low mount turbo header
 

Ok hello everyone I have a 2.3 gm quad 4 in my beretta. i want to change up my turbo setup i'm really looking in to buying a hx40. I want to mount the turbo below my headlight behind my bumper so this means having a pretty long header. My old setup had a log manifold and spool was fast. My question is will having a longer header cause more lag? Also in mounting the turbo there it will cut down on my intercooler piping by a few feet. And also would i have a oil drain problems. Thanks guys

Also for the holset guys whats the best size hx40

the length in the manifold will cause a lag in spool time but not much, and you might have problems with drain if you go to low, but you can always get a electric pump

if you design the header well enough, you should not see much of a difference, if you keep the primaries sized to the exhaust ports spool should not be a huge issue with a properly matched turbine...in which an hx40 may be a little big...but i'm not an holset expert, so i do not know what they like

it depends on what you want out of the car. i know i just recently took my pro-made ram-hornish manifold off in favor of a HMT log and i would never go back.

But thats cuz i like to go when i wana go, with the tubular it was like a stock rex waiting to get kicked in the ass at 5k rpm. it was a big ol kick but the log lets it happen alot quicker.

I knoticed from my experience that when the turbo gettings spining it pegs max boost quick with the tubular, but the log starts building earlier and comes on much smoother.

you will also have a better top end if you do the setup your thinking about. doesnt domestic guys do this?

i want to keep down lag as much as possible. I'm still up in the air with this setup, i could mount it in the engine bay but the means alot of rerouting fuel line, wires, and so on

sell car buy new one. jk good luck why would u have to reroute those lines??

cuz
 

cuz he has fwd chevy v6 = pain the the mother ------- ass

thing will haul with some lag or not though so dun worry to much

There have been a few 2.4 ld9's that have mounted the turbo behind the headlight, I believe they used a scavenger pump to get the oil returning ok. As long as its designed ok and as equal as possible youll be cool. Maybe run a twin scroll housing if your worried about more lag.

Post pics of your setup :) Is it LO or HO?

they came stock 3.1 turbo...its not a pain in the ass. fuel lines dont need to be rerouted just sounds like hes not very informed


and he has a quad 4 POS. lol not v6

They never made a turbo beretta. Grand am's, sunbirds, and a few others but never berettas.

How is the quad 4 a pos? The LGO was one of the best n/a 4cyls made during the early 90's of all makes, have you ever even hear of a W41?? I know this is mostly a honda board but you guys need to do your research before ---- talking certain cars and saying motors came in vehicles they actualy didnt.

i'm a dsm guy but i've owned a bunch of cars. its the same ------- piece of ---- that came in cavaliers, Lumina's etc. and no, one of the best 4cyl's made was the d and b series honda,and the dsm 4g63,dodge 2.2 and 2.5,vw 1.8,porsche 2.0,ford 2.3h. Those are Bullet proof engines, they never had issues with oil pumps failing,or head gaskets blowing out of no where even at over 200,000miles. I've seen numerous quad 4 pieces of ---- in the shops ive worked at/with. Oil pump failure is common amoungst gm pieces of ----

Wow..They never put quad 4's in lumina's and they only came in 95 cavaliers. Those were low outputs anyway, the high outputs were rated at 180-190hp which I do believe I said one of the best N/A engines.

And Im probably sure your mixing them up with ld9's(2.4 twin cam) which have a shitty oiling system. Many people build ld9s and use factory 2.3 quad 4 oil pump swaps and handle over 400whp on factory used oil pump parts. I myself am doing an ld9 build and will be doing the quad 4 oil pump swap.

and ur cars gonna blow up lol. either way its gonna still be a slow Chevy Beretta

i've seen ur all mighty 190hp pos get taken down by a(my) 1991 automatic 2.5 Dodge Shadow Turbo convertible...that was before i changed the turbo to a daytona T2 garrett T03 and threw on a starion fmic.

oh and my automatic stock dodge stealth es tore the ---- out of an LG0 '91 grand am se that was on a 75shot. all gm 4cyl drivers are fat heads lol.

idk if anyone has felt the pull of a quad4 HO but i used to have a caviler that i swapped a full HO drivetrain in and the thing was faster than a lot of civics i raced. I also took my 180hp quad4 and swapped everything over the the 190hp w41 version. it was just as fast as a gs-r

the 2001 grand am is almost as fast as an automatic dodge stealth but still not quite....still a waste.

