Notices
Evo General Discuss any generalized technical Evo related topics that may not fit into the other forums. Please do not post tech and rumor threads here.
Sponsored by: RavSpec - JDM Wheels Central

Twin Scroll; Making all Existing Turbo Kits Obsolete?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 11:25 AM
  #166  
THUB's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
From: Lombard IL
Looks to me like he's disagreeing, while legitimizing your point. theoretically a single scroll on the flow bench where air flow is truly constant would e more effective. but engines let out exhaust gasses in unsteady pulses, and make for unpredictable results that a twin scroll could be better able to cope with.
I think that's the point he was trying to make.
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 01:52 PM
  #167  
homemade wrx's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
From: Mooresville, NC
yes, a single scroll is more efficient as it doesn't lose velocity because of skin friction from the added material/surface area...hence why I said the top end loss is worth the gain of area under the curve.
the single scroll also has less thermal transfer but I'm really curius at how negligable the thermal loss is.
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 02:35 PM
  #168  
robertrinaustin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,858
Likes: 0
From: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country
Originally Posted by homemade wrx
yes, a single scroll is more efficient as it doesn't lose velocity because of skin friction from the added material/surface area...hence why I said the top end loss is worth the gain of area under the curve.
the single scroll also has less thermal transfer but I'm really curius at how negligable the thermal loss is.
What do you mean by "more effecient"?
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 03:48 PM
  #169  
Frenchy4g63's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
twin scroll make turbo go whooossshhh

Last edited by Frenchy4g63; Aug 6, 2007 at 07:57 PM.
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 07:21 PM
  #170  
High_PSI's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 12
Originally Posted by ill-luzion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ill-luzion
Hey, would you need to run a 4inch Turbo back if you went with a built 2.4 93oct/meth on the GT4094R? or is a 3inch fine?

3" is fine. There are turbo'd V8's that don't have 4" exh.

Thanks
They also have 2 3.0 pipes, one for each side. So 6.0 of flow.
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 08:06 PM
  #171  
homemade wrx's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
From: Mooresville, NC
Originally Posted by robertrinaustin
What do you mean by "more effecient"?
I guess I really meant more ultimate power...if talking averaged power and overall "efficiency" I would have to give the twin scroll the award


efficiency I guess would also apply to velocity in vs. velocity out being higher too...
Old Aug 5, 2007 | 08:43 PM
  #172  
PVD04's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
Originally Posted by High_PSI
They also have 2 3.0 pipes, one for each side. So 6.0 of flow.

It doesn't really work that way. 2 3.0 pipes flow about the same as 1 4.0 pipe.

-Paul
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 12:26 AM
  #173  
Geoff Raicer's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
From: NJ / AZ FULL-RACE
Originally Posted by homemade wrx
thinking about a twinscroll with the same a/r as a single entry...the twin has more surface area = lower velocity fromt surface friction and more heat loss...wonder how that would affect the top end as normally the top end issue is choking and thus causing reversion...
youre definately on the right track. twinscroll does have downsides, friction is increased, heat transfer gets worse (it turns out this is entirely negligible, however) and steady state top end performance will depend on the particulars of each setup, and the cam specifics. In my opinion, these downsides are vastly outweighed by the upsides...

Originally Posted by Drifto
The ability of a twin scroll to utilize the pulsing, unsteady flow of the exhaust exiting the engine gives it a huge bump in "apparent" efficiency, and ultimately spools up the turbine that much sooner. Twinscrolls also isolate the cylinders' blowdown events much better than a non-divided housing, preventing the exhausting cylinder's very high PEAK exhaust manifold pressures from finding their way into the other cylinder on its overlap period. "
^^^^^someone paid attention

Originally Posted by THUB
Looks to me like he's disagreeing, while legitimizing your point. theoretically a single scroll on the flow bench where air flow is truly constant would e more effective. but engines let out exhaust gasses in unsteady pulses, and make for unpredictable results that a twin scroll could be better able to cope with.
agreeing with the premise, disagreeing with the conclusion

Originally Posted by homemade wrx
yes, a single scroll is more efficient as it doesn't lose velocity because of skin friction from the added material/surface area...hence why I said the top end loss is worth the gain of area under the curve.
the single scroll also has less thermal transfer but I'm really curius at how negligable the thermal loss is.
i would say that single scroll has less FRICTION, less efficient depends entirely on what "efficiency" you are referring to. There should be no top end loss to correlate the newfound area under the curve if the system is working optimally. the heat transfer is negligable, especially with Spark Ignition
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 12:31 AM
  #174  
High_PSI's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 12
Originally Posted by PVD04
It doesn't really work that way. 2 3.0 pipes flow about the same as 1 4.0 pipe.

