Twin Turbo Evo?
#17
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the big issue wiht the TT setup on the Evo is just packaging constraints, but I'll be the first to admit it'd be cool to see the AMS setup get some more development time.
Dave
Last edited by DaveK; Jan 18, 2009 at 09:25 PM.
#18
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
You could try to do something similar to what is available on diesel passenger vehicles:
http://www.honeywell.com/sites/porta...50813231049691
http://www.honeywell.com/sites/porta...50813231049691
#19
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Castleton, VT
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like there are both proponents and adversaries to the development of tt tech in the evo. the staged system is very interesting, but sounds almost too complex (with AMS' difficulty in getting the valves to actuate properly), however it seems like there may be room for a smaller tt setup using two similarly-sized turbos. Interesting.
Somebody who's got way too much money ought to hash this one out for us!
Somebody who's got way too much money ought to hash this one out for us!
#20
RC Developments in the UK did a twin trubo, but they went bust...:-(
Also has anyone thought about using one of these on a normal manifold but using a Twin Scroll turbo???
http://www.sound-performance.com/p19...duct_info.html
Be nice to see just how fast a 2.3/4 could spool a GT4202RS with one of these on.
Or you could machine the housings out to take a GT47-88!!
Chris.
Also has anyone thought about using one of these on a normal manifold but using a Twin Scroll turbo???
http://www.sound-performance.com/p19...duct_info.html
Be nice to see just how fast a 2.3/4 could spool a GT4202RS with one of these on.
Or you could machine the housings out to take a GT47-88!!
Chris.
#21
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
[QUOTE=adamweldonjohns;6586021]the staged system is very interesting, but sounds almost too complex [\QUOTE]
Exactly. That's the beauty of a compound turbo set-up. See post number 8.
No mixing valves. No separation valves. Small turbo simply blows into/through the big turbo.
Exactly. That's the beauty of a compound turbo set-up. See post number 8.
No mixing valves. No separation valves. Small turbo simply blows into/through the big turbo.
#22
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
This might be my setup for the rally car. We've got AMS building us a 2.3L with 10:1 compression, and I've got an FP White on the car right now.
I think the big issue wiht the TT setup on the Evo is just packaging constraints, but I'll be the first to admit it'd be cool to see the AMS setup get some more development time.
Dave
I think the big issue wiht the TT setup on the Evo is just packaging constraints, but I'll be the first to admit it'd be cool to see the AMS setup get some more development time.
Dave
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you could construct it using turbos with V-band fittings and dry break oil & water lines, it might not be such a nightmare to work on, but packaging would still be difficult at best. Thinking about the engine bay in my race car, I suppose you could put one turbo in the OEM location, then have the larger one hanging over the transmission where the battery/air inlet piping used to be. It'd still be a tight fit, but I'd bet you could squeeze all the necessary piping in.
Dave
Dave
#25
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Delta_S4
#26
Evolved Member
iTrader: (46)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Thornton, CO & Pasadena, MD
Posts: 1,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya it would be cool to have both but from what I remember about the thread the supercharger took the place of the turbo. It was mounted about the same height maybe little higher than the valve cover.
#27
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Glendale Heights, IL
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only problem he had was surge issues. He actually had 2 psi just reving it. I feel that Cosmo and Devo gave up on this idea too soon. They didn't try larger turbine housings, more aggresive cams (they were only on HKS 272's), and an aftermarket intake manifold. I feel this set-up would work great on a 2.3 or 2.4 with MEATY cams. The strokers have better VE down low and can actually put the extra air to work. 2 16G's at 20 psi on 110 octane were coming close to where he had 1 at 28 psi on 116 octane.
#28
RC Developments in the UK did a twin trubo, but they went bust...:-(
Also has anyone thought about using one of these on a normal manifold but using a Twin Scroll turbo???
http://www.sound-performance.com/p19...duct_info.html
Be nice to see just how fast a 2.3/4 could spool a GT4202RS with one of these on.
Or you could machine the housings out to take a GT47-88!!
Chris.
Also has anyone thought about using one of these on a normal manifold but using a Twin Scroll turbo???
http://www.sound-performance.com/p19...duct_info.html
Be nice to see just how fast a 2.3/4 could spool a GT4202RS with one of these on.
Or you could machine the housings out to take a GT47-88!!
Chris.