• 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!

I know.. twin turbo B230f

in this thread. People that own. VOLVO 2/7/9 series cars debate whether their performance idea is better than other.

You guys... who even cares? Everything has been swapped into these cars. Why? Because bored. Why do any of you (save for the like... 3 of us that are properly restoring stuff (not me btw)) give a crap about a TT setup?

What's better? 2JZ? 302? LSx? C'mon... this has just gotten dumb now.

4 turbos..Anything less is not enough..
 
But whatabout Renaults V6 F1 engine back in the day?

These were cool.

But these were cooler:

img_7463-stitch-1024x535.jpg
 
And yeah bazillion rpm cars with a 1500 rpm wide poereband with 6-7 speed paddle shifted half automatic sequential boxes IS REALLY exactly the thing we look to to see what we need for a street car in Turdboatpricks..

Yeah.... Keep building those straw men dude. The fire should keep your ego warm.

If you're about to tell me that these three cars (Ferrari F40, GTR Nismo GT3, Audi R10 TDI) have narrow power bands, you're still talking out your a55.

And of course, out of convenience and need, you ignored what's been said about the N54, TT'ing an M112 (E320 engine) with 15g's, and even my mention of my older quick spooling setup.

Why is it pertinent? Because as Evil said... people swap things around here.

So as your boy VG said, can we move on?
 
Last edited:
If done properly the intent of a twin-turbo (parallel) system on an inline 4 should be to broaden the powerband, not narrow it. I was talking about two completely divided systems with two cylinders each feeding their own turbine. I'm not saying it's easy to match the correct turbo(s) to attain this, but a broad NA-like powerband with instant response should be the goal.

The Japanese systems JohnV mentions are all parallel-sequential systems with esoteric valves and controls to block flow to one turbine during low load & low engine speeds. Not really an apples-to-apples comparison.

Also, performance of radial turbines and compressors has come so far in the past 25 years. Compared to what's on the market today, early '90s turbo systems were stone age stuff.
 
Yeah.... Keep building those straw men dude. The fire should keep your ego warm.

If you're about to tell me that these three cars (Ferrari F40, GTR Nismo GT3, Audi R10 TDI) have narrow power bands, you're still talking out your a55.

And of course, out of convenience and need, you ignored what's been said about the N54, TT'ing an M112 (E320 engine) with 15g's, and even my mention of my older quick spooling setup.

Why is it pertinent? Because as Evil said... people swap things around here.

So as your boy VG said, can we move on?

Quit fapping about these stupid cars you fap over..Talk about ego
Can't you get real for just amoment.

Where the **** are you?
TURBOBRICKS for fawks sake..
People DREAM about swapping stuff and one in 100 or 200 do..

All the stupid Italian cars in the world mean in the context of TB nothing..

If somebody is asking, then they can't do it..
Get thee to Off Topics with your dreamy fixation on roadrace or exotica based reality.

This is performance, not Fantasy Fappening.

Or show us just how and why references to F1, LeMans, and exotics V or flat multicylinder sh1t is a good model for some dufus cause we're all dufuses here.

Step by step, part number by part number, and give us dimensions of what will work, too.

Well?
 
Last edited:
The BMW M1 Coupe is a perfect example of a low cost street car running twin low mass turbochargers. They have very impressive power bands. A friend of mine runs one in B-Street with our Autocross club. That car has instant acceleration, excellent braking and handling. There are plenty of examples of twin turbo street cars if you just pull your head out of the past and take a look at what is going on all around you. Another club member runs a twin turbo LS1 1999 Corvette. The thing is making 600+ HP and accelerates like a sling shot. It is incredible to watch it make a run. If there is any lag at all, it is hard to tell. I have a video of it somewhere on my Youtube account. Exotic, no. Just a cheap Corvette with a very nicely done turbo system that makes it seem like an exotic. It quite often sets fast time of day.
 
Where the **** are you?
TURBOBRICKS for fawks sake .... cause we're all dufuses here.

Keepin' it real ha? You think that lowly of us? Misery loves company and you want all of us to have
the same antiquated view that you do?

Perhaps you should move on then.

All the stupid Italian cars in the world mean in the context of TB nothing..

I'm pretty sure I only mentioned one Italian car in all of this. :lol: The rest were German.
Since I know you're not that ignorant, you clearly must be just plain pissed or something.

Or show us just how and why references to F1, LeMans, and exotics V or flat multicylinder sh1t is a good model for some dufus cause we're all dufuses here.

