twin charger
 

i want to do a twin charger setp on my car. i want to make alot of boost and dont want any lag. so i have the supercharger for instant boost then a huge turbo top end boost so i get a 6psi s/c then take that 6psi and compress it in a turbo to compress it another 6psi will i have 12psi final or 36psi final. what do you all think

Brilliant. Pics?

gonna be hard

Easy. Been there, done that.

Turbo feeds Supercharger....

https://www.homemadeturbo.com/forum/...make-22-a.html

https://www.homemadeturbo.com/forum/...ally-work.html

but to anwser your question of boost, it depends on each compressors efficency, and just with some guessamation math, running a turbo (first stage) at 6psi would give you a 1.4:1 ratio, and the 2nd stage which would then would prob be compressing at the same ratio (assuming it's set for 6psi on it's own) of 1.4:1 then you would have 2.8:1 of boost.
assuming your at 14.7 static, you would then be at 41.16 static PSI. resulting in ~26.4 PSI of boost.
that's about as simple as it goes...

overkill?

eleventy billion PSIs wow maxor poweerz, would it be faster than a simple single turbo setup...?

well heres the problem...outside of it being horrendously expensive....the boost supplied from the turbo will just run into the back of the blades of the supercharger thus lowering the boost output from the turbo (not to mention possibly damaging the supercharger fins).....i had this idea a while back....looked into it pretty extensively.....not a good choice haha

NOT.

its not like im saying that your going to see less boost with both than you would with one because you will see more
im sorry if i made that a bit hard to follow
but what im saying is that you would be more efficient/better off to run two turbos of different sizes with a crossover to equalize the back pressure than you would to run this system. try it if you want and nothing is holding you back but i have looked into it... i work with engineers...im going to school for engineering and they agree that this is less efficient

let the flame begin

Dude, its been done. And it works. And it works well. Not to mention.... I did it and it works incredibly well....

i didnt mean to sound like a know it all or anything man
if it worked ill take your word for it
but i will still stick to my guns on it not being as efficient
but it is unique so i guess to each their own
(its been a long day didnt want to sound like a prick haha)

Read the threads I listed earlier.

Twincharging does work, it is just not economically feasible to do it for OEM, and you need to be able to fab parts if you want to do it yourself.

i read it....and im not trying to start ---- dude.....but also realize that there are other people on here that know it as being less efficient too....you made it work and thats cool
i was throwing in my two cents on why i wouldnt do it and i have actually heard of damaged parts and other issues....im not claiming that it wont work all together because as you have displayed it can work.....ill just leave it alone cool?

Pics, dyno?

idk about that..

It sounds like over all it would work well but I agree with KJell on it being less eficient, but none the less it will work and work well.

Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to build your motor, NOS it on the bottom to make your low end power and use a larger turbo for big HP numbers. 575 ponies on that Opel w. Volvo engine seem good, but I know NOS and large turbo would throw out bigger numbers. It would be cool to be twincharged, but again... seems the HP to Cost ratio would high. It's a neat idea and if you have done it... Good job! It's cool that we are all experimenting and making ideas in our heads come together. Hell, if none of us tried something because it was inefficient or no one thought it would work... where would we be with our current technology? Do what you want and have fun. To the original question... twincharging is possible, but you could make more power for less following a different route.

thats what i was getting at
wasnt trying to squash fun or creativity im all for that

search for reddevil its actually a really cool thread about it and his project was very nicely done

Waste of time. Cool idea just turbo wont work how you plan

I knew what you were trying to say. The most important part is we have fun building and keep doing it. If the numbers are big... BAM! good job. We all like big power and it is fun to see an idea come together. :cool:

And you know this how?

NOS works great, but you run out of a bottle pretty darned fast at Autocross/Rallycross, not to mention its not legal to run NO2 there....

http://www.vincentfurniture.com/phot.../DynoFeb10.jpg

Thats 390 torque @ 3800 rpm.... Then I had a belt jump (fixed that issue) But still made 350 whp @ 5200 rpm.....
http://www.vincentfurniture.com/phot...wermarchdyno15

My run against a supercharged Ford.... 12.5 @ 112.xx mph

YouTube - drag race subaru legacy supercharged turbocharged

Then I started making real power but had tranny issues, so I was stuck with 12.8 @ 112 mph passes WITH NO THIRD GEAR!

Yeah, twin charging doesnt work. My ass.

dont you love it how people with under 50 posts and no turbo projects under their belt tell you how things work and how they dont work. reddevil you know about the new site right

Have you all seen that issue of autoweek where they put a twin turbo system on top of a supercharged gt500? The way the power came on and torque numbers were insane.

