Aspiration Types

[jediali]

What proof?

well quite..

[johnnynumfiv]

You act like he's posted visual evidence before...

[jediali]

ok then, your pretty sure he is lying then. I am only new so dont really know anyone so remain neutral. I think (from my technical knowledge) that proof isnt that hard to get and i provide it whenever i can (see my "V10 idea" for example).

[hightower99]

July 2002, Volume 14, No. 07 of SportCompactCar.

Project Matrix: Turbocharging the 2ZZ-GE Toyota engine.

Bottom line: they ran 7 psi boost on 11.5:1 compression ratio with 91 octane pump gas. Bringing WHP up from 159 to 231.

It was a fun drivable everyday car that was realiable enough to survive the 1000 mile Trek to Texas. All that was accomplished with the old Tec 2 system controlling fuel and ignition using the "black box method" of tuning (they did have to retard the timing). Stock ECU still controlled valve timing.

The above is actually my second piece of proof... Of course to actually count as undeniable proof then you would have to find the actual article (because according to you I am just some snot nosed punk who lies like a chain smoker smokes...)

So because you are too much of a wanker to do this yourself without f**king it up I did all the hard work for you:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

I took my info from part 2 but the whole series goes to prove my point.

Now if that isn't enough I also told you the website that had the turbo kits for miatas that don't require any internal mods whatsoever, while still being able to run 15psi boost on 91 octane and 25psi boost on 100 octane race gas.

The website is http://www.racingmazda.com
And because I know you are going to have trouble finding the kit I am referring to here is a direct link: '94 miata X-kit

I think what Quiggs is referring to here is the amount of air/fuel mixture the piston compresses due to the forced induction charge as related to what the compression ratio would be if if it was a NA engine.

Not that hard to work out, but the numbers start showing what a joke your claims are that you can run this on 91 octane fuel.

Any chance or working out the effective compression ratio for a McLaren F1 with 15psi, Quiggs?

If that is what he meant than it isn't the Effective compression ratio it is the Theoretical NA compression ratio and is pretty much meaningless. Think about it... Did you actually think that the air is heated up equally whether it is a 11:1 compression ratio running 5 psi boost or a 14.75:1 compression ratio with atmospheric pressure? Not to mention the fact that the air in the McLaren doesn't even experiance 11:1 compression I think the effective compression is something closer to 10:1 maybe just under.

And if I am right I believe the theoretical NA compression ratio of a McLaren running 15 psi boost would be 22.22:1

What do you say Quiggs?

[Quiggs]

I think what Quiggs is referring to here is the amount of air/fuel mixture the piston compresses due to the forced induction charge as related to what the compression ratio would be if if it was a NA engine.

Not that hard to work out, but the numbers start showing what a joke your claims are that you can run this on 91 octane fuel.

Any chance or working out the effective compression ratio for a McLaren F1 with 15psi, Quiggs?

11:1 static CR + 15 psi = 22.2:1 CR.

Not. Effing. Gonna. Happen.

Edit: And I think you're retarded if you think you won't break a McLaren trying to do that.

[jediali]

[Quiggs]

What "effective compression ratio" are you talking about? Effective compression ratio is normally the amount of compression that the piston actually achieves compared to the physical compression ratio built into the engine. For example an engine with a 11:1 compression ratio might only achieve 10:1 compression... This isn't effected by turbo pressure...

O rly?

http://www.motorsportsdigest.com/tech/forced2.htm

All motors have a static compression ratio. This is the amount that the air inside the cylinder is compressed. It is a ratio of the cylinder volume at BDC to the volume at TDC. When a supercharger is added, additional air is forced into the cylinder effectively raising the compression ratio. The result of this is called effective compression. The formula for finding the effective compression is very easy:

((boost psi / 14.7) + 1) x motor compression = effective compression

I don't work for a secret company but even so I would prefer that some information stays off the internet.

So you can't even tell us what kind of motors you work on and have experience with? Chevy? Honda? Air cooled VW/Porsche? Nothing?

I showed the website where you can find the information about the Miata and I have told you all the prescise magazine that had the info about turbocharging the 2ZZ-GE running 7 psi on 11.5:1 compression ratio on 91 octane.

