go to a medical supply store and buy a tank of O2. Whenever it was that you'd fire your stored compressed air, fire the O2 tank instead. Sounds like fun. Don't know if it'll work or not, but it sounds like fun.

 

You need to do some serious reading on turbocharging theory. A turbo only releases "extra air" of you have a blowoff or bypass valve installed, and the amount of excess air released is nearly insignificant (the air released is just the excess pressure in the relatively small volume intake manifold when the throttle shuts). The turbo does have a wastegate to control boost by bypassing EXHAUST gas around the turbine.

You math is wrong. For one, a 60HP gain is a 42% gain, not 142%. Where did you get your other numbers? These numbers are quite different if intercooled or not, and strongly depend on the chosen turbo. Do you know how to read a compressor map?

 

I understand what you are asking but I do not think it will work. As mentioned the exces air isnt much. Also I do not think it would even have an effect, not to mention it will screw wit hthe MAF.

Also if you size the turbo right you will not have an issue of lag.

Do the turbo first.

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Oct 7 2009, 08:28 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758452

go to a medical supply store and buy a tank of O2. Whenever it was that you'd fire your stored compressed air, fire the O2 tank instead. Sounds like fun. Don't know if it'll work or not, but it sounds like fun.[/b]

Seriously do it as I would love to be there when the car blows. Pure O2 will blow that car so quick.

 

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Oct 7 2009, 09:28 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758452

go to a medical supply store and buy a tank of O2. Whenever it was that you'd fire your stored compressed air, fire the O2 tank instead. Sounds like fun. Don't know if it'll work or not, but it sounds like fun.[/b]

This would be a great idea...

...if you wanted to incinerate your engine heads. :glare:

 

QUOTE (Jeff K @ Oct 7 2009, 12:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758489

You need to do some serious reading on turbocharging theory. A turbo only releases "extra air" of you have a blowoff or bypass valve installed, and the amount of excess air released is nearly insignificant (the air released is just the excess pressure in the relatively small volume intake manifold when the throttle shuts). The turbo does have a wastegate to control boost by bypassing EXHAUST gas around the turbine.

You math is wrong. For one, a 60HP gain is a 42% gain, not 142%. Where did you get your other numbers? These numbers are quite different if intercooled or not, and strongly depend on the chosen turbo. Do you know how to read a compressor map?[/b]

You grammar is wrong
Just messing around lol! Sorry, I was rushed when making this thread today. I'm pretty new to doing anything custom, so I'm not entirely familiar with how things should be written - I figured 200hp is 142% of 140. I also failed to mention that to limit the boost to 60hp I would use an 8 PSI valve.

I personally don't know very much about turbos, I was just going to get it installed at a garage/have a friend of mine in motive power help with the project. The 14.7 is from standard atmospheric pressure. I read somewhere that to double an engine's horsepower, you would need to double the intake pressure - I went from there to figure out how much pressure was required for my decided 60 hp increase. I went with 60hp because I can't afford to do everything required for the engine/body/transmission to be able to handle more power. The 80% was just a rough estimate of the turbo's efficiency. Right now I'm looking more for input on the feasibility of storing excess boost in a tank for its use before the turbo gets up to speed, because I'm not even sure I want to install a turbo if I can't somehow get at least a decent amount of boost at low RPMs (4?). It's only meant to compensate for the first part of take off, and for 8 PSI to be available at the beginning of each gear from the stored boost from the lower gear or last 8+PSI boost from the turbo.

The car: engine has 20,000 miles on it, body about 70,000. The transmission is in excellent condition, was driven light for it's entire life, and was just flushed. I also have new tie rods, ball joints, brakes, and tires as of June 09.

 

That's not how it works at all. If it were possible or if it came down to working, it would have been done.

You know what helps turbo lag? Nitrous. Go to some turbo related forums and read up.

Turboford.net and or dsmtalk.com

As said. Size a turbo correctly and you won't have lag issues.

 

If you want 200 hp out of a 3.8-powered Taurus, swap in a '96+ split-port engine. It's been done a couple times, and it's a far easier way to see 200 hp.

