Turbo kit component thread
- Thread starter M5-
- Start date
N
NM
Well-known member
Well MCX would have built the map with target AFRs through the boost and rpm range and they know that the intake air temps would never be lower than ambient.
Worst case the 02 mixture would become richer as IAT climbed, so in theory, if the charge air was to remain more consistent then the 02 values would also remain closer to the desired number and the sled should run better.
I have made long pulls in the past where you can see the 02 numbers drop and the sled would start to lose power and RPM. When that happens you know the charge temps have gone way up.
Once the water to air was installed then it never happened again and the 02 values remained consistent at Wot.
N
NM
Well-known member
The coolers we have made would not work on either kit, but it would not be hard to build a airbox that would work.
The Impulse would be a bit harder because the airbox is above the throttle bodies and the filler for the coolant must be higher than the coils. It's really just plumbing. We have worked on plenty of Impulse sleds and we know it is possible.
In my opinion every high end turbo kit will at least have a water to air option in the next few years. When riding in snow that does not heavily load the motor, it becomes less important.
All of our Poo turbo kits are getting one and we will not even consider building a kit without it.
MCX 270
MCX Great kit over all ,would get another in a heart beat. Fuel and go kit no buttons or gauges, just boost gauge and can run 17-18#'s. Fit and finish pretty good.
Poor header system, and BOV on older kits!
MCX Great kit over all ,would get another in a heart beat. Fuel and go kit no buttons or gauges, just boost gauge and can run 17-18#'s. Fit and finish pretty good.
Poor header system, and BOV on older kits!
I think I know what you are getting at but I think you phrased it wrong. When I talked about pressure drop above thats what I meant. WA cores have much lower pressure drop across them then air to air cores, I've read claims of .1 lbs vs say 4 lbs on an air to air. Theoretically you would see less lag till spool up because the WA core does not need to overcome as much pressure drop prior to delivering boost to the motor/plenum. The volume of air is determined by your fueling, engine work ie porting, exhaust etc not by the IC. The engine requires X amount of CFM regardless of how it gets there either thru a W/A or A/A core. If you read NMs posts above you'll see they turned the boost down and maintained the same power, thats because of the increase in the core's efficiency. Another positive of that and NM talked about it indirectly is you will end up with less back pressure on the exhaust side because the turbo isn't woking as hard so that equals less heat and longer header life. It'll help you get closer to that 1:1 compressor:turbine pressure ratio.
M5
No idea. How much snow gets flung up into the tunnel when trail riding? What kind of intercooler? Does it lie flat or is is propped up like an Impulse? I think you'd see a benefit on any setup that gets long durations on boost where the air flow throught the IC is limited and where you have a heat exchanger that is exposed to good snow flow. If you can't cool the W/A heat exchanger it would probably be worse. NM?
M5
P
powderlites
Well-known member
Intercoolers
First of all flat landers really don't gain much as they never open for more then a few seconds at high boost and have lots of speed and air venting to cool off air to air.
Mountain sleds that are riding in deep powder and long pulls need water to air as it is conduction and not convection.
Intercoolers that have boost drop too high are working as heater not cooler!
Low boost doesn't get to hot with bigger turbo and lots of free flowing exhaust.
2860 is the same as 2871 turbine side but at over 15 psi the 2860 is really beating up the air and making it hot that's why way more power from larger compressor wheels but laggy with high trim.
Same size compressor wheels but in billet and machined like GTX can flow more and spool faster with cooler temps.
The balance of everything from cam timing to compression ratio and sizing of turbo is still tricky unless tested.
Long tube header on apex motor when trying to make big power at 30 psi boost over short tube will be up to 100 HP.
Log manifold on skidoo 1200 like stock one just will not make power no matter how much boost you give it.
Does intercooler have stacks tapered? how long are the stacks? How much volume in airbox? Is airbox part of intercooler?
I have done a lot of building and testing of intercoolers and always can learn something new.
I have a wall of shame junk airboxes and intercoolers that would scare most guys for sure. But i have also built and supplied intercoolers and airbox parts for One stop performance, Greg @ GNS, Hurricane, Northest turbos, Dunn's, Ted Jennetty, Greg @ 1st Choice turbos, and many more for guys that try building there own stuff.
Blow off valves we have invented for guys to use are also important for throttle response. Lots of copy cats and I have also stolen a few good idea's for sure.
Can I make a certain turbo kit pull more power just by building a better intercooler? Yes been done many times with custom stuff.
Paul I am only posting to help out with what is out there and what people have for options and ideas. Just my idea of a better mouse trap is always changing with knowledge and wisdom.
http://www.powderlites.com
First of all flat landers really don't gain much as they never open for more then a few seconds at high boost and have lots of speed and air venting to cool off air to air.
Mountain sleds that are riding in deep powder and long pulls need water to air as it is conduction and not convection.
Intercoolers that have boost drop too high are working as heater not cooler!
Low boost doesn't get to hot with bigger turbo and lots of free flowing exhaust.
