turboed sc eng
10-28-2006, 05:42 PM
#12
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sauk Centre, MN
Posts: 5,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 2000SilverBullet
So it'* a low pressure ...4 psi....boost :?:
Is it intercooled before the SC :?:
I see that added an intercooler after the SC.
Is it intercooled before the SC :?:
I see that added an intercooler after the SC.
10-28-2006, 06:05 PM
#13
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rochester, NY (college)
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by willwren
Yes, it'* been done. In fact, GM has produced it in one unit on a commercial vehicle in the last 50 years. See if you can find it.
10-30-2006, 09:24 PM
#15
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Robertsdale Alabama
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In theory it is simple to do. My version would be to engineer a turbocharger with gears in it to attach a pulley to it with an over-run clutch. When gunned, the engine will near-instantly spool the turbo up (providing instant boost) and then the exhaust will take over, taking the load off the engine AND providing more boost.
BUT a few problems:
1. Engineering a gearbox for the turbo that can handle the load AND the incredibly high rpms that the turbo will be operating at.
2. Once or IF designed, the components will not be cheap to manufacture
3. If its not around now then the VERY smart engineers at any car company (except ford
) must know exactly why that is because if a 15 year old kid can come up with a concept like this one on his own (how old I was when I thought of it) then it has definately crossed a few other minds as well.
BUT a few problems:
1. Engineering a gearbox for the turbo that can handle the load AND the incredibly high rpms that the turbo will be operating at.
2. Once or IF designed, the components will not be cheap to manufacture
3. If its not around now then the VERY smart engineers at any car company (except ford
) must know exactly why that is because if a 15 year old kid can come up with a concept like this one on his own (how old I was when I thought of it) then it has definately crossed a few other minds as well.
10-31-2006, 12:14 AM
#19
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Robertsdale Alabama
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh ok, well a csc is what it would essentially be but turbos are alot smaller than cscs that are used by themselves (the turbines) and spin ALOT faster because it'* the only way to effectively use the exhaust to make boost. I was just saying that it would be hard to mechanically make the turbine move at such high speeds WHILE under extreme heat from the exhaust.
10-31-2006, 12:16 AM
#20
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Philly
Posts: 4,508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 2000SilverBullet
I don't understand how that works.
If the SC is a positive displacement device, it will only move a fixed quantity of air.
I thought the Turbo cars remove the SC rotors. :?
If the SC is a positive displacement device, it will only move a fixed quantity of air.
I thought the Turbo cars remove the SC rotors. :?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
green95se
1992-1999
4
02-13-2004 10:48 AM
2MCHPSI
1992-1999
9
08-18-2003 01:10 PM