Re: mail Digest for 19 Dec 2004 in hour 0:00

[farna@xxxxxxx]

I forget the name of the company, but do a Google search for "remote turbo" and it should pop up. 

Draw through really isn't a good idea for low boost (15 psi or less) systems. For one thing the fuel mixture can erode turbine blades, but the main problem is in the even of a backfire. BOOM goes the turbo! Most carbs can take 5-10 psi with little of no leakage, aftermarket Holleys can take 20 psi and have been run at 25 psi WITHOUT a pressurized box, but 25 psi is pushing it. Blow through is the SAFEST way to go, and just turns out to be the easiest. 

When I build a 1963 American roadster I think I'm going to put a single turbo on built AMC L-head six. Plan on using a GM 2.5L 1V TBI fuel injection with the turbo bolted straight to the top of it. The exhaust will turn straight into the turbo from the front (the "exhaust manifold" on the L-head six is just a piece of exhaust pipe clamped to the block, should be easy). I want to run around 10 psi, keep compression down around 7.5:1. Will run a 1955 or so 184 crank and rods to reduce stroke, and order custom forged pistons unless I can find some hypereutectic (sp?) pistons that will work. Those old blocks can be bored up to 0.125", so I have a decent range to work with (3.155" to 3.250" -- assuming it will need at least a 0.030" overbore). I doubt I can find anything I can use with the correct pin height though. Might be able to use the longer 195.6 rods and a lower pin height piston though, will have to mock that up. Of course I could drill the side of the block along the in!
 take "trench" and use a direct injection system...
The remote turbo sounds good now though... I'd mount it in the trunk or back seat area, and since  I'm not looking for lots of boost it should work great...

Okay, the dreaming is getting out of hand now!! ;>

--
Frank Swygert
Publisher, "American Independent 
Magazine" (AIM)
For all AMC enthusiasts
http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
(free download available!)
			

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
F
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:33:10 -0800 (PST)
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: remote turbo kit
> To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> I'm a bit skeptical on the no-lag bit, but I've been wrong only
> a few million times so far (this year). And a turbo sure beats
> no turbo!
> 
> I'm not sure if I'll *ever* do it (you know how project ideas
> go) but my plan was to size things such that max. boost is
> small enough to not require wastegates and all that crap,

> and do draw-through. The remote turbo would probably do all that.