Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: Webby the Bear on 10 November 2014, 16:26:57
-
Aye up guys,
A while ago I asked about turbos, their workings, considerations when TCing an N/A car etc.
There is a guy in the gallery who has done this to his 2.5 V6.
So. If i wanted to do this (humour me).....
1.) What calculations regarding size of turbo, boost pressure etxc. do i need to do to work this out? i suppose i could carbon copy the guy in the gallery but id rather understand it first.
2.) MarksDTM mentioned the biggest challenge would be cooling. Is that cooling of the turbo or the charged air going in to the inlets?
3.) What about breather system? presumably that cant live in the now pressurised inlet manifold?
4.) would i also simply drill a hole in the sump for my oil feed / return to the turbo?
5.) would i have to use exhaust gases from both manifolds or could i simply run a standard manifold on pass. side and my turbo manifold from drivers side?
6.) is there enough room for intercooler gubbins at the front? i presume so as its been done but would i have to make ''adaptions''
7.) finally is this something i could achive on my own?
-
1.) What calculations regarding size of turbo, boost pressure etxc. do i need to do to work this out? i suppose i could carbon copy the guy in the gallery but id rather understand it first.
You'd get the compressor maps for various turbos and work out which one will be working efficiently at the boost pressure you want.. actually it's probably a lot more complicated than that when you take into account all the different things you can tweak on a turbo - compressor size, turbine size, blade cutback. But you want one that's working efficiently at your target pressure, you can work out turbine size by looking at something of similar capacity (so if you have one turbo per bank, 1.5L cars).
2.) MarksDTM mentioned the biggest challenge would be cooling. Is that cooling of the turbo or the charged air going in to the inlets?
Cooling of the coolant, the oil, the intake charge - all need thinking about. Cooling the turbo itself will pretty much take care of itself after that ;)
3.) What about breather system? presumably that cant live in the now pressurised inlet manifold?
Correct, and/or it needs check valves adding in appropriate places.
4.) would i also simply drill a hole in the sump for my oil feed / return to the turbo?
For the return, yes. Just a hole (and spigot) in the sump above the oil level. For the feed you need to tap into a pressurised oil feed somewhere; oil pressure sensor feed is a popular choice as long as it's post-filter.
5.) would i have to use exhaust gases from both manifolds or could i simply run a standard manifold on pass. side and my turbo manifold from drivers side?
Eh, the latter is a bodge (IMHO) and will lead to a very unbalanced engine.. you'd really want to either merge the manifolds and use one turbo or have one per bank. Both can be done, subject to packaging (which is tight on the Omega!)
6.) is there enough room for intercooler gubbins at the front? i presume so as its been done but would i have to make ''adaptions''
Dump the aircon and you gain some space.. or the windscreen washer tank and gain a ton of space (relocate it to a smaller tank)
7.) finally is this something i could achive on my own?
No disrespect but right now, probably not. Given time, yes, definitely. You'll need to do a lot of reading on turbocharging, learn to weld pretty decently etc etc.
Oh and to simplify things you might be better off just looking at crank driven centrifugal superchargers (Rotrex) - they're half a turbo, essentially, with the turbine side replaced by a belt drive. Much easier to package.
-
That's easy... remove the engine and fit one from a turbo charged car ::)
Just like the bloke in the gallery...
Granted, not as helpful as Aarons post :-[
-
Thanks for the detailed input Aaron.
Certainly lots to think about.
i noticed in gen help you mentioned a jap engine could take up to 700bhp before having to upgrade / change bearings, rods etc.
any idea what a 2.5 could hack without having to alter any bottom end gubbins?
-
2.) MarksDTM mentioned the biggest challenge would be cooling. Is that cooling of the turbo or the charged air going in to the inlets?
Cooling of the coolant, the oil, the intake charge - all need thinking about. Cooling the turbo itself will pretty much take care of itself after that ;)
I think there's an additional issue with the V6 that the rear cylinders get poor coolant flow so, where they've been tuned to extremes in the past, an additional coolant pipe has been plumbed in where the oil cooler sits, the oil cooler moved external and a blanking plate made up to cover the hole where it previously sat. Not sure on any further details but they are around somewhere.
I reckon the radiator is pretty generously sized, so that's probably all you'll need to do, in addition to a new oil cooler somewhere and an intercooler, of course.
-
Thanks for the detailed input Aaron.
Certainly lots to think about.
i noticed in gen help you mentioned a jap engine could take up to 700bhp before having to upgrade / change bearings, rods etc.
any idea what a 2.5 could hack without having to alter any bottom end gubbins?