 

just toss in an LSxx it'll be limitless........................

 

QUOTE (Racer X @ Oct 7 2009, 02:44 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758529

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Oct 7 2009, 09:28 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758452

go to a medical supply store and buy a tank of O2. Whenever it was that you'd fire your stored compressed air, fire the O2 tank instead. Sounds like fun. Don't know if it'll work or not, but it sounds like fun.[/b]

This would be a great idea...

...if you wanted to incinerate your engine heads. :glare:
[/b][/quote]

/whistles inocently

So if someone did cut a hole in their intake right after the MAF and inserted a clear plastic hose, sealed the hose and intake with silicone, and that hose ran to underneath the passenger seat and was connected to a small green bottle of O2 that was at 25 psi, with an easy to reach chrome valve handle... They should remove it?

 

Without doing all the math ... Just look at obvious issues here...I apologize for ramblings but there are about 10,000 reasons why this wont work..

1) To pressurize it with Blowoff from a BOV would net little to no volume...Definately would not build any PSI....What your failing to understand is As you get off the throttle, exhaust slows turbo slows... the boost goes down Anyway because even though your NOT ON THE GAS the ENGINE IS STILL RUNNING/Consuming some air (when your at idle speed you still consume air).. But Pretend you were at 5000000 PSI.. The reason the BOV is there is to keep the air from forcing backwards through the turbo... so your valve would have to be 1 way only and HUGE to capture the air because the engine is consumming it and its forcing out the back of the turbo(Turbofart)>>>>Air will follow path of least resistance... Pressurizing an accumulator will not be that path...


2)Also at 6 psi the dischage tubing and head would be contained in X amount of volume... You introduce a TANK which would be 0PSI and Y volume... the system equalizes lowering the boost.. So you lose there again as well. as a third parasitic loss.

3)Then you need a way to control both valves so that losses are minimized.. That setup to accurately and effictively do that would cost more than a new turbo... ***I messed with Pneumatic systems in the plastics industry and the precise timing of valves like that isnt going to be handled by a radio shack switch..

4) THEN After all these miracles are performed>Lets pretend that we have boost in the tank still>>Guess what we are back to problem #1 and #2>>>> You now have a discharge tube and an engine running at X volume....Your at -HG(Vacuum) engine and Discharge tubing.. When you release the valve the pressures equalize again and lower to result in -HG at the heads..


If it was that easy to make HP...Every turbo and supercharged vehicle on the road would have this contraption.... Unfortunately to pressurize your Discharge tube and engine you would need a tank with HIGH PSI in it and more volume than would be consumed/bled off in the amount of time it takes the turbo to catch up. When a turbo is making boost its building and maintaining pressure because its creating pressure faster than its consumed.. An accumulator would Bleed off/Degrade immediately... If you flip valve to have the turbo help the accumulator the whole process starts over again..

I left weight/size out of this but that would be another huge obstacle..

 

"So if someone did cut a hole in their intake right after the MAF and inserted a clear plastic hose, sealed the hose and intake with silicone, and that hose ran to underneath the passenger seat and was connected to a small green bottle of O2 that was at 25 psi, with an easy to reach chrome valve handle... They should remove it? "


Ummm you would be 1 backfire away from meeting your maker... Without question would be on the 2009 Darwin Awards..

 

QUOTE (Kenwood05 @ Oct 7 2009, 04:26 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758551

"So if someone did cut a hole in their intake right after the MAF and inserted a clear plastic hose, sealed the hose and intake with silicone, and that hose ran to underneath the passenger seat and was connected to a small green bottle of O2 that was at 25 psi, with an easy to reach chrome valve handle... They should remove it? "


Ummm you would be 1 backfire away from meeting your maker... Without question would be on the 2009 Darwin Awards..[/b]

It'll be 2010. Not sure there would be enough gas on the back fire to kill me. Would probably destroy the entire intake system. Now I feel compelled to try this...

 

QUOTE (Kenwood05 @ Oct 7 2009, 05:24 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758549

Without doing all the math ... Just look at obvious issues here...I apologize for ramblings but there are about 10,000 reasons why this wont work..

