Turbo without Intercooler
Raphael
I am thinking of getting a PowerChip package which also includes a
slight boost upgrade (up from 7psi by between 1.5 and 2) and was just
wondering, since the VL is not intercooled could this cause problems?
Any other good options besides intercooling? I've seen the prices for
intercoolers, plus the installation costs, and am not too keen. How about
water injection , etc. how much would I be looking to spend?
As the boost will only be upped to about 9psi (PowerChip supposedly
increased power to 180kw from 150kw), and not driven that crazy, will effect
the life of my engine as much (is a newly recondition engined BTW) and also
will the temperature of the Turbo increase by much. I don't have a turbo
timer as it's a hassle to add one onto my alarm, and usually let it cool
down if I have driven it hard.
Thanks,
Raphael
BTW - Anyone know how much VLs weigh?
pete
>
> Hi there, I own a Commodore VL Turbo and have a question or two :
>
> I am thinking of getting a PowerChip package which also includes a
> slight boost upgrade (up from 7psi by between 1.5 and 2) and was just
> wondering, since the VL is not intercooled could this cause problems?
No probs, but use premium to be safe.
> Any other good options besides intercooling? I've seen the prices for
> intercoolers, plus the installation costs, and am not too keen. How about
> water injection , etc. how much would I be looking to spend?
You won't need either with the boost that low. If you're planning on
going higher, then sure. Personally I'd recommend going for
intercooling, you should be able to put a full-width truck core in there
for less than a grand.
Ditch the power chip, go for manual boost and whack on an intercooler:)
Personally, I'm not too keen on water injection on turbo cars. Sure it's
only gonna cost about $5 but then turbo life is dramatically reduced. If
you're going to spray it after the turbo, then that's different.
> As the boost will only be upped to about 9psi (PowerChip supposedly
> increased power to 180kw from 150kw), and not driven that crazy, will effect
> the life of my engine as much (is a newly recondition engined BTW) and also
> will the temperature of the Turbo increase by much. I don't have a turbo
> timer as it's a hassle to add one onto my alarm, and usually let it cool
> down if I have driven it hard.
>
Bah! who needs a turbo timer. As for engine life and turbo temps it all
depends on how you plan to drive it and if you're going to cool it down.
-pete
> BTW - Anyone know how much VLs weigh?
Bit under 1300kg's I think.
Matt Cremer
<7hosu4$b...@atlas.synflux.com.au>...
> Hi there, I own a Commodore VL Turbo and have a question or two :
>
> I am thinking of getting a PowerChip package which also includes a
> slight boost upgrade (up from 7psi by between 1.5 and 2) and was just
> wondering, since the VL is not intercooled could this cause problems?
> intercoolers, plus the installation costs, and am not too keen. How about
> water injection , etc. how much would I be looking to spend?
> increased power to 180kw from 150kw), and not driven that crazy, will
effect
> the life of my engine as much (is a newly recondition engined BTW) and
also
> will the temperature of the Turbo increase by much. I don't have a turbo
> timer as it's a hassle to add one onto my alarm, and usually let it cool
> down if I have driven it hard.
Water injection sounds like the answer; it shouldn't cost you more than a
few hundred to knock something up. I'd do this, by the way, as on a hot
day you must surely be getting close to pinging (not many factory cars
run as high as 9psi without an intercooler). I'd especially do it if I had
a
new engine!
Turbo life shouldn't be a problem; your turbo won't run as hot as a car
with an intercooler and running 10psi, and even then it'd be pretty similar
(exhaust temps don't change much, after all). Your turbo should be able
to handle as much boost as you can force out of it, at the limit; keep
idling it down, and it'll be fine.
-Forg (Elsewhere)
Hanley
turbo on aviation fuel mixed with premium. It might take a while to get the mix
right but you should be able to hit 13-14 psi before the onset of detonation
occurs, this from a standard VL turbo with no modification what so ever. This
observation is made with a Calais turbo, which had done less than 100 k when we
tried various mixtures. It also makes your exhaust tip go blue running this fuel
mixture.
Raphael wrote:
> Hi there, I own a Commodore VL Turbo and have a question or two :
>
> I am thinking of getting a PowerChip package which also includes a
> slight boost upgrade (up from 7psi by between 1.5 and 2) and was just
> wondering, since the VL is not intercooled could this cause problems?
> Any other good options besides intercooling? I've seen the prices for
> intercoolers, plus the installation costs, and am not too keen. How about
> water injection , etc. how much would I be looking to spend?