Or maybe some of the new members just found out about this forum and are on others, or decided to finally sign up, but have a good amount of turbo projects and a good amount of turbo experience under their belts? Not to be defensive or anything, just because some people are noobs on a forum does not mean they are a noob in general

no i decide whether some is a noob by their complete lack of knowledge but yet still try to tell people how ---- works or doesnt work. read some of the responces to this thread and tell me any one of these new guys have any idea what they are talking about

Hahah yeah, i looked at that and realized wow, 90% of the new guys dont know anything, so i see where your coming from, at first i though it was in response to what I said, but those are some pretty good numbers redevil, and it seems like it really worked for you, but i still think if you tried another setup it would yield a better power gain and over all better performance, regardless great work.

ok so this post started out as a joke but these new guys turned it into a complete joke and still no one answered the question. but im suprised no one mentioned that greddy used to make a turbo kit for the supercharged mr2. so if it doesnt work why would greddy invest into it

We never said it wont work, just that it wont work best, being better than other options, as i said it will work, has worked, and has worked well, but still other setups do theoretically yield a better output, i think its time to test it haha. But really go for it if its what you want.

both of these guys said it would not work

but no i dont have the resources to do it and this thread was only started to see if any one knows the amount of boost the 6psi turbocharged air compressed another 6psi in the supercharger would be

Ohhhh oh ok, well never mind then haha.

Now I'm not sure, mayb e I'm a bit too ------- redneck, but I'm pretty sure I can read.

I can't speak for the rest of you, but the part about you wanting to do this, stating why, then asking for advice, led me, and others, to believe that you actually wanted to do this. We all knew you couldn't for lack of ability, but for lack of everything else needed as well? You really are a retard. Grats!

However, if you really wanna know. In elementery school some of us, apparently not you, learned simple addition. It went sorta like this:

If you have 1 bean, and Sally has 1 bean, and you rape Sally and steal her bean, how many beans do you have? Then you wrote on a piece of paper, 1 + 1, and bow chica wow wow, you've got 2. So by replacing the 1's with 6's, in accordance with your boost levels, we get 6 + 6. With a lil bow chica wow wow, we get 12. HOLY ------- APE ----.

However, you're a ------- retard, and it doesn't work that way. The amount of boost you will get is solely dependent on the most important component of a turbocharger system besides the ------- turbocharger. I don't expect you to know what that is, considering your extremely limited IQ, and extremely abundant ignorance, so here goes. A wastegate. Goddamn I should be a rocket scientist.

z34 your obviously an idiot and there is a clear and apperent answer to the question maybe in elemntrey school all you learned was addition but i also learned multiplication here is the equation and answer
14.7+6=20.7
20.7x2=41.1
41.1-14.7=26.7
the answer is 26.7psi. i started this thread to see what kind of retards started visiting this forum and you are obviously one of them. and obviously this forum is not salvagable anymore due to the complete over run of retarded know it all like you so on a side note go ---- yourself.
and waste gate has nothing to do with the question when i said 6psi so congratulations you have officially avoided a question by spouting out more bull ---- you ------- idiot

If the SC is runs on pressure ratio like turbos do, you have that wrong. If your SC is set for 6psi (a 20.7:14.7 = 1.408PR) then feeding it air at 20.7psi would net you 29.15psia or 14.45psig.

I'm not sure a SC works this way. This is why the WG issue was brought up. Lets say you are holding a 1.4PR with your turbo and you have a 1" exhaust. Step up to a 3" exhaust and with a big ass wastegate you are still holding a 1.4PR but flowing a TON more.

Same scenario with the SC, 1.4PR going through a 1" exhaust. Step up to the 3" pipe and all of a sudden you're flowing a lot more, and consequently your boost has gone down.

I don't know if that makes sense, but I believe that the SC being crank driven and positive displacement, the pressure ratio you get out if it is dependant on pulley size and what's flowing into it, and what it is flowing into rather than something you can simply set like the turbo. That is, when you put a turbo on the supercharger, I don't know that you could (easily) calculate the end result at the manifold.

I've been wrong with these ideas before. I'm not wrong about the pressure ratio though.

Obviously I am. Engineering degree and national certification be damned. All of the research and design into my car be damned.

Look, all your numbers are completely useless, because the wastegate controls boost--Nothing else. So yes you will theoretically see 26.7psi of boost without a wastegate (Actually slightly less). But why the ---- would you run without a WG, or with it's feed being between the turbo outlet and blower inlet? So you get 26.7psi? That would surely blow most of the motors here. Not to mention how inefficient it'd be.

How does the wastegate have nothing to do with it? It controls the pressure in the system. Sure, plumb it and it won't, but why would you do that? You'd overboost in a heartbeat.

well you show little intellegence from most of your post or you just have a huge inability when it comes to reading comprehension i said the turbo is pushing 6psi(controlled by the wastegate obviously). so why again would it be inefficient.

So what's making the other 20psi?

exactly point. its called physics man. if i was you i would try to get a refund on that engineering degree and "national ceritfication"(what ever the ---- that means) becyase it really seems like you wasted money on that to not be able to understand a simple concept of compression.
ill break it down more simple for the retarded
air goes in at atmospheric pressure (14.7psi)
turbo compresses it 6 more psi (20.7psi)
then s/c compresses it again at(20.7psi)
now what should the pressure be even thought both syatems are only at 6psi. tell me that sir