2860 is the same as 2871 turbine side but at over 15 psi the 2860 is really beating up the air and making it hot that's why way more power from larger compressor wheels but laggy with high trim.
Same size compressor wheels but in billet and machined like GTX can flow more and spool faster with cooler temps.
The balance of everything from cam timing to compression ratio and sizing of turbo is still tricky unless tested.
Long tube header on apex motor when trying to make big power at 30 psi boost over short tube will be up to 100 HP.
Log manifold on skidoo 1200 like stock one just will not make power no matter how much boost you give it.
Does intercooler have stacks tapered? how long are the stacks? How much volume in airbox? Is airbox part of intercooler?
I have done a lot of building and testing of intercoolers and always can learn something new.
I have a wall of shame junk airboxes and intercoolers that would scare most guys for sure. But i have also built and supplied intercoolers and airbox parts for One stop performance, Greg @ GNS, Hurricane, Northest turbos, Dunn's, Ted Jennetty, Greg @ 1st Choice turbos, and many more for guys that try building there own stuff.
Blow off valves we have invented for guys to use are also important for throttle response. Lots of copy cats and I have also stolen a few good idea's for sure.
Can I make a certain turbo kit pull more power just by building a better intercooler? Yes been done many times with custom stuff.
Paul I am only posting to help out with what is out there and what people have for options and ideas. Just my idea of a better mouse trap is always changing with knowledge and wisdom.
http://www.powderlites.com
heres how I set my impulse kit up on my apex...
I get plenty of air across the intercooler since most run a CR hood or similar and just end up blocking it off. Its usually very cool to the touch, but then agin im only running a 2860 at mostly 12 lbs around 5-7K feet so im not pushing it out of its efficiency by any means!
I get plenty of air across the intercooler since most run a CR hood or similar and just block it off.
I get plenty of air across the intercooler since most run a CR hood or similar and just end up blocking it off. Its usually very cool to the touch, but then agin im only running a 2860 at mostly 12 lbs around 5-7K feet so im not pushing it out of its efficiency by any means!
I get plenty of air across the intercooler since most run a CR hood or similar and just block it off.
Thanks Dave I knew you'd have some good input. Look forward to some more input/comments when we get to fueling as I'm sure that'll get interesting, hopefully it remains civil.
Mattymac, I think what you've got there is about as good as you can do with air to air without adding a fan, air flow wise. Compare that setup to an MCX Nytro intercooler like mine and you don't have to be a genius to figure out which one is going to cool better. Everything is a trade off it seems, packaging, performance etc.
These are the kinds things I'm hoping to highlight in this thread, design features not brands per say although brands will come up as examples.
M5
Mattymac, I think what you've got there is about as good as you can do with air to air without adding a fan, air flow wise. Compare that setup to an MCX Nytro intercooler like mine and you don't have to be a genius to figure out which one is going to cool better. Everything is a trade off it seems, packaging, performance etc.
These are the kinds things I'm hoping to highlight in this thread, design features not brands per say although brands will come up as examples.
M5
N
NM
Well-known member
I agree with Dave, that a water to air would have little change on a flatland sled.
In my opinion a intercooler system is tested by load and time. By load, I mean load on the engine while under boost and time meaning how long on boost. These are the two main factors that create heat in the charge system. There are others, but in my opinion load and time are the two I key on. This is assuming of course the sled has a properly sized turbo and a good header design.
Having said that though I do believe a water to air would be better than a air to air in any boosted sled. The water is constantly circulating through the exchanger and airbox, and there is not a better heat sink than water to remove heat.
Neil, with the water to air on your Pro, did you compare the weight of the airbox / intercooler you designed vs the one HM turbos would use or a cooler from frozen boost like the one I have:
This cooler works really well, but I think integrating the air box and W-to-A into one unit would work better and maybe even save a few lbs if you could get enough air flow, which obviously you have on the pro
This cooler works really well, but I think integrating the air box and W-to-A into one unit would work better and maybe even save a few lbs if you could get enough air flow, which obviously you have on the pro
B
BigFish BC
Well-known member
if you compare the same size turbos most of the gains you get are drivability ie throttle responce,less back pressure,more air flow at less boost & less heat.all out power would be the least gained but you would gain some too,the biggest most important thing with turbos is matching the size to your application one size does not fit all.
Yeah I think were on some what of the same page, I probably did word it wrong... What I was trying to say is I had thought that it took more volume of air to fill up and pass through an air to air intercooler vs WA. Resulting in maybe a loss of velocity and how fast the air gets to the engine?? Is this correct?
I understand waht NM was saying with less drive pressure with less boost and making the same power.
if you compare the same size turbos most of the gains you get are drivability ie throttle responce,less back pressure,more air flow at less boost & less heat.all out power would be the least gained but you would gain some too,the biggest most important thing with turbos is matching the size to your application one size does not fit all.
Yeah I think that is one of the biggest points of running a better turbo is that you could get away with running smaller more responsive turbo that will flow as much as a size or even two bigger then itself... Or even go up two sizes bigger and still be able to spool it decent and have a ton of top end.
is there a w/a inter cooler for the nytro
B
BigFish BC
Well-known member
boost it has plans to make kits for them not sure when he will have them avalible.