Not a clue on that one, I'm afraid.. I know the rumour mill here usually says they're pretty delicate, later 3.2 being sturdier with a forged crank.
Even so you're unlikely to see 3-4x power out of a stock bottom end on anything produced outside of Japan in the 1990s :)
-
any idea what a 2.5 could hack without having to alter any bottom end gubbins?
Folklore is that even the very mildly boosted engines made for the PSNI way back used to lunch their bottom ends. This may not be due fundamentally to the strength of the engine but lack of lubrication or oil cooling, though, but it's an idea of the sort of issues you might hit when even with a conversion that presumably had a fair budget ploughed into it.
-
How closely related is the C20LET to the X/Z20/22 unit?
A cheap, early facelift 2.0 manual would be a good project base, rather than messing with Eeyore... that way, if it goes horribly wrong then you still have your nice car :y
Easiest way to get a bit more oomph into your nice car is to drop a 3.0 lump in :y
-
I'd start with a 3.2, based on its low CR and strong crank
-
On the 3.2 subject.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.
-
The current ABS chairman had a courtney turbod mig estate. It developed a knock which turned out to be the big end shells had turned. Omegatoy bought it from him. Dont know what happened to it after that
-
How closely related is the C20LET to the X/Z20/22 unit?
A cheap, early facelift 2.0 manual would be a good project base, rather than messing with Eeyore... that way, if it goes horribly wrong then you still have your nice car :y
Easiest way to get a bit more oomph into your nice car is to drop a 3.0 lump in :y
I should have prefaced by saying I wouldn't touch Eeyore! I'd buy another one; funds permitting of course. That way I don't wreck my daily driver and the best Omega ever ::) ;D and basically do what gixers doing with his V8.
As for dropping the 3.0l in.... already on it ;)
Thanks for all your input dudes.
Knowing the very basics of turbos..... would a small turbo not compliment the omega.... turbo for initial acceleration that is lacking cos of the weight of the beasts?
So I suppose the huge issue with this would be the making of the manifolds?
-
How closely related is the C20LET to the X/Z20/22 unit?
A cheap, early facelift 2.0 manual would be a good project base, rather than messing with Eeyore... that way, if it goes horribly wrong then you still have your nice car :y
Easiest way to get a bit more oomph into your nice car is to drop a 3.0 lump in :y
I should have prefaced by saying I wouldn't touch Eeyore! I'd buy another one; funds permitting of course. That way I don't wreck my daily driver and the best Omega ever ::) ;D and basically do what gixers doing with his V8.
As for dropping the 3.0l in.... already on it ;)
Thanks for all your input dudes.
Knowing the very basics of turbos..... would a small turbo not compliment the omega.... turbo for initial acceleration that is lacking cos of the weight of the beasts?
So I suppose the huge issue with this would be the making of the manifolds?
I think the biggest issue is the cost against the power gained, much easier and cheaper just to fit a bigger donkey or if turbo is a must fit an engine and management system from a turboed car.
-
That's another thing...... ECU! When I saw a conversion on youtube there was a company called Haltech (Aus) who basically provided all new wiring, ecu etc.
ipresume youd have to rip all wiring out and do pretty much the same with bespoke ecu, wiring etc?
-
The current ABS chairman had a courtney turbod mig estate. It developed a knock which turned out to be the big end shells had turned. Omegatoy bought it from him. Dont know what happened to it after that
I'd seen that one, and another Courtney turbo'd estate. Both had deep knocks. Coincidence? Doubtful ;)
-
are these deep knocks after a while or like immediately? :o all that work and money and then it knocks :'(
was it a big turbo?
-
are these deep knocks after a while or like immediately? :o all that work and money and then it knocks :'(
was it a big turbo?
These were converted presumably from new. So both had covered some miles. Can't remember the specifics, but don't recall them suffering much lag, implying small turbos.
-
are these deep knocks after a while or like immediately? :o all that work and money and then it knocks :'(
was it a big turbo?
These were converted presumably from new. So both had covered some miles. Can't remember the specifics, but don't recall them suffering much lag, implying small turbos.
Interesting. So pretty much we can say that these engines are no good for turbo charging!
-
In my opinion,get a nissan skyline engine,gearbox,loom ecu etc,fit that instead of turboing the mig.
-
Here do...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/04-VAUXHALL-SIGNUM-VECTRA-Z20NET-NOT-Z20LET-2-0-TURBO-COMPLETE-ENGINE-CAN-HEAR-/281387186962?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item4183fbbb12 :y
-
How closely related is the C20LET to the X/Z20/22 unit?