and umm on your list of best 4 cyl engines i would def take off the dodge 2.2 and 2.5 as yes there errr simple but there headgasket hungry

lol about as fast a gsr lol....sry there both slowwwwwwww. but im boost driven so. makes a lil difference, maybe there better engines boosted but i've tuned a few gsr's and there weak sauce. i'm all about the mitsubishi mirage hatchback 4g63t swapped revolution.

nah the 2.2 and 2.5 dodges are great. i've never blown a headgasket and i ran 350fwhp on a stock block with a super 60 turbo (custom tune by me).
I blew a bunch of turbo's tho haha took them well out of efficient ranges. and i still got 25mpg city
maybe i had a diamond in the rough tho haha

the only thing gm knows how to do is build v8's

and economic pieces of crap. only plus for economic performance with gm is suzuki

shitty v8's. most of those bullshit v8's cant touch any honda for power-per-litre. ---- i had a 84 camaro z28 "HO" with a whoooping 180ish? hp from a 5.0.

even a good gm 5.7 say 350 hp n/a is pritty good, 61.4 hp for every litre

and take the shitiest honda d16 at say 100-110 hp - 68ish hp per litre

h22 sits around 90 hp per liter, b18 is up by 100 hp per litre.

so tell me, if gm v8s cant compete with honda 4 bangers how the ---- do you get off saying there 4 cylinders would hold there own....

And thats not getting into boost where hondas shine, 300 from a 1.6 is not hard, and thats 187.5 hp per litre.

this is real interesting. i had alot of problems with my 2.5 cam seized and always knockeda little..

the heads on those quad 4's are the most retarded ---- in the world. each cam literaly has its own little head and those 2 heads bolt to the head, that bolts to the block. kiss....Keep It Simple Stupid.

not to mention the coil pack/wires/valve cover bullshit contraption that gets a hairline crack in its shity plastic and stops the car from running. try to find a quad 4 coil pack in a junk yard. you wont, and its NOT because there are no quad 4's in there, thats for sure.

Iv dismantled many a car at the junkyard in my 3 years and honestly the quad 4 has always stuck out as a peice of ----, right up there with pulling a jaguar v12 cylinder head, which has about 40 million tight fitting studs, not even a forklift and bouncing the car off the ground took that unbolted head off, took atleast 2 hours to slowly shimmy it up perfectly evenly befor it came off. no wonder most jags get 350s.

Hear are a just a few reasons, coil pack as mentioned, stupid ass head design, timing cover has to be completly removed to do realy any motor work and thats a pain in the ass cuz they have more bolts in the timing cover then they do in the inside of the engine =/ and the list can go on.

well you wanna talk about crazy bastard engins has anyone worked on the gm 3.4 dohc? i tore one down and i swore it was an indy car engine it was soooooo over engineered

its cuz everyone needs one for there hunk of ----! hahahaha

lol indy car engines aren't that complex lol they dont have a ---- ton of retarded useless electronic crap

Jag's are tanks tho, and get good fuel economy for what they are. Handling is incredible but i feel you man.

yea but i will give it to gm, the dohc v6 3.whatevers your talking about are bad ass.

Which is why i believe its in the same catagory as the ford SHO v6 - Which was designed by yamaha for a mid-engine sports car to compete the gms ----, plan got scraped and ford had a contract with yamaha for a buncha motors. so they trew it in the taurus, no joke.

Basicly i need proof gm designed that bitch, those dohc v6's are bad ------- ass. thats what my preludes getting in her trunk one day....=)

the 6.3 is prob designed by suzuki just like every other reliable engine in gm's line up haha

coolest ---- about jags is the rear disk brakes, mounted on the differential, not the wheels.

Litteraly on the axle shaft in the middle of the car.

i was pritty confused for a second when i had to pull the rear caliper heh

thats pretty bad ass tho :-D

it was till i got fed up and had to pull the whole suspension down to get em off.

They also have 2 complete coilover/shocks for each back wheel, one of the front of the lower control and and one on the back, right next to eachother.

damn this should just be the bastard weird design thread. i am suprised no one is pissed off at the fact you can never ever get a rear strut bolts out of a honda lca without them snapping. geez honda lets put 2 materials that corrode themselves together

see in florida,a place that gets no snow and never see's rust due to lack of road salt, you dont have those problems lol.