> As the boost will only be upped to about 9psi (PowerChip supposedly
> increased power to 180kw from 150kw), and not driven that crazy, will effect
> the life of my engine as much (is a newly recondition engined BTW) and also
> will the temperature of the Turbo increase by much. I don't have a turbo
> timer as it's a hassle to add one onto my alarm, and usually let it cool
> down if I have driven it hard.
>
> Thanks,
> Raphael
Mike
> This
>observation is made with a Calais turbo, which had done less than 100 k
>when we
>tried various mixtures. It also makes your exhaust tip go blue running t
>his fuel
>mixture.
Like WOW ! - Thats reason enough ;-)
--
Rgds ~`:o)
Mike
Perth, Western Australia
Products/Personal/Client web area at http://www.wantree.com.au/~erazmus
(Current info - trip to Malaysia to install equipment in jungle power site)
Some say there is no magic but, all things begin with thought then it becomes
academic, then some poor slob works out a practical way to implement all that
theory, this is called Engineering - for most people another form of magic.
Gavin Brown
Raphael <rap...@synflux.com.au> wrote in message
news:7hosu4$b...@atlas.synflux.com.au...
> Hi there, I own a Commodore VL Turbo and have a question or two :
>
> I am thinking of getting a PowerChip package which also includes a
> slight boost upgrade (up from 7psi by between 1.5 and 2) and was just
> wondering, since the VL is not intercooled could this cause problems?
> Any other good options besides intercooling? I've seen the prices for
> intercoolers, plus the installation costs, and am not too keen. How about
> water injection , etc. how much would I be looking to spend?
> As the boost will only be upped to about 9psi (PowerChip supposedly
> increased power to 180kw from 150kw), and not driven that crazy, will
effect
> the life of my engine as much (is a newly recondition engined BTW) and
also
> will the temperature of the Turbo increase by much. I don't have a turbo
> timer as it's a hassle to add one onto my alarm, and usually let it cool
> down if I have driven it hard.
>
> Thanks,
> Raphael
>
>
actuator (so the boost varied on gear changes) and in top gear at full boost
I was pulling 10psi with no sign of detonation running Shell premium
unleaded. A healthy VL should run 9-10 psi no problem @15 degress on
premium unleaded. Yo don't need to change the chip or water inject it. Any
questions Email me on
avl08...@hotmail.com
Gavin
>
>
>
rusty
intake temp. chipping the engine for more boost does the opposite. a good
intercooler will lower thermal load on the engine, produce the increase in power
that u want now, and facilitate futher gains later on.
if u must have more boost, do the intercooler first and use a simple bleed valve
to get a couple of psi. the cooler air will have a larger effect than a similar
non intercooled boost increase.
cheers,
rusty
Raphael
rusty wrote in message <3746E0D5...@rusty.net>...
>intercool the car as it increases power by improving efficiency and
lowering
>intake temp. chipping the engine for more boost does the opposite. a good
>intercooler will lower thermal load on the engine, produce the increase in
power
>that u want now, and facilitate futher gains later on.
>
>if u must have more boost, do the intercooler first and use a simple bleed
valve
>to get a couple of psi. the cooler air will have a larger effect than a
similar
>non intercooled boost increase.
But the price dif. between chipping and upping the boost it quite a bit less
than putting an intercooler in.
I would prefer not to touch the boost (warranty) issue, so maybe I should
fit a cheap-ish intercooler in a spot where a bigger one will be adaptable
when I have money.
I think someone was saying that an intercooler actually makes the turbo run
hotter. <shrug>
Mike
>
>intercool the car as it increases power by improving efficiency and lowe
>ring
>intake temp.
Yes, this part is correct and correct placement of the various pipes is
important and also where possible to maintain gas velocity too...
>chipping the engine for more boost does the opposite.
You are wrong there, changing the chip (depending on supplier) increases
fuel at higher air flows (ostensibly when under boost) and has a higher
advance at lower speeds as the factory advance for cruise (for example)
is not as agressive as it could be. I bought a "PowerChip" and I get a
bit more fuel and higher advance with a bit more retard when under higher
boost...
a goo
>d
>intercooler will lower thermal load on the engine, produce the increase
>in power
>that u want now, and facilitate futher gains later on.
Yes, this part is correct too but bear in mind that a richer mixture
even with intercooler is better since it helps keep the exhaust temperature
down - if you keep the mixture stociometric at ALL loads then you will
fry the exhaust valves and turbine as well ! The biggest problem with
fueling is to keep the flow high enough at high revs so you don't melt
the plugs or burn the exhaust valves.