A cheap, early facelift 2.0 manual would be a good project base, rather than messing with Eeyore... that way, if it goes horribly wrong then you still have your nice car :y
Easiest way to get a bit more oomph into your nice car is to drop a 3.0 lump in :y
I should have prefaced by saying I wouldn't touch Eeyore! I'd buy another one; funds permitting of course. That way I don't wreck my daily driver and the best Omega ever ::) ;D and basically do what gixers doing with his V8.
As for dropping the 3.0l in.... already on it ;)
Thanks for all your input dudes.
Knowing the very basics of turbos..... would a small turbo not compliment the omega.... turbo for initial acceleration that is lacking cos of the weight of the beasts?
So I suppose the huge issue with this would be the making of the manifolds?
Webby, omega can be converted to turbo.. but many parts would need to be re-located, some parts machined , welded , new parts added etc etc.. but for a car that size and weight , you will need 300-350 hp to say its fast.. and even in that condition, with 2 rear tyres spinning you will loose most of your power .. and I doubt ar35 can handle this much power for a reasonable time.. you will need other autoboxes.. and the cost will multiply within short period.. :-\
-
In my opinion,get a nissan skyline engine,gearbox,loom ecu etc,fit that instead of turboing the mig.
Damn , beat me to it :) :)
-
Cem, I think youre right re the boxes. assuming it is an auto, that chap in the gallery shredded around 6 boxes in short succession :'(
-
buy this and you are done.. trust me it would be cheaper .. only service costs and fuel££££ ;D
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-645-4-4-auto-2005MY-Ci-/221583407413?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3397667935
-
buy this and you are done.. trust me it would be cheaper .. only service costs and fuel££££ ;D
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-645-4-4-auto-2005MY-Ci-/221583407413?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3397667935
Obviously, as soon as you sit in it, you have to have a lobotomy. Hopefully only temporarily until you get out...
-
From old posts it's fairly clear the bottom end can't cope too well with forced induction. It's the reason why one of the v8 conversions came into existence, as the original 2.6 (?) was fitted with a supercharger and too much boost. It destroyed the bottom end, prompting a... More "sensible" route to more power.
I'm wondering if I'll ever really get started on the problems with the mv8, given time constraints. :(
-
From old posts it's fairly clear the bottom end can't cope too well with forced induction. It's the reason why one of the v8 conversions came into existence, as the original 2.6 (?) was fitted with a supercharger and too much boost. It destroyed the bottom end, prompting a... More "sensible" route to more power.
I'm wondering if I'll ever really get started on the problems with the mv8, given time constraints. :(
how much boost ?
-
buy this and you are done.. trust me it would be cheaper .. only service costs and fuel££££ ;D
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-645-4-4-auto-2005MY-Ci-/221583407413?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3397667935 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-645-4-4-auto-2005MY-Ci-/221583407413?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3397667935)
Obviously, as soon as you sit in it, you have to have a lobotomy. Hopefully only temporarily until you get out...
I must admit when you sit in a "relatively" fast car , most people (including me) have some transformation ;D
clit is now 6 secs 0-100 ,so I'm still in the phase of learning how to drive slow ;D
-
From old posts it's fairly clear the bottom end can't cope too well with forced induction. It's the reason why one of the v8 conversions came into existence, as the original 2.6 (?) was fitted with a supercharger and too much boost. It destroyed the bottom end, prompting a... More "sensible" route to more power.
I'm wondering if I'll ever really get started on the problems with the mv8, given time constraints. :(
how much boost ?
Don't know. A nats cock more than atmospheric iirc. Thoretical max of 250hp rings a bell. Whatever that equates to. So not really worth bothering with. There's been several threads since it's all on here somewhere.
Basickly, don't force feed the v6, it WILL shit itself! It just will.
Iirc it was accepted naturally aspirated was the way to go, with tube manifolds instead of cast collectors on the oe ones, and accept the engine will flat at low rpm.
...from memory.
But you know what my memory is like. :(
-
From old posts it's fairly clear the bottom end can't cope too well with forced induction. It's the reason why one of the v8 conversions came into existence, as the original 2.6 (?) was fitted with a supercharger and too much boost. It destroyed the bottom end, prompting a... More "sensible" route to more power.
I'm wondering if I'll ever really get started on the problems with the mv8, given time constraints. :(
how much boost ?
Don't know. A nats cock more than atmospheric iirc. Thoretical max of 250hp rings a bell. Whatever that equates to. So not really worth bothering with. There's been several threads since it's all on here somewhere.
