| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
buldogo2

Joined: 13 Nov 2009 Posts: 79 Location: Nederland, Tilburg
|
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rasta Monsta wrote: | | I wonder why more people don't use a simple tubular header and copy the 951 solution. |
Because this will mean longer runners/pipe(s) to the turbo. And this will effect spool up time. (in theory)
I will sent my design to a 3D bender shortly for evaluation. The can bent bent after bent without straits . |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gegge

Joined: 27 Jul 2007 Posts: 1124 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rasta Monsta wrote: | | I wonder why more people don't use a simple tubular header and copy the 951 solution. |
Using a cast 924 manifold perhaps? An adapter to the front or routed to the cold side might work. The problem is space under the engine. 4-2-1 for equal puls or split entry for spool is not bad after all. _________________ Carl Fredrik Torkildsen
924 turbo -81 Carrera GT RESTOMOD
924 turbo -80 Dolomite De Luxe
924 -85 DP kit, BBS RS, M030 and tuned engine
924s -86 Black on black turbo with Fuchs |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rasta Monsta

Joined: 12 Jul 2006 Posts: 11733 Location: PacNW
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| buldogo2 wrote: | | this will effect spool up time. (in theory) |
Indeed, but there is a difference between "theoretcial effect" and "perceptable effect." Drive a chipped 951 and see if it's too slow/laggy for your taste! _________________ Toofah King Bad
- WeiBe (1987 924S 2.5t) - 931 S3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flosho

Joined: 01 Jul 2004 Posts: 3160 Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jazz guy wrote: |
| flosho wrote: | | Why are you guys so concerned that the runners are mandrel bent from one single piece? Seems superfluous for our engines. |
Point taken, there sure is the option of making the runners in segments, though I'm not quite sure what you mean by single piece runners being superfluous. For one off or limited run projects a segmented construction might be the best solution. I guess I was looking at it from a production run viewpoint where we are always looking for ways to take individual operational steps out... more operations, more time, more money.
I do think that it would be preferable to use one piece runners but obviously there are numerous factors yet to be determined that will affect the ultimate end design.
Keep up the dialogue.
Cheers, Brian |
I guess, I'm speaking from very little experience... However, I would think it would be cheaper for someone to fabricate a few turbo manifolds 'the old fashion way' instead of paying to have them bent on a CAD machine out of one piece. Seems like the cost of design and setup would be higher with the technology involved than simply chop/cut/weld.
Once you build one manifold the ones following it should be easier to reproduce. _________________ [This Space For Rent] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Martijnus

Joined: 29 Dec 2006 Posts: 2019 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
I totally agree with Rasta.
If it was a dumb idea, why has porsche moved the turbo to the other side?
The 931 was the first front engined turbo porsche, the 951 an evolution on that, so the fact that they moved the turbo to the other side says enough for me.
I think the difference in spool time will be 50rpm or less; unnoticable.
There's a lot of other factors which have probably more influence.
I've seen the performance of that dutch dude who just put on a semi-random turbo with a 951 style setup and he pulled 210 hp.
Unless we're all driving on the track and really need those 200 rpm earlier spool, why bother going the hard way. _________________ "Rule: Turbo's make torque, and torque makes fun." (C. Bell)
924 "50-jahre", 1981.
MSII/extra, LPG, ITB's, 5lug.
To be turbo'ed in a while.
Killed her at the Nurburgring, Porscheless at the moment |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flosho

Joined: 01 Jul 2004 Posts: 3160 Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The 951 also makes more power off boost, than a 931 does at full boost.
2.5L is a pretty good size 4 cylinder.. _________________ [This Space For Rent] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joes924Racer

Joined: 03 Nov 2002 Posts: 11964 Location: Oregon, Denver Colorado native!
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
It would take a little time and a good vert. band saw help.
Though the old fashionway is cool.
Moving the turbo to the other side - wow what an idea.
Ill have to take a look at that set-up. A-la 951.
Ive seen a few intakes built on the board... That would take
some time. Nice pics Mike Danger. _________________ 1979 porsche 924 Na
1980 porsche Turbo 931GT Replica
Have u ever driven a turbo.
Last edited by Joes924Racer on Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joes924Racer