>if u must have more boost, do the intercooler first and use a simple ble
>ed valve
>to get a couple of psi.
Yep and depends on how much you want to spend and how much trouble you are
prepared to go to. I have a VL and upping the boost to 10psi (from stock 7)
was easy with bleed valve and chip upgrade (as described above). Although I
could go to 12 or even 15psi - I'll wait till I have room for an intercooler..
the cooler air will have a larger effect than a
>similar
>non intercooled boost increase.
Well that depends on how far you go and how much you are preapred to pay ?
--
Rgds ~`:o)
Mike
rusty
Mike wrote:
> In article <3746E0D5...@rusty.net>, ru...@rusty.net says...
> >
> >intercool the car as it increases power by improving efficiency and lowe
> >ring
> >intake temp.
>
> Yes, this part is correct and correct placement of the various pipes is
> important and also where possible to maintain gas velocity too...
>
> >chipping the engine for more boost does the opposite.
>
> You are wrong there, changing the chip (depending on supplier) increases
> fuel at higher air flows (ostensibly when under boost) and has a higher
> advance at lower speeds as the factory advance for cruise (for example)
> is not as agressive as it could be. I bought a "PowerChip" and I get a
> bit more fuel and higher advance with a bit more retard when under higher
> boost...
>
the more u compress air the hotter it gets. this is an immutable fact of life with
which we are stuck. in addition, running boost above factory levels through a
small turbo quickly pushes it out of its best efficiency range, further adding to
the heat load.
u can dump in excess fuel as a countermeasure but that is a separate issue. its
better to begin with a cooler intake temp and maintain optimal air/fuel mix.
>
> a goo
> >d
> >intercooler will lower thermal load on the engine, produce the increase
> >in power
> >that u want now, and facilitate futher gains later on.
>
> Yes, this part is correct too but bear in mind that a richer mixture
> even with intercooler is better since it helps keep the exhaust temperature
> down - if you keep the mixture stociometric at ALL loads then you will
> fry the exhaust valves and turbine as well ! The biggest problem with
> fueling is to keep the flow high enough at high revs so you don't melt
> the plugs or burn the exhaust valves.
>
stochiometric ratios were not mentioned. from what ive seen an ideal turbo a/f mix
is somewhere in the low to mid 14:1 range off boost and as rich as mid 12.*:1 at
high rpm and high load.
>
> >if u must have more boost, do the intercooler first and use a simple ble
> >ed valve
> >to get a couple of psi.
>
> Yep and depends on how much you want to spend and how much trouble you are
> prepared to go to. I have a VL and upping the boost to 10psi (from stock 7)
> was easy with bleed valve and chip upgrade (as described above). Although I
> could go to 12 or even 15psi - I'll wait till I have room for an intercooler..
>
yes u probably could. and your intake temps would be so high as to seriously
hamper performance about and certainly after that point.
>
> the cooler air will have a larger effect than a
> >similar
> >non intercooled boost increase.
>
> Well that depends on how far you go and how much you are preapred to pay ?
>
no it doesnt. a cooler denser intake charge means more power.
cheers,
rusty
Mike
>
>>
>> the cooler air will have a larger effect than a
>> >similar
>> >non intercooled boost increase.
>>
>> Well that depends on how far you go and how much you are preapred to p
>ay ?
>>
>
>no it doesnt. a cooler denser intake charge means more power.
Hey Rusty - you missed the point !
The issue is not 'more power' or 'denser air' etc
The issue is which is best to do first:-
Either up the boost (ostensibly if the engine can take it) or add an
intercooler as well as up the boost (presumably higher then the first option).
Your comments blythely ignore my statement :(
It all depends on how much you are prepared to spend, for example:-
You can up the boost on a VL from 7psi to 10psi by adding a bleed valve
and (if you feel like) you can *also* add a chip upgrade to give a little
more fuel at the top end as well as more agressive advance in normal cruise.
For *me* this is a lot cheaper and more *convenient* then just adding an
intercooler and upping the boost.
Now: IF you have *more* to spend then its bleedin obvious you:-
- Add an intercooler - properly matched to engine needs and turbo output
- Increase the fueling - to minimise chance of burning exhaust valves
- Adjust ignition timing to provide less advance udner high boost
- Change cams to take full advantage of higher intake temp.