Basickly, don't force feed the v6, it WILL shit itself! It just will.
Iirc it was accepted naturally aspirated was the way to go, with tube manifolds instead of cast collectors on the oe ones, and accept the engine will flat at low rpm.
...from memory.
But you know what my memory is like. :(
if we assume a theoritical value of 250 hp for a 2.6, it must be around 6 psi.. not too much boost.. but cant predict the original state of engine before turbo :-\
-
Theoretical value for any v6. As the bottom end is quite similar I believe?
If so that's only 40hp over stock.
-
there are many parameters that should be taken into account in a turbo conversion..
oil cooler, oil pump, intercooler size, turbo size , exhaust manifold size and shape .. I bet 2.6 was tested with a stock ecu which will end in disaster before bottom end gave up..
-
I'm sure those interested can search and reveal all. But I'm sure it was supercharged as said, not turboed. If that makes much odds I don't know, or care really tbh.
As the lesson learned from the numerous threads was, don't force feed. Supercharge OR turbo. The bottom end can'nay take it captain.
-
But for the op, my opinion will always lead to a n other engine. He knows this from the Ls 1/Mv8 project. So it's a bit pointless me posting on the subject in all honesty. :)
I like the straight 6 Toyota supra idea too though. Obviously both will take all the boost from which aver fan you choose to fit. :y
-
So to ask my question again on page one of the thread.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.?
-
Not being funny, but my Mickey Mouse 4pot with a blower gives 250HP as standard. Stage 1 (purely a software update) gives 265-270HP.
Replace the downpipe with a 3" and Stage 2 will see near to 300HP.
Just a shame it's Wrong Wheel Drive.
Webby - Stop trying to get more performance from your 2.5. As I've said many times............. If you want a faster Omega, buy a faster Omega. The 2.5 is pretty poor mid-range compared to the 3.0 and the 3.0 is nothing compared to the 3.2. Torque from the 3.2 is awesome.
-
So to ask my question again on page one of the thread.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.?
In short, no. The engine fitted is pretty much at its tolerance.
-
So to ask my question again on page one of the thread.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.?
In short, no. The engine fitted is pretty much at its tolerance.
I don't disbelieve you as this subject crops up most years on the forum but all the unknowns with turbo/supercharging versus gaining extra stroke from the crank and bore from new pistons and liners (if that is indeed possible) would seem to me to be far more sensible use of money. Has anyone actually investigated it?
-
So to ask my question again on page one of the thread.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.?
800 or more cc is a serious demand Varche.. you need to find a suitable crank or build it custom and even in that case 3.2 stroke is pretty long which you will struggle with the same block.. if you bore 3.2 you will decrease the engines resistance to heat.. I guess may be 3.4 or 3.5 litre volume can be gained but with risky sacrifice and on a na engine this gain is small.. but one thing you can do is using high compression pistons but still gains will be negligible compared to forced induction
and you need to pay for custom forged high compression pistons , rods which wont be cheap also
-
So to ask my question again on page one of the thread.
Is there any way of changing the Bore and or Stroke to gain say 800 or more cc? That would seem to be a more cost effective solution than turbo/supercharge or V8 as it would all fit and "look" standard.?
In short, no. The engine fitted is pretty much at its tolerance.
I don't disbelieve you as this subject crops up most years on the forum but all the unknowns with turbo/supercharging versus gaining extra stroke from the crank and bore from new pistons and liners (if that is indeed possible) would seem to me to be far more sensible use of money. Has anyone actually investigated it?
I've not investigated it, but lets look at facts. The Lotus Carlton used forced induction. There are a few 4.0 Senator engines running, but nothing like the performance of the LC.
Adding circa 25% extra displacement would be quite impossible. :-\
-
on a naturally aspirated 3.2 the only method ( or combination of methods) is to use variable cam timing and independant throttle per cylinder setup to gain real performance like the bmw did on m3.. but I think thats beyond the capability and budget of an avg omega owner.. :-\
-
The X30XE was equipped with a low pressure turbo under the bonnet of the Saab 9000. I think it was designated the engine code B308.
-
From Wikipedia:
For 1997, Saab introduced a turbocharged version called the B308 for their 9-5 model. The engine produced 200 hp (149 kW) at 5000 rpm and 229 lb·ft (310 N·m) of torque at 2500-4000 rpm. The engine was unique in that it used asymmetrical turbocharging; with the turbocharger driven by the exhaust gases from only one bank of cylinders. A charge pressure of 3.6PSI (.25 Bar) was produced using a Garrett GT15 turbo. The engine was equipped with a special version of Saab Direct Ignition and utilized the Trionic T7 engine management system.