The Miata only makes that 400whp on 25 pounds and race gas, which is God knows octane. 107? 117? Maybe some methanol in the mix? And it was you that wanted to leave race cars (which I equate with race gas) out of the mix.

And the Matrix article gave no real tech info. It was more of an advertisement for the turbo company and standalone manufacturer. It said they "had to pull a few degrees" of timing, but didn't want to tell us how many exactly. 3? 4? 15?

Cyco: Yes 15 psi above atmospheric is correct. the engine can already handle 5 without detonation so it is like only adding 10psi boost to an engine and therefore doesn't require much (if any) modificaction.

I still don't remember seeing the pressure graph that shows the McLaren's intake pressurizes the air.

I give this whole thread a big ...

[hightower99]

O rly?

I will start by saying sorry... I got my wording mixed up yes that is effective compression ratio. But I would still like to point out that it isn't a very good indicater of performance for that you need to know the Dynamic Compression Ratio.

So you can't even tell us what kind of motors you work on and have experience with? Chevy? Honda? Air cooled VW/Porsche? Nothing?

I don't do much work on car engines I have done some work on a ford (taurus 3.8L) a Porsche (944 2.4L) and a few BMWs (mostly 3 series old ones) other than that mostly small model engines and a prototype engine I am working on... I don't want to talk about the prototype anything else is game.

The Miata only makes that 400whp on 25 pounds and race gas, which is God knows octane. 107? 117? Maybe some methanol in the mix? And it was you that wanted to leave race cars (which I equate with race gas) out of the mix.

It still can take 15psi on pump gas and make over 300whp without internal mods...

And the Matrix article gave no real tech info. It was more of an advertisement for the turbo company and standalone manufacturer. It said they "had to pull a few degrees" of timing, but didn't want to tell us how many exactly. 3? 4? 15?

What are you talking there is a ton of technical info in the 3 parts... Everyone seems to think that even low boost is gonna kill their poor engine without making hefty internal mods... I am saying that that just isn't true. Depending on the engine you should be able to put 5-10psi on them without changing anything (the miata takes 15psi) I have shown evidance of extreme cases having survived... Now I want to see all these obvious proofs that 10psi or less will kill your engine.

[Quiggs]

I will start by saying sorry... I got my wording mixed up yes that is effective compression ratio. But I would still like to point out that it isn't a very good indicater of performance for that you need to know the Dynamic Compression Ratio.

But the effective compression ratio is a good place to start to see what kind of fuel you'll need.

I don't do much work on car engines I have done some work on a ford (taurus 3.8L) a Porsche (944 2.4L) and a few BMWs (mostly 3 series old ones) other than that mostly small model engines and a prototype engine I am working on... I don't want to talk about the prototype anything else is game.

Any of them running FI on stock compression and/or internals?

It still can take 15psi on pump gas and make over 300whp without internal mods...

For how long?

What are you talking there is a ton of technical info in the 3 parts... Everyone seems to think that even low boost is gonna kill their poor engine without making hefty internal mods... I am saying that that just isn't true. Depending on the engine you should be able to put 5-10psi on them without changing anything (the miata takes 15psi) I have shown evidance of extreme cases having survived... Now I want to see all these obvious proofs that 10psi or less will kill your engine.

Uh, well it sure killed the Matrix's engine.

Blowby, and lots of it, was pumping oily air out the crankcase vent and into the turbo inlet. That much blowby could mean only one thing and a leakdown test confirmed it. Cylinder #3 had 70 percent leakdown. The Matrix was broken. Our best guess is that something happened in Florida. A bad tank of gas or a few careless gallons of 87 would be enough to cause a few hard pings.

Could it have been caused by low octane? Sure, it's possible. But I think its a lot more likely that Toyota engineered the rings to their specifications, thinking no one would be dumb enough to try to boost an 11.5:1 motor in the first place.

[2ndclasscitizen]

But I think its a lot more likely that Toyota engineered the rings to their specifications, thinking no one would be dumb enough to try to boost an 11.5:1 motor in the first place.

Yes, who would've thought "I know, let's turbo an engine that redlines at 9000rpm, and just hope that it's always run on the best fuel." Birlliant thinking there.

[herojan]

W20 Nos

[hightower99]

But the effective compression ratio is a good place to start to see what kind of fuel you'll need.