1) To pressurize it with Blowoff from a BOV would net little to no volume...Definately would not build any PSI....What your failing to understand is As you get off the throttle, exhaust slows turbo slows... the boost goes down Anyway because even though your NOT ON THE GAS the ENGINE IS STILL RUNNING/Consuming some air (when your at idle speed you still consume air).. But Pretend you were at 5000000 PSI.. The reason the BOV is there is to keep the air from forcing backwards through the turbo... so your valve would have to be 1 way only and HUGE to capture the air because the engine is consumming it and its forcing out the back of the turbo(Turbofart)>>>>Air will follow path of least resistance... Pressurizing an accumulator will not be that path...


2)Also at 6 psi the dischage tubing and head would be contained in X amount of volume... You introduce a TANK which would be 0PSI and Y volume... the system equalizes lowering the boost.. So you lose there again as well. as a third parasitic loss.

3)Then you need a way to control both valves so that losses are minimized.. That setup to accurately and effictively do that would cost more than a new turbo... ***I messed with Pneumatic systems in the plastics industry and the precise timing of valves like that isnt going to be handled by a radio shack switch..

4) THEN After all these miracles are performed>Lets pretend that we have boost in the tank still>>Guess what we are back to problem #1 and #2>>>> You now have a discharge tube and an engine running at X volume....Your at -HG(Vacuum) engine and Discharge tubing.. When you release the valve the pressures equalize again and lower to result in -HG at the heads..


If it was that easy to make HP...Every turbo and supercharged vehicle on the road would have this contraption.... Unfortunately to pressurize your Discharge tube and engine you would need a tank with HIGH PSI in it and more volume than would be consumed/bled off in the amount of time it takes the turbo to catch up. When a turbo is making boost its building and maintaining pressure because its creating pressure faster than its consumed.. An accumulator would Bleed off/Degrade immediately... If you flip valve to have the turbo help the accumulator the whole process starts over again..

I left weight/size out of this but that would be another huge obstacle..[/b]

Thank you for explaining it so well! I guess that idea is scrapped then lol. Someone said that if I found the right size turbo I wouldn't get lag. Suggestions on a turbo?

 

QUOTE (mike_6289 @ Oct 7 2009, 06:50 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758569

QUOTE (Kenwood05 @ Oct 7 2009, 05:24 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758549

Without doing all the math ... Just look at obvious issues here...I apologize for ramblings but there are about 10,000 reasons why this wont work..

1) To pressurize it with Blowoff from a BOV would net little to no volume...Definately would not build any PSI....What your failing to understand is As you get off the throttle, exhaust slows turbo slows... the boost goes down Anyway because even though your NOT ON THE GAS the ENGINE IS STILL RUNNING/Consuming some air (when your at idle speed you still consume air).. But Pretend you were at 5000000 PSI.. The reason the BOV is there is to keep the air from forcing backwards through the turbo... so your valve would have to be 1 way only and HUGE to capture the air because the engine is consumming it and its forcing out the back of the turbo(Turbofart)>>>>Air will follow path of least resistance... Pressurizing an accumulator will not be that path...


2)Also at 6 psi the dischage tubing and head would be contained in X amount of volume... You introduce a TANK which would be 0PSI and Y volume... the system equalizes lowering the boost.. So you lose there again as well. as a third parasitic loss.

3)Then you need a way to control both valves so that losses are minimized.. That setup to accurately and effictively do that would cost more than a new turbo... ***I messed with Pneumatic systems in the plastics industry and the precise timing of valves like that isnt going to be handled by a radio shack switch..

4) THEN After all these miracles are performed>Lets pretend that we have boost in the tank still>>Guess what we are back to problem #1 and #2>>>> You now have a discharge tube and an engine running at X volume....Your at -HG(Vacuum) engine and Discharge tubing.. When you release the valve the pressures equalize again and lower to result in -HG at the heads..