-
Small gains (if any?!) for the efforts involved in bolting the bits on to an Omega. Go for an engine swap.
-
From Wikipedia:
For 1997, Saab introduced a turbocharged version called the B308 for their 9-5 model. The engine produced 200 hp (149 kW) at 5000 rpm and 229 lb·ft (310 N·m) of torque at 2500-4000 rpm. The engine was unique in that it used asymmetrical turbocharging; with the turbocharger driven by the exhaust gases from only one bank of cylinders. A charge pressure of 3.6PSI (.25 Bar) was produced using a Garrett GT15 turbo. The engine was equipped with a special version of Saab Direct Ignition and utilized the Trionic T7 engine management system.
Thats less bhp than a stock 3.0 isn't it ???
-
Thats less bhp than a stock 3.0 isn't it ???
Yep, just shifted it down in revs a little and beefed up the midrange torque. 0.25 BAR isn't going to set the world alight.
-
So then guys, turob charging a NA vx V6 is a no go!!!!!
If i considered fitting A N Other turbo charged lump in to the miggy i presume i'd only have to worry about the ECU / wiring and engine mounting, intercooler mounting etc etc? Any other considerations when fitting a turbo lump?
-
So then guys, turob charging a NA vx V6 is a no go!!!!!
If i considered fitting A N Other turbo charged lump in to the miggy i presume i'd only have to worry about the ECU / wiring and engine mounting, intercooler mounting etc etc? Any other considerations when fitting a turbo lump?
Depends on the engine you choose tbh. You might have bulkhead clearance issues with oe equipment in the way, transmission coupling, you'll need manifolds, boost pipework, loads of stuff. Oh, and a willingness to shell out for all of the above. What engine did you have in mind?
You could fit C20LET pistons to an X30XE as a starting point if you are determined to turbo the V6. It has been done before...
-
So then guys, turob charging a NA vx V6 is a no go!!!!!
If i considered fitting A N Other turbo charged lump in to the miggy i presume i'd only have to worry about the ECU / wiring and engine mounting, intercooler mounting etc etc? Any other considerations when fitting a turbo lump?
Webby you can turbo the V6 but the cost will be fairly high, work very time consuming and I really doubt you can take your money back when you sell it..
on the other hand you can buy any turbo or powerful car for a "logical" price and at least you can take some of your money back when you sell it..
if you can install a ready turbo lump within 1-2 grand of total cost this may be considered logical.. but if you start to buy pieces one by one, this would would end up really expensive :-\
so decision is yours :y
-
If you're doing an engine swap "properly" then you probably want to:
Rip out the engine, engine loom etc
Swap out the fuel pump for an uprated item; Walbro 255lph is a popular choice although depending on target power you might have to go bigger
Fabricate your engine mounts, fabricate adapter plate to your desired gearbox and/or swap gearbox and fabricate the mounts
Drop the engine in
Drop in a new ECU with wiring loom, figure out how to 'piggyback' the relevant signals into/out of the original ECU to drive the clocks etc
Enjoy
Sounds so simple, doesn't it ;)
Once upon a time it was a lot easier - no electronic clocks to worry about, no ABS, no TC etc.. All of these things are driven from or feed signals to the ECU now, however, and the hard part is making sure you can make your aftermarket ECU talk the right way to all the ancillaries, assuming you want to keep them.
The actual swap & fab work is still the same as it was 20 years ago, so that's pretty well understood :y
-
and a important note check the prices and installation of custom ecu's like megasquirt, vipec, aem etc..
programming them requires dyno sessions which are also costly :(
-
Any engine swap will present you with common challenges, but the only way to know what you're up against is to decide on the engine that you want to fit and work out what the obstacles associated with that particular powerplant are going to be.
-
Thanks guys.
i'll 'ave a look for some turbo charged units and come back on here with some ideas.
aaron, thanks for that detailed input. fabricationg engine mounts shouldnt be an issue as i imagine i can simply buy the ones made for that engine and find a way to weld them on to the miggy chassis rail (or wherever they live)
as for gearbox mounts... do you mean the mounts that actually support the turbo?
-
programming them requires dyno sessions which are also costly :(
Not necessarily. ;) I tuned my Megasquirt on the road with a wideband lambda sensor.
The advantage of this approach is that you learn an awful lot about what makes an engine work.