  • There's nothing wrong with being a dufus. The problem is in staying a dufus. Someone asking means they don't want to remain a dufus. Why does it seem like that's a problem too you?
  • That's where most new thinking is tesed. Example: Nissan (Japan! Not Italy. ;-) ) Delta Wing.
  • It's where current ideas are continuously evolved and stress tested.

Does everything that comes from racing ultimately translate to street cars? Definitely not! A great example is F1 when they disallowed turbos and we found ourselves in the era of stupid high revving V12's and V10's. Now while it did result in an understanding of how to make pistons survive at those speeds (and it was a considerable issue at the time), that was pointless since an engine that idled at 6k and redlined at 20k was never going to be practical in a grocery getter.

CONVERSELY, there are the Audi's ( Germay! Not Italy. ;-) ) that raced in the states in SCCA Trans AM and IMSA GTO. Nothing exotic about them. Nothing was exotic about turbo charging a 5 cylinder and 4 WD as concepts in '88 and '89. They just applied them differently and took it all road racing. AND KICKED A55!!!

Step by step, part number by part number, and give us dimensions of what will work, too.

Well?

In other words, you should never involve yourself in a conversation about doing something custom. If there's not a manual and you can't buy all the parts off some shelf, it shouldn't be done. This is precisely the kind of attitude that keeps people stuck where they are. No longer able or willing to re-arrange or use existing concepts currently outside their comfort zone.

There are plenty of examples of twin turbo street cars if you just pull your head out of the past and take a look at what is going on all around you.

Exactly! I don't fully agree with a TT setup for a 4 because of space and packaging (I hate how densely packaged BMW's tend to be), but there is no doubt that the concept would work even on a B230.
 
Compound turbos generally feed the other way. A small turbo upstream would choke the larger one. Ideally you want a large turbo running at a relatively low pressure to move a high volume of air into a smaller unit which is used for higher pressure. For example, If you're running a large turbo (high vol, low press) at 10psig then it is responsible for the work of increasing your intake pressure to 24.7psia. Then you might set the smaller turbo (lower vol, higher press) to operate at pressure ratio 2, therefore running the smaller turbo in its area of peak efficiency and achieving 49.4psia (34.7psig) while splitting the work nicely between the two. Compare that to trying to push 34.7 pounds of boost from a single turbo. In most cases running a single at 34 while maintaining a reasonable powerband would be well outside it's peak efficiency and you would generate a lot of excess heat.

But how many people are really trying to run a 35psi redblock anyway?

Not many can grasp the concept of a compound setup, works well on diseasels when massive boost levels are required.
 
If it's so good of a concept, where are all the twin turbos redblock?
Where is yours?

You're still failing! The very last thing I said was..

I don't fully agree with a TT setup for a 4 because of space and packaging (I hate how densely packaged BMW's tend to be), but there is no doubt that the concept would work even on a B230.

It's kind of hard to read with you eyes closed. :lol:

Funny-Sad-Angry-Baby-Pictures.jpg


Oh, and BTW...

0cb2d68bc34218731dd294a699ae243b.gif
 
Keepin' it real ha? You think that lowly of us? Misery loves company and you want all of us to have
the same antiquated view that you do?

Perhaps you should move on then.



I'm pretty sure I only mentioned one Italian car in all of this. :lol: The rest were German.
Since I know you're not that ignorant, you clearly must be just plain pissed or something.



  • There's nothing wrong with being a dufus. The problem is in staying a dufus. Someone asking means they don't want to remain a dufus. Why does it seem like that's a problem too you?
  • That's where most new thinking is tesed. Example: Nissan (Japan! Not Italy. ;-) ) Delta Wing.
  • It's where current ideas are continuously evolved and stress tested.

Does everything that comes from racing ultimately translate to street cars? Definitely not! A great example is F1 when they disallowed turbos and we found ourselves in the era of stupid high revving V12's and V10's. Now while it did result in an understanding of how to make pistons survive at those speeds (and it was a considerable issue at the time), that was pointless since an engine that idled at 6k and redlined at 20k was never going to be practical in a grocery getter.

CONVERSELY, there are the Audi's ( Germay! Not Italy. ;-) ) that raced in the states in SCCA Trans AM and IMSA GTO. Nothing exotic about them. Nothing was exotic about turbo charging a 5 cylinder and 4 WD as concepts in '88 and '89. They just applied them differently and took it all road racing. AND KICKED A55!!!



In other words, you should never involve yourself in a conversation about doing something custom. If there's not a manual and you can't buy all the parts off some shelf, it shouldn't be done. This is precisely the kind of attitude that keeps people stuck where they are. No longer able or willing to re-arrange or use existing concepts currently outside their comfort zone.