Joined: 03 Nov 2002 Posts: 11964 Location: Oregon, Denver Colorado native!
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the otherhand on mandrel bent tubes ... if some one would come up
with a design close to mikes where then bends are uniform and equal.
Kind a like a weld up kit ... what about making a solid mounting flange
for the tubes. I saw one not to long ago.  _________________ 1979 porsche 924 Na
1980 porsche Turbo 931GT Replica
Have u ever driven a turbo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rasta Monsta

Joined: 12 Jul 2006 Posts: 11733 Location: PacNW
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flosho wrote: | | The 951 also makes more power off boost, than a 931 does at full boost. |
P'shaw, the 10.6:1 2.5 made 160 (barely more that US 931), the 951 is only 8.0:1.
Get your point, tho. _________________ Toofah King Bad
- WeiBe (1987 924S 2.5t) - 931 S3
Last edited by Rasta Monsta on Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:13 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joes924Racer

Joined: 03 Nov 2002 Posts: 11964 Location: Oregon, Denver Colorado native!
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heres a nice custom set up i found ... though it is a 951
set up. Its well-built. Heres alink to his other pics. of the header
a install pic. It has a interesting features.
http://www.666fab.com/951/
 _________________ 1979 porsche 924 Na
1980 porsche Turbo 931GT Replica
Have u ever driven a turbo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rasta Monsta

Joined: 12 Jul 2006 Posts: 11733 Location: PacNW
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Martijnus wrote: | | the fact that they moved the turbo to the other side says enough for me. |
And on the 924GTR. . . _________________ Toofah King Bad
- WeiBe (1987 924S 2.5t) - 931 S3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joes924Racer

Joined: 03 Nov 2002 Posts: 11964 Location: Oregon, Denver Colorado native!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shurick

Joined: 15 May 2005 Posts: 524 Location: Russia, Moscow.
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flosho wrote: | The 951 also makes more power off boost, than a 931 does at full boost.
2.5L is a pretty good size 4 cylinder.. |
Take a look at intercooled version of 931 (CGT) and you'll see, that 931 has more specific power with a poor intercooler and simplier ignition/fueling. _________________ WBR, Shurick
'79 931 -- intercooled K26-3060-6.10 turbo @ 1.2 bar, EFI+EDIS, 951S brakes, stripped interior, 951 look.
'86 924S -- R.I.P.
https://www.instagram.com/ru_pacecar/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MikeDanger

Joined: 21 Nov 2002 Posts: 774 Location: Denver
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To answer some questions and concerns (and no offense to anyone but since I actually build and design things, I put them in to practice, as theory alone is worthless)
I didnt worry about trying to build these out of one peice, that would be very hard to get equal lengths with the spacing limitations. and They wouldnt be made out of mild steel for a part that would actually be used, this was just the fitting/mock up stage.
Most of the curves are cut from "doughnuts" and it works just fine, unless you have F1 money and resources... its still way better than anything else I could find.
My version as I stated earlier would put the turbo on the other side of the motor (like the 951) Where the AC compressor is, so the exhaust would go around the front of the motor. Also this would make plumbing for the front mount intercooler a little easier
I would probably shorten the straights that connect to the collector a little bit, and they would all 4 be slip fit joints to allow for heat expansion/contraction.
Additionally I would use V-band at the end of the collector(and along the rest of the exhaust sistem) To make installation and maintnece easier, but this would also allow one to put turbo right at the end of the collector. like the original system.
lets not forget about wastegate plumbing, and all that on the passenger side makes it tough and I think throws the balance of the motor way off.
Also I was using 1-5/8" tubing in stead of 1.5" _________________ It was either this or a giant box of legos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
morghen

Joined: 21 Jan 2005 Posts: 9102 Location: Romania
|
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i think they moved the turbo on the other side for the 951 because the 2.5L is larger and they didnt have enough space.
why would anyone put the turbo so close to the intake for a road/city going car? for me its not enough that porsche put the turbo there on the 951....the GTR is a completely different business. _________________ Supercharger and EFI kits
https://www.the924.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|