-
as for gearbox mounts... do you mean the mounts that actually support the turbo?
No I mean the mounts that hold the gearbox to the car ;) There's one at the tail end of the gearbox .. unless you're using the same gearbox or you're really, really lucky, a replacement engine & box combination might not line up.
The only things supporting the turbo are (usually) the exhaust manifolds ;) Although if you're using tubular manifolds some kind of bracing is useful otherwise the manifolds usually meet an early demise due to cracks at the welds (been there, done that, got that t-shirt!)
Oh and as Kev says, I mapped the MR2 on the road with a wideband and Mk1 Ear.. there was room for improvement on a dyno with a skilled mapper, but it wasn't bad considering it was my first time (fnarr fnarr!) :)
-
Most turbocharged vauxhall engines should bolt to the Omega manual box, as the four pot turbos are physically variations of the 2.0/2.2 Omega lump :y
Don't even consider an auto as even the AR35 will probably shit a brick in fairly short order...
-
Fit a Lotus Carlton Engine and Box, 377BHP, 180mph or more and six speed box. The Omega was based on the same floor pan as the Carlton
Andy
-
Has to be auto i'm afraid Al :y
-
am i right in thinking there are some bmw boxes that suffice?
-
programming them requires dyno sessions which are also costly :(
Not necessarily. ;) I tuned my Megasquirt on the road with a wideband lambda sensor.
The advantage of this approach is that you learn an awful lot about what makes an engine work.
first, you have Kevin Wood handy ;D
second, most tuners prefer initial session on the dyno for the car to run because tuners prefer biggest injectors possible which requires creating a map from scratch :( after the car reaches "normal" working state , fine tuning done on the road
-
Has to be auto i'm afraid Al :y
That does make any engine transplants (and tuning work beyond chipping and changing cams) quite difficult, unfortunately.
Whereas manual gearboxes can be pushed quite far beyond their original spec, automatic gearboxes are very much designed for the application. Their clutches need to cope with the torque output of the engine in question but still engage progressively to give a smooth shift, so they aren't normally engineered to cope with much more torque output than the original engine develops, as there is a balance to be struck. Witness the well documented problems with tuning automatic TD Omegas where the AR25 box is retained instead of replaced with an AR35.
Add to that the complication that most modern autoboxes are electro-hydraulic meaning they need an ECU to control them, and that ECU needs to be tightly integrated with the engine ECU.
You'll be fine going to 3.0 cams and chipping it, but any further than that, you really need to transplant a more powerful engine, automatic gearbox and control electronics in one go, IMHO. The MV8 project, in fact, if it ever materialises. ;)
-
Unless you're happy with a properly old fashioned all mechanical auto box, of course, like a two speed Powerglide ;)
On a serious note, there are aftermarket transmission controllers available for the 4L80/85: http://www.transmissioncenter.org/compushift_4l60e_4l80e.htm
They're good for 440lb/ft & 460lb/ft respectively.
-
programming them requires dyno sessions which are also costly :(
Not necessarily. ;) I tuned my Megasquirt on the road with a wideband lambda sensor.
The advantage of this approach is that you learn an awful lot about what makes an engine work.
first, you have Kevin Wood handy ;D
second, most tuners prefer initial session on the dyno for the car to run because tuners prefer biggest injectors possible which requires creating a map from scratch :( after the car reaches "normal" working state , fine tuning done on the road
and a problem with that approach is that those cars will never be economical for daily use as tuners prefer low afr ratios to prevent detonation and high flow injectors squirt more even if you cut the duration times :-\
-
first, you have Kevin Wood handy ;D
Yes, but, despite that, it worked. :y
second, most tuners prefer initial session on the dyno for the car to run because tuners prefer biggest injectors possible which requires creating a map from scratch :( after the car reach "normal" working state , fine tuning done on the road
True. Most tuners would prefer you to pay by the hour to use their rolling road. ;)
I started out with a rough ignition map which was what I was using with the DCOEs that were previously on the engine. I had no fuel map whatsoever, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I was the first to run a megasquirt on a Zetec engine. I also used Jenvey individual throttle bodies running Volvo 940 Turbo injectors, so it was a bit of an odd combination anyway.
My approach was to calculate the fuelling requirement for the engine power I expected, turn that into an approximate injector duration and calibrate the whole system using that as a baseline for 100% VE. I'd observed that around 30% VE at idle is typical, so I shot at that and had it idling OK with a bit of tweeking. I then increased the revs off load and got it able to rev unloaded to the red line cleanly. I then "interpolated" the valves in the map from unloaded up to 100% VE and tweaked the acceleration enrichment until it'd rev cleanly. That's about all I could do without hitting the road.
