Tom-Guy

Sorry, bro. I saw BB and went off on a rant - nothing directed at you, homeslice.



Crude? No. Wildly innaccurate? Yes. You have stated that a T3/14B won't spool until the upper rpms, and then plotted 5 psi as being 10lb/min of airmass and how that is "below the map" - this demonstrates how you don't even remotely have a clue. 10lb/min is 100 whp. An R6 makes a little OVER 100 whp in the upper rpms. You are stating "factually" based on "calculations" that a T3/14B won't work because it will make less power at 5 psi in the upper rpms than it will stock - or that's all I can get out of what you are saying.

PS - the reference we can all use are... ding ding ding! Commonly available dyno sheets!!! Yes!!1


One of those turbos will spool in the midrange.


Boost controllers are your friend.


Last T2 I tuned was on a 1.6 liter Miata, made 175 whp @ 11psi. Come to find out the dyno's wideband was miscalibrated and the engine is running 10.5:1 AFRs, I should be able to go back and manifest 190 whp out of it.

But, I digress. T2 is a wierdfuk flange setup, but the thing didn't spool until 3000-3500 rpms on the Miata 1.6, which is rated similarly to the higher output D16. A K03 or IHI or other small frame turbo... ach. Do you know how twitchy and uncontrollable the power delivery is on a vehicle that goes from no boost to full spool with a difference of (using Goforth's CRX as an example) 28% TPS to 34% TPS? That's a 6% window of throttle travel for you to modulate if you are trying to control power output... everything else is either full boost or highway cruise. A T3/14B will give a high output 600cc bike a solid power band while not creating a twitchy goddamn nightmare out of what is already a two-wheeled deathmachine.

I've been through a LOT more turbo setups on a LOT more cars than you have, and not everything is brand-specific. I have a lot of insight in this.

theprophet36

Those kits are nice but waaaay too much money. My exhaust manifold has cost me only $180 The Black Satin coating is $50 for 12oz which should cover the manifold, exhaust side of the turbo and the whole exhaust system. I emailed a lot of the sites who make those kits regarding air-boxes an exhaust manifolds, they wanted $400+ each!! My whole kit so far is about $1500 including water/methanol injection, wide band, PCIII, Turbo, flanges, gauges, etc etc. Besides, I'd rather do the research, and fabrication when I can, myself and hand pick every part in the kit. I figure the whole project will cost me $2k tops and that's high balling it. I picked up the bike for $6k it only has 3900 miles on it. So, for $8k I will have a one-off, mean *** machine that I built. Next up is the air-box, I'll post up pic's when that is done too. Which leads me to a question.

As far as the air-box goes, velocity stacks or no? I'm on the fence with the idea. I've heard of positive results tho. With my design it would actually be easier and less labor to do the stacks. Thanks in advance.


Ethan

blade8r

okay. so 3000-3500 rpms on a 1.6L engine.

so assuming everything is 100% that's 3250rpms * 1.6L = 5200L of possible flow of air when full boost begain. so using common sense.. using the same turbo, it should.. spool at the same amount of air flow at the turbine would it not?

so to make a 600cc engine flow the equal amount of air it would need to be spining at

X * .6L = 5200L
8666 * .6 = 5200L

so we'd have to be spining a 600 engine at least a 8.6k rpms for it flow the same amount of air a 1.6l would be before spool began. now obviously the higher compression motocycle engine should spool the turbo a tad bit faster. 1.5k rpms at most sooner it would happen i'd say.

so full boost at 7k.. sounds mean. i'd ride it. i will admit that even my moto would rise with 5 psi of boost at 7k rpms. i'd have to put the stock sprockets back on. but then again i would still would have play all around in those lower rpms. anything below that and i shouldn't have enough exhaust velocity to have instaboost.

then again i was so used to 21psi @ 1800RPMS in my gay skittle.

ekhatch

just wondering but, about how much boost can a stock r6 handle? boosting a bike sounds too dangerous for me haha

blade8r

well.. unfortionatly there isn't enough information out there to actually know. often times turbo + motocycles although a neat idea, isn't a really a good one either. not too many people are out there are willing to invest on a 600 and test out to see what's it's capable of and ------ing the word. when all the fruit and labor would be squashed by reliability and a leanur powerband of a 1k motorcyle. not only that sometimes it's just flat out cheaper to buy the bigger bike (but im sure the Dredded HMT crew believes otherwise).

a turbo bike idea is often flamed on in most sportbike forums. too many people bitching about unpredictable powerbands, the inability of stopping the front wheel from rising to the air. how handleing is hampered from a change in weight distribution. and more and more bitching when people never actually tried it out and learned for themselves. it's like walking into a farm and listening to a herd of cows. saying the same ol regertitaing ---- that some fuckface wanabe know-it-all who thinks he's right.

there are too many internet racers with "Knowledgeabilites" out there who don't test out their rides for themselves. it's a shame too. i would like to see more turbo motocyles out on the road enjoying themselves.

Hitchhikkr

Not trying to rip on you or join in on this "debate" However, it seems like your calculating VOLUME when you need to be calc. AIRFLOW over TIME. Yeah. Just thought id point that out.

Tom-Guy

That's the sort of regurgitated statement I hear a lot coming some fuckface wanabe know-it-all who thinks he's right. The truth is that CR has no effect on spool time, but internet racers with "Knowledgeabilites" like to argue. Most arguers have never tried what they are talking about, and even more annoying are the ones who tried their ideas out on their personal car but misperceive the reasons why their car performs as it does because they lack perspective based on extensive experience.

theprophet1979

Agree'd. That's why I have not mentioned this on any sportbike forums I go on. I figured finish the project, ride it for a while to be sure of the stability, rideability and reliability. Then post it up for anyone interested.

I appreciate that I can come on here and not get the typical "just buy a literbike" comments . Anyone can bust out their wallet and buy a literbike, where's the challenge or learning curve in that? I like to take ---- apart, I like to tinker and build stuff..... it's fun. Thanks for the support and info guys.

BTW, any opinions on the v-stack question I posted?

sohcpwr

get a 42/48 t3. Anything else is too small- Oh and listen to JD for christ sake.

probably wasting your time fabbing velocity stacks in the plenum... i believe their more effective on NA engines.

theprophet36

Like I said it would be easier to do the v-stacks than it would be not to do them with my plenum design. I do know they work well with N/A as I had them on my last R6. That being said, would they not help atomize the water/meth? Can anyone think of anything negative from using them? Thoughts....