Looks like intercooler talk is done for now so we might just as well move on to fuel controllers. First off there are LOTS of guys who know a lot more about this then me (Dave, NM, Climbmax) so please chime in when you think its the right time with any pros and cons. This will undoubtedly cause a few arguments/discussions but WTF.
Broadly speaking you can divide contollers into two main categories piggyback and standalone. I think the only complete true standalone out there and correct me if I'm wrong is Impulse, the rest are some form of piggyback system. For those of you who don't know the difference or who may be new to the whole turbo thing, a piggyback retains the original ECU and the auxiliiary fuel controller runs on top of that where a standalone replaces the entire stock unit with a new brain.
There are differences in the piggyback systems as well. For example the MCX kit adds a second set of fuel injectors in the intercooler plenum which add fuel based on boost, so at idle you would be running on just the stock injectors. I beleive the Boost It system is the same but uses a different box obviously, one that is easily tunable. Powderlites is currently using the RBR box which only needs one set of injectors therfore non in the intercooler. The RBR, correct me here Dave, runs in series with the stock controller and intercepts the signals for fuel and timing, alters them to meet the new requirements from boost based on a pre-determined map and then sends them on rather than just turning on and off a set of auxiliiary injectors like MCX or Boost it. I believe the RBR has the capability to alter the baseline map on the fly 15% up or down where the older RB3 could only run on the map you had in there. The MCX box is not tunable by the average guy but I believe there is some software out there to do it. MCX does make the Display unit but I've got no experience with it and its pretty spendy. I don't have one but I think the new MCX box has a USB port on it for loading maps maybe from a PDA or laptop, don't know for sure but you still need some way to make the map in the first place.
Open loop vs closed loop. Most systems out there are still Open loop which means they are not monitoring the O2 and are not correcting fuel on the fly based on an O2 Sensor. The Impulse closed loop standalone does this so in theory it should work just like a modern car, downside is you need to carry a spare O2 sensor cause they do fail in sleds pretty regularily.
Alter ingnition timing or don't alter it. There are two camps here for sure. Personally I don't see how altering the timing can be a bad thing but it may be an un-necessary level of complexity. If you had a true functioning knock sensor on the ignition side combined with a closed loop fuel supply that would be the ticket IMO. I guess really it comes down to how far do you want to go with your system? The MCX box is really pretty crude when you think about it but it does work pretty darn well pretty much all the time.
As for the rest like Gems, or Prologic, me I wouldn't even consider one of those they just don't have the track record of the others. Hopefully somebody better versed will correct any misinformation I've got there.
M5
Broadly speaking you can divide contollers into two main categories piggyback and standalone. I think the only complete true standalone out there and correct me if I'm wrong is Impulse, the rest are some form of piggyback system. For those of you who don't know the difference or who may be new to the whole turbo thing, a piggyback retains the original ECU and the auxiliiary fuel controller runs on top of that where a standalone replaces the entire stock unit with a new brain.
There are differences in the piggyback systems as well. For example the MCX kit adds a second set of fuel injectors in the intercooler plenum which add fuel based on boost, so at idle you would be running on just the stock injectors. I beleive the Boost It system is the same but uses a different box obviously, one that is easily tunable. Powderlites is currently using the RBR box which only needs one set of injectors therfore non in the intercooler. The RBR, correct me here Dave, runs in series with the stock controller and intercepts the signals for fuel and timing, alters them to meet the new requirements from boost based on a pre-determined map and then sends them on rather than just turning on and off a set of auxiliiary injectors like MCX or Boost it. I believe the RBR has the capability to alter the baseline map on the fly 15% up or down where the older RB3 could only run on the map you had in there. The MCX box is not tunable by the average guy but I believe there is some software out there to do it. MCX does make the Display unit but I've got no experience with it and its pretty spendy. I don't have one but I think the new MCX box has a USB port on it for loading maps maybe from a PDA or laptop, don't know for sure but you still need some way to make the map in the first place.
Open loop vs closed loop. Most systems out there are still Open loop which means they are not monitoring the O2 and are not correcting fuel on the fly based on an O2 Sensor. The Impulse closed loop standalone does this so in theory it should work just like a modern car, downside is you need to carry a spare O2 sensor cause they do fail in sleds pretty regularily.
Alter ingnition timing or don't alter it. There are two camps here for sure. Personally I don't see how altering the timing can be a bad thing but it may be an un-necessary level of complexity. If you had a true functioning knock sensor on the ignition side combined with a closed loop fuel supply that would be the ticket IMO. I guess really it comes down to how far do you want to go with your system? The MCX box is really pretty crude when you think about it but it does work pretty darn well pretty much all the time.
As for the rest like Gems, or Prologic, me I wouldn't even consider one of those they just don't have the track record of the others. Hopefully somebody better versed will correct any misinformation I've got there.
M5
Similar threads