Fortunately, I had a short downhill stretch of road before I could turn onto a main road and drive for 10 miles or more. I gave the closed-loop fuelling a lot of authority to correct the fuelling (by up to 50% IIRC) and set off. It drove like a dog, of course, but if you held constant speed and load for long enough for the closed loop fuelling to adjust you could watch the correction and decide how far you needed to adjust the map to correct it. A few manual corrections of the map and it was perfectly driveable. After about 30 miles it was almost perfect - better than the carbs I was running before, at any rate. It had a little more tweaking in the following months, but more than 10 years later it's still running perfectly!
Maybe I could get another few percent out of it on a rolling road, but I know that the tune probably varies enough with temperature and altitude / atmospheric pressure at the moment that that would probably be futile. Maybe one day I'll tune the correction for these well enough that I'll have a go at fine-tuning the map...
What I would say is that tuning the fuelling on the road is easy. You can tell through the "seat of the pants dyno" when you've hit the sweet spot and readings from a wideband lambda sensor can give you confirmation of that. Tuning ignition timing is much less easy, and I reckon a dyno would help greatly in getting that completely optimised.
-
Unless you're happy with a properly old fashioned all mechanical auto box, of course, like a two speed Powerglide ;)
On a serious note, there are aftermarket transmission controllers available for the 4L80/85: http://www.transmissioncenter.org/compushift_4l60e_4l80e.htm
They're good for 440lb/ft & 460lb/ft respectively.
True. Actually, the Megasquirt guys were working on a transmission controller about the time I decided I needed to get a life outside that project. ::)
It would actually be very nice to be able to tweak the Omega's autobox. I reckon you could make it a much more involving drive.
-
Has to be auto i'm afraid Al :y
Then you won't have a car to drive unless you go for a much stronger box... Which makes it a wasted exercise. :'(
-
Seems like there's sooooo much to take in to account. its actually a mine field.... and thats even if the bottom end of the v6's could hack it.
thing is it looks pretty darn straight forward on things like ''mighty car mods''. the hard bit being the wiring of the ecu and fabricating manifolds.
they shoved a turbo on an mx5. there was no mention of ''we've calculated we can do this'' so wonder if that'll start knocking quite quickly :-\
-
The MX5 is known to have a pretty bulletproof bottom end and takes very well indeed to turbo or supercharging - there's plenty of tried & tested aftermarket kits for that already ;)
-
Thing is Webby, a 1.8 MX5 has a power to weight ratio of about 140bhp per tonne, and a manual box. To achieve this in an Omega you need at least 270 bhp. And if your saying that it must be auto, then you're looking at 300+ bhp to overcome transmission losses. And if you're going to look for that sort of power, then you're needing a much stronger box, and ideally a manual...
-
yeah fair enough guys.
i just think i havent thought through the implications... of which there seems A LOT!!!!
-
There's an old saying..
Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?
;)
-
;D
That seems very true!!!!!!
i suppose it doesnt have to be a miggy (especially with all the talk of it not coping with FI).
I had an idea of getting something like a spares or repairs VW Passat TDI and fixing it followed by doing some turbo mods i.e. upgrading turbo just so i can get used to the process and pitfalls.
all things that go ''choo choo'' lol
-
If you're going to learn how turbos work for the sake of learning, I'd learn on a petrol engine..
The requirements on a diesel engine are very different due to the lack of throttle plate (well, ok.. some have them but let's not complicate things just yet), vastly different compression ratio etc. While it is true it's very easy to get more power out of a TDi generally, you're much better served learning on a regular petrol engine.
My suggestion would be pick up an MX5 for ~£1000-1500, do the welding it'll need (practice with your new toy!) and then look for a cheap secondhand turbo kit for it, put that on, see how it all works and plumbs together when you're not trying to learn everything from scratch and you'll also end up with a very, very quick road legal gokart to have fun in :y
-
Has to be auto i'm afraid Al :y
Quite right Webby. Quite right.
Of course, there is one engine with an auto strong enough to take a lot of extra power. Isn't there, gentlemen. ....ahem. Cough cough. ::) :)
Not cheap though, looking at 4k with box and related engine management gubbins. Will probably have to be imported from the States unless your lucky.