Exactly! I don't fully agree with a TT setup for a 4 because of space and packaging (I hate how densely packaged BMW's tend to be), but there is no doubt that the concept would work even on a B230.


For years I thought you were a reasonable and thoughtful person...and that IS a rare thing in the parts.
But then whewn I read bull****, keyboard warrior **** like this:
"In other words, you should never involve yourself in a conversation about doing something custom. If there's not a manual and you can't buy all the parts off some shelf, it shouldn't be done. This is precisely the kind of attitude that keeps people stuck where they are. No longer able or willing to re-arrange or use existing concepts currently outside their comfort zone. "

I see you are not interested in actually advancing knowledge or reasoning abilities or judgement on cost benefit ratios of ideas but in scoring "debate points"..

Because I never suggested the ONE thing OR another.

But you've been so vehement on this as a viable, sensible thing..it seems that you must have thought of how to DO---not f8cking type about it, how --what parts might you choose..some idea..some idea of dimensions..

And all you have is words--insults..Not a single goddamn hint of a part, a plan.

Just words
 
This is just a discussion forum. The whole thing is just words. Bench racing is fine and can lead down interesting trains of thought if it can happen in a civil manner. We're not all looking for fully developed concepts with dimensioned & toleranced prints when clicking on a thread.

It would be really great if different concepts could be discussed without it always turning into some pissing match about who knows more or whose idea is more relevant to the real world or whose e-Johnson is heavier.

Do we need mods to come in and police this type of stuff more?
 
Flawed Concept

This is just a discussion forum. The whole thing is just words. Bench racing is fine and can lead down interesting trains of thought if it can happen in a civil manner. We're not all looking for fully developed concepts with dimensioned & toleranced prints when clicking on a thread.

It would be really great if different concepts could be discussed without it always turning into some pissing match about who knows more or whose idea is more relevant to the real world or whose e-Johnson is heavier.

Do we need mods to come in and police this type of stuff more?

No actually we need an engine with lower compression than a B230F as a starting point for high boost, twin turbos or not.
 
No actually we need an engine with lower compression than a B230F as a starting point for high boost, twin turbos or not.

A parallel twin setup (like the OP was asking about) should be used for reducing lag & improving transient response. Can be done at low boost levels to make a very snappy streetable setup. Should be fine to try on a stock B230F.

Series turbos (aka compound) are used when ultra high boost is needed. For sure a stock B230F would not be a great starting point for that.
 
This is just a discussion forum. The whole thing is just words. Bench racing is fine and can lead down interesting trains of thought if it can happen in a civil manner. We're not all looking for fully developed concepts with dimensioned & toleranced prints when clicking on a thread.

It would be really great if different concepts could be discussed without it always turning into some pissing match about who knows more or whose idea is more relevant to the real world or whose e-Johnson is heavier.

Do we need mods to come in and police this type of stuff more?

Well said. And yes, we do need to police these threads more. JV and Vincent need to listen more, type less. This is a discussion forum, not their own personal sand box. The "nay sayers" need to step aside and let the motivated experiment. That's how new developments take form.
 
Well said. And yes, we do need to police these threads more. JV and Vincent need to listen more, type less. This is a discussion forum, not their own personal sand box. The "nay sayers" need to step aside and let the motivated experiment. That's how new developments take form.

And there's a difference between pointing out technical difficulties and nay saying ...
 
Well said. And yes, we do need to police these threads more. JV and Vincent need to listen more, type less. This is a discussion forum, not their own personal sand box. The "nay sayers" need to step aside and let the motivated experiment. That's how new developments take form.

12-13 years here Moderator and you've seen the same brilliant idea come up again and again and again..And nobody has done anything but jaw and fap.

Your biases are well known and plain and obvious..You call dreaming and theorizing "experimenting"? Same guys blah blahing about exotic things with V or flat (two bank) long ass things "is how development" take "form"?

Its off topic idle chat just like the same subject was the time before and the time before and the time before..

Let's see some metal welded, ON A INLINE 4..let's see ONE step toward something then it might be discssion and learning instead of dreaming about twin turbo V12s:roll:
 
And there's a difference between pointing out technical difficulties and nay saying ...

Or more to the point asking what the proponents of this BS have concluding is the point and what they ARE DOING.... and nay saying..

That moderator, being who he is has shown many time that he cannot distinguish between asking a question--which he always regards as 'an ad-hominy attack---and nay saying...
Normal ways of discourse baffle him..
Normal people when puzzled ask questions..
 
Back
Top