I wouldn't bother with it.

Any of them running FI on stock compression and/or internals?

The porsche comes turboed from the factory. I helped install a turbo system on a BMW 316 but the kit came with low compression (9:1) pistons and it runs 18psi on european 98 octane gas.

For how long?

As long as you want assuming you aren't stupid and don't neglect the necessary care (ie fill it with the right fuel, remember oil changes, ect)

Uh, well it sure killed the Matrix's engine.

Purely from lack of care. The project was from 2002 using TEC 2. You now have access to better technologies for setting up turbo systems. The project lasted a 2400 mile cruise to texas (pretty tough on a car) dyno runs, and general hard driving.

Could it have been caused by low octane? Sure, it's possible. But I think its a lot more likely that Toyota engineered the rings to their specifications, thinking no one would be dumb enough to try to boost an 11.5:1 motor in the first place.

highly unlikely... Why did they not deteriorate noticibly over a 2400 mile trek with alot of hard driving and dyno runs? The article says that it basically happened over night from good driving to #3 cylinder losing 70% compression. that doesn't sound like a piston ring getting beat out by the turbo system, that sounds like some idiot filling it with regular and driving it hard. Just making the stock engine handle 11.5:1 needs good piston rings with some good tolerances built in.

And why is it dumb? the higher the compression the more you get out of every pound of boost. If you lowered the compression to 9:1 then you would need to run 13 psi (according to effective compression) or almost double what they ran to get into the same kind of power they were making.

I still want to see all these cars that keep blowing up from only 10 pounds or less of boost....

[Quiggs]

Yes, who would've thought "I know, let's turbo an engine that redlines at 9000rpm, and just hope that it's always run on the best fuel." Birlliant thinking there.

There are variances in fuel quality at a single gas station from day to day large enough to cause major engine damage from detonation. All it takes is a little water in the tanks, or a station owner who runs out of 93 and decides 91 is close enough to 93 that it won't make a difference.

[Cyco]

I took my info from part 2 but the whole series goes to prove my point

Dropping the compression to 10:1 or running 95-octane gas would allow far better efficiency and much more power

You must have learnt a lot

reliable enough for a 1,000-mile trek to Texas

1000 miles!!!!! Wow thats about what I drive every 2 weeks, such mega reliability I want one now........

The VF23 is designed to accommodate water cooling, though, like most aftermarket turbo installations, XS doesn't use this feature.......could be easily accomplished by teeing into the heater circuit less than a foot from the turbo.

Another eye opener - you take engine design lessons from people who wont install a T junction and a foot (or 2) of hose.

Shows how much reliability you like.

Lots and lots on upgrading the fuel system

All stuff that hightower99 you don't seem to think you need. I'm sure the burnt piston could be accomplished much faster without enough fuel......

Lots about reprogramming the ignition system and upgrading it

Again stuff that apparently isn't needed for Mr hightower99's work

Everyone seems to think that even low boost is gonna kill their poor engine without making hefty internal mods...

I have shown evidance of extreme cases having survived... Now I want to see all these obvious proofs that 10psi or less will kill your engine.

You posted this yourself - the Matrix you wanted to use as support for your argument with 7psi broke after less than 4000km. That is completely crap in terms of reliability.

I wouldn't bother with it.

We have noticed. You also don't seem to bother with any other fundamentals of engine design, so this is no surprise.

The porsche comes turboed from the factory.

So what did you do to it?

I helped install a turbo system on a BMW 316 but the kit came with low compression (9:1) pistons and it runs 18psi on european 98 octane gas.

Wow a lowered compression ratio and high quality fuel and it works - what we have been saying and you denying......

The project lasted a 2400 mile cruise to texas (pretty tough on a car) dyno runs, and general hard driving.

A cruise by definition is easy. the only dyno runs mentioned were during set up and rather unavoidable, and if you can't do some hard driving whats the point.

Ignoring the whole fact it DIDN'T survive.......

[2ndclasscitizen]

There are variances in fuel quality at a single gas station from day to day large enough to cause major engine damage from detonation. All it takes is a little water in the tanks, or a station owner who runs out of 93 and decides 91 is close enough to 93 that it won't make a difference.

But to a properly built turbo engine, that wouldn't be as much of an issue i.e killing a cylinder