-
Yes and if Webby goes that route he'll also be faced with all the steering mods and chassis mods that you've been deliberating over for months ;)
Let's start simple for Webby's first learning project, eh? :y
-
Yes and if Webby goes that route he'll also be faced with all the steering mods and chassis mods that you've been deliberating over for months ;)
Let's start simple for Webby's first learning project, eh? :y
Yes, but it could be made to work, with a steering box. The manifolds will have to be modified anyway, and they can be swapped to the opposite sides so they exit forwards, allowing turbo fitting where there is a bit more space.
...and it's almost bloody years by now I'm sure ;D although time related, rather than being stuck.
-
Although seriously, it does have to be an auto for young bear.
-
Seems like there's sooooo much to take in to account. its actually a mine field.... and thats even if the bottom end of the v6's could hack it.
thing is it looks pretty darn straight forward on things like ''mighty car mods''. the hard bit being the wiring of the ecu and fabricating manifolds.
they shoved a turbo on an mx5. there was no mention of ''we've calculated we can do this'' so wonder if that'll start knocking quite quickly :-\
lets say a field full of money pits that drain you when you fall into ;D
I can say , you will reach the end either this way or that way, but one thing I'm sure, your bank account will be depleted long before the end :-\
-
Yes and if Webby goes that route he'll also be faced with all the steering mods and chassis mods that you've been deliberating over for months ;)
Let's start simple for Webby's first learning project, eh? :y
:) :) :) :) :) :) :)
-
first, you have Kevin Wood handy ;D
Yes, but, despite that, it worked. :y
second, most tuners prefer initial session on the dyno for the car to run because tuners prefer biggest injectors possible which requires creating a map from scratch :( after the car reach "normal" working state , fine tuning done on the road
True. Most tuners would prefer you to pay by the hour to use their rolling road. ;)
I started out with a rough ignition map which was what I was using with the DCOEs that were previously on the engine. I had no fuel map whatsoever, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I was the first to run a megasquirt on a Zetec engine. I also used Jenvey individual throttle bodies running Volvo 940 Turbo injectors, so it was a bit of an odd combination anyway.
My approach was to calculate the fuelling requirement for the engine power I expected, turn that into an approximate injector duration and calibrate the whole system using that as a baseline for 100% VE. I'd observed that around 30% VE at idle is typical, so I shot at that and had it idling OK with a bit of tweeking. I then increased the revs off load and got it able to rev unloaded to the red line cleanly. I then "interpolated" the valves in the map from unloaded up to 100% VE and tweaked the acceleration enrichment until it'd rev cleanly. That's about all I could do without hitting the road.
Fortunately, I had a short downhill stretch of road before I could turn onto a main road and drive for 10 miles or more. I gave the closed-loop fuelling a lot of authority to correct the fuelling (by up to 50% IIRC) and set off. It drove like a dog, of course, but if you held constant speed and load for long enough for the closed loop fuelling to adjust you could watch the correction and decide how far you needed to adjust the map to correct it. A few manual corrections of the map and it was perfectly driveable. After about 30 miles it was almost perfect - better than the carbs I was running before, at any rate. It had a little more tweaking in the following months, but more than 10 years later it's still running perfectly!
Maybe I could get another few percent out of it on a rolling road, but I know that the tune probably varies enough with temperature and altitude / atmospheric pressure at the moment that that would probably be futile. Maybe one day I'll tune the correction for these well enough that I'll have a go at fine-tuning the map...
What I would say is that tuning the fuelling on the road is easy. You can tell through the "seat of the pants dyno" when you've hit the sweet spot and readings from a wideband lambda sensor can give you confirmation of that. Tuning ignition timing is much less easy, and I reckon a dyno would help greatly in getting that completely optimised.
good one Kevin.. :y
what were you using map sensor or maf ?
-
good one Kevin.. :y
what were you using map sensor or maf ?
I'm using speed-density, so MAP sensor for the primary load input. As I'm using individual throttles, a MAF wasn't going to be easy without a big airbox. Most people use Alpha-N in such a scenario (TPS as primary load input), but I decided to be different. ;)
Actually, SD works quite nicely, because it gives you better resolution on the fuelling at light throttle openings, which is important when you have 4 big throttles. A little throttle angle gives a big change in airflow!
-
Although seriously, it does have to be an auto for young bear.
:) :) :) :) :)
-
Although seriously, it does have to be an auto for young bear.
:) :) :) :) :)
...unless anyone would care to volunteer to change gear for me everytime i wanted to go for a drive? :)
-
Although seriously, it does have to be an auto for young bear.
:) :) :) :) :)
...unless anyone would care to volunteer to change gear for me everytime i wanted to go for a drive? :)
That could make for some comedy moments. :D