounded air meter, and a small end T-04 setup, 320hp would be non existent. Those engines should have been 420hp stock. Compound turbo is an art. You can't just twin a car and hope to God it works. Nissan did a good job with the 300zx. The FC3s twins were a disgrace, period. Buick did a good job with the GN. I have only seen one compound turbo system work on a car that was perfect. It was on a ricer based LS Acura. Ran flat 10s, bit that's only in a straight line.
 
centason said:
I will agree with John here, being an old Toyota guy here, the twin Supra turbo setup was a nightmare. Sickening from the single CT26 setup of the 7M torque monster. All they really had to do with the JZ motor, was cam lobe changes, change the damn confounded air meter, and a small end T-04 setup, 320hp would be non existent. Those engines should have been 420hp stock. Compound turbo is an art. You can't just twin a car and hope to God it works. Nissan did a good job with the 300zx. The FC3s twins were a disgrace, period. Buick did a good job with the GN. I have only seen one compound turbo system work on a car that was perfect. It was on a ricer based LS Acura. Ran flat 10s, bit that's only in a straight line.
Click to expand...

You are all over the place here. 300zx was a compound? GN's?
While I can agree with John I don't think what you are saying here is what he is saying.
 
The GN was a single turbo masterpiece. 300zx? Ever heard of a VG30DETT? Twin turbo, twin cam 3.0 liter 300zx? I'm speaking of twin design here. Even with a Supra, the compound was minimal. Unless you have sat in and drove said cars, don't speak. Its quite annoying. I have driven or owned said cars I stated. I don't mean to knock on a TB guy here, it's not how I am, but i am using references of great cars as a point of reference. You said nothing of the FC based RX7, which was true twin, why? Enlighten me why you think i am wrong with my references. I really don't like getting upset, i just don't like the "E-Penis" generation too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top