-Paul

In a V Formation? Each bank of 4 cylinders (assuming a true dual Exhaust) would have it's own 3.0 exhaust pipe. How would it flow as well as 1 4.0 pipe?
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 12:32 AM
  #175  
trinydex's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,072
Likes: 7
From: not here
Originally Posted by sonicnofadz
I don't see what all the arguing is about, twin scroll is obviously better suited for circuit duty. It will lose top end, there is no doubt about that. If your car is all top end, it will only be good in a straight line. To properly conquer a race track, you need power and torque ALL over the RPM range (to properly accelerate into, around, and out of turns with minimal shifting). This is why the twin scroll has an advantage. However the twin scroll is not the end all solution for better midrange power. More displacement, playing games with the intake/exhaust manifolds, mivec, cam timing, porting the cylinder head, and the turbine housing all are huge factors. A good example is the AMS time attack Evo, which doesn't use a twin scroll setup, and yet it manages to scorch down lap times comparable to that of an open wheel formula 1 race car.
i think it is premature to say this. twin scroll should be superior in all situations even if there is "more frictional area" introduced by the divider. what we're neglecting to address here is that twin scroll revolutionizes the way that you size turbos. what was good for 800hp as a single scroll you might want to use a 900hp single scroll in twin scroll attire to achieve the same goals BUT with the benefits of twin scroll
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 01:40 AM
  #176  
Sxhawnn's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
can't wait to see some dyno numbers
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 03:01 AM
  #177  
Max Power's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
From: Chandler, AZ
Originally Posted by High_PSI
In a V Formation? Each bank of 4 cylinders (assuming a true dual Exhaust) would have it's own 3.0 exhaust pipe. How would it flow as well as 1 4.0 pipe?
It's about cross sectional area...
Two 3" pipes = 56.5 in^2
One 4" pipe = 50.3 in^2

So it's about 12% more.
Old Aug 6, 2007 | 06:57 AM
  #178  
homemade wrx's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
From: Mooresville, NC
Originally Posted by Full-Race Geoff
i would say that single scroll has less FRICTION, less efficient depends entirely on what "efficiency" you are referring to. There should be no top end loss to correlate the newfound area under the curve if the system is working optimally. the heat transfer is negligable, especially with Spark Ignition
so with spec manifold runner length, radius, diameter and collector volume with a spec cam, I would imagine the single scroll of the SAME a/r to still out perform the tiwnscroll in the top end for the afformentioned reasons. Are you saying the identical set up twinscroll can make the same as a single?

Of course the twinscroll should smoke it for the rest of the power band.

Last edited by homemade wrx; Aug 8, 2007 at 12:40 PM.
Old Aug 7, 2007 | 11:08 PM
  #179  
Geoff Raicer's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
From: NJ / AZ FULL-RACE
Originally Posted by homemade wrx
so with spec manifold runner length, radius, diameter and collector volume with a spec cam, I would imagine the single scroll of the single a/r to still out perform the tiwnscroll in the top end for the afformentioned reasons. Are you saying the identical set up twinscroll can make the same as a single? Of course the twinscroll should smoke it for the rest of the power band.
you cant really say that a single scroll of 1 a/r will out perform the twinscroll of the same... that doesnt make snese, it depends entirely on what the setup is and what the AR is

A good example would be a 1.06 A/R on a gt35R. it will be lazy, lag a bit and make some ok top end but a terrible powerband. At the same time put a 1.06 a/r twinscroll on and it picksup power everywhere, high rpm, low rpm and midrange

Another example is to take a .63 a/r single scroll GT35R. It will be responsive, spool nicely and have good top end. If you swapped in a .63 twinscroll (no point which is why they dont exist) it would spool crazy fast with more midrange and low end but it would choke up above 450whp, so its pointless... the .78 a/r would be a better comparison
Old Aug 7, 2007 | 11:13 PM
  #180  
Turbo Kyle's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
From: St. Louis
Any Ideas when we can see some dyno numbers on your new kits?


Quick Reply: Twin Scroll; Making all Existing Turbo Kits Obsolete?



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:29 PM.