The whole point of the initial post was which is easist to do first, for a
VL Turbo you can quite safely add 3psi boost without needing an intercooler
but, if you can afford it then naturally its best to add an intercooler
as well :)
This is *not* to say that all cars with turbo's can just have the boost
increased - *of course* one should be mindful of related issues - thats what
I was trying to impart in my previous post :)
--
Rgds ~`:o)
Mike
Network Power Systems
rusty
Mike wrote:
> In article <37481F5A...@rusty.net>, ru...@rusty.net says...
>
> >
> >>
> >> the cooler air will have a larger effect than a
> >> >similar
> >> >non intercooled boost increase.
> >>
> >> Well that depends on how far you go and how much you are preapred to p
> >ay ?
> >>
> >
> >no it doesnt. a cooler denser intake charge means more power.
>
i didnt miss any point. i know what the general discussion is about.
but look at the preceding lines. a factual statement of cause and effect, followed
by "Well that depends on how far you go and how much you are prepared to pay.."
you can stop right after 'that depends' because it doesnt depend on anything.
> The issue is not 'more power' or 'denser air' etc
> The issue is which is best to do first:-
>
> Either up the boost (ostensibly if the engine can take it) or add an
> intercooler as well as up the boost (presumably higher then the first option).
>
"which is best" is intimately tied in with both 'more power' and 'denser air'.
after all how do u rate the success of any venture, if not by the results?
intercooling is by far the superior solution to the 'chip and she'll be right
mate' approach. chips generally sell anywhere from 500 dollars upwards, which, if
u are prepared to get involved rather than just dropping the car off to a
workshop, is sufficient to efficiently intercool a car. sure, if u have an eye on
a trust or greddy intercooler in some catalogue then your are going to be up for a
bit more.
>
> Your comments blythely ignore my statement :(
>
not at all
>
> It all depends on how much you are prepared to spend, for example:-
>
> You can up the boost on a VL from 7psi to 10psi by adding a bleed valve
> and (if you feel like) you can *also* add a chip upgrade to give a little
> more fuel at the top end as well as more agressive advance in normal cruise.
> For *me* this is a lot cheaper and more *convenient* then just adding an
> intercooler and upping the boost.
>
> Now: IF you have *more* to spend then its bleedin obvious you:-
>
> - Add an intercooler - properly matched to engine needs and turbo output
> - Increase the fueling - to minimise chance of burning exhaust valves
> - Adjust ignition timing to provide less advance udner high boost
> - Change cams to take full advantage of higher intake temp.
>
> The whole point of the initial post was which is easist to do first, for a
> VL Turbo you can quite safely add 3psi boost without needing an intercooler
> but, if you can afford it then naturally its best to add an intercooler
> as well :)
>
agreed
>
> This is *not* to say that all cars with turbo's can just have the boost
> increased - *of course* one should be mindful of related issues - thats what
> I was trying to impart in my previous post :)
>
> --
> Rgds ~`:o)
> Mike
> Network Power Systems
> Perth, Western Australia
> Products/Personal/Client web area at http://www.wantree.com.au/~erazmus
> (Current info - trip to Malaysia to install equipment in jungle power site)
> Some say there is no magic but, all things begin with thought then it becomes
> academic, then some poor slob works out a practical way to implement all that
> theory, this is called Engineering - for most people another form of magic.
cheers,
rusty
boost25
wrote:
> lowering
> >intercooler will lower thermal load on the engine, produce the increase in
> power
> >that u want now, and facilitate futher gains later on.
> >
> valve
> similar
> >non intercooled boost increase.
>
>
> than putting an intercooler in.
> I would prefer not to touch the boost (warranty) issue, so maybe I should
> fit a cheap-ish intercooler in a spot where a bigger one will be adaptable
> when I have money.
>
> I think someone was saying that an intercooler actually makes the turbo run
> hotter. <shrug>
>
>
>
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
Mike
qas...@hotmail.com says...
>> I think someone was saying that an intercooler actually makes the turb
>o run
>> hotter. <shrug>
>>
>>
>>
>DETONATION
Nop - simple physics - with an intercooler you effectively put more fuel
and air into the engine - ostensibly to get more output - thats the whole
point. Therefore the turbo and exhaust *must* also have more energy in it,
therefore the turbo will run hotter - not just because of the intercooler
but as a consequence of putting more air/fuel in assisted by the intercooler.
This must have been a bit too subtle for you - detonation is *not* the
reason ;-)