If it was that easy to make HP...Every turbo and supercharged vehicle on the road would have this contraption.... Unfortunately to pressurize your Discharge tube and engine you would need a tank with HIGH PSI in it and more volume than would be consumed/bled off in the amount of time it takes the turbo to catch up. When a turbo is making boost its building and maintaining pressure because its creating pressure faster than its consumed.. An accumulator would Bleed off/Degrade immediately... If you flip valve to have the turbo help the accumulator the whole process starts over again..

I left weight/size out of this but that would be another huge obstacle..[/b]

Thank you for explaining it so well! I guess that idea is scrapped then lol. Someone said that if I found the right size turbo I wouldn't get lag. Suggestions on a turbo?
[/b][/quote]

You will lag no matter what. But it will be miniscule if you do it right. You have to take into account pipe size and intercooler drop as well(if youd use one). You're going to have to look at flow maps of turbos and size it for yourself.

Small twins lag much less, but thats a bit of a complicated system.

 

It is very interesting somebody is proposing this idea here. Actually a professor in switzerland who came to ohio state to visit gave a presentation on a "hybrid" vehicle where the hybrid comes in the form of an engine that acts as both an internal combustion engine AND an air compressor. So the idea is when there's no or low demand for torque (which is when the engine is usually not operated optimally), one or more cylinders are used compress air (thus no combustion). The air is sent from by a 5th valve into a tank. This air is used for two purposes. First it is used to "charge" the engine under high torque demand. Second the pressure from the tank can actually "drive" the car under certain conditions when very little torque is required (this part I wasn't completely sure from the talk... but i think it is right). Obviuosly the point of the research is not to get high horse poewr but to improve fuel economy by optimizing engine efficiency. But it sounds very similar to what you are talking about.

From his preliminary studies, he was able to achieve enough gains for this to make sense. Obviously you can't get as much fuel economy as the electric hybrid. But the cost of this is significantly cheaper than the battery pack in HEV. Therefore it might still make snese.

 

QUOTE (yiranhu @ Oct 7 2009, 08:35 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758595

It is very interesting somebody is proposing this idea here. Actually a professor in switzerland who came to ohio state to visit gave a presentation on a "hybrid" vehicle where the hybrid comes in the form of an engine that acts as both an internal combustion engine AND an air compressor. So the idea is when there's no or low demand for torque (which is when the engine is usually not operated optimally), one or more cylinders are used compress air (thus no combustion). The air is sent from by a 5th valve into a tank. This air is used for two purposes. First it is used to "charge" the engine under high torque demand. Second the pressure from the tank can actually "drive" the car under certain conditions when very little torque is required (this part I wasn't completely sure from the talk... but i think it is right). Obviuosly the point of the research is not to get high horse poewr but to improve fuel economy by optimizing engine efficiency. But it sounds very similar to what you are talking about.

From his preliminary studies, he was able to achieve enough gains for this to make sense. Obviously you can't get as much fuel economy as the electric hybrid. But the cost of this is significantly cheaper than the battery pack in HEV. Therefore it might still make snese.[/b]

To further this idea...

http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2009/01/...gle-conversion/

 

That's pretty sweet. The project that this professor was working is exactly the same idea except the whole focus is how you do the control strategy (like when to supply air, when to switch to an air pump, when to shut off the engine completely to conserve fuel). I think the concept is pretty sweet.

 

Ive read of this...But thats completely different than what was being proposed for recycling BOV pressure which is miniscule compared to displacement of combustion chambers..

 

mike_6289. are you doing any other mods to support your turbo? cuz i also have thought about putting in a trubo or supercharger in my 93 3.8

 

Read: Maximum Boost

This will help you a lot! You can then pick a turbo and work on a system.

 

QUOTE (ChaceMasteFlex @ Oct 8 2009, 11:21 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758735

mike_6289. are you doing any other mods to support your turbo? cuz i also have thought about putting in a trubo or supercharger in my 93 3.8[/b]

I haven't really made any mods to the car, but I do have new springs/shocks/brakes/tie rods/ball joints/tires. Also had the transmission flushed. The engine in the car I have only has 20,000 miles, transmission 70,000 (treated well by my grandfather). The car handles really well, so I'm not doing anything with the body. I'm pretty sure the 3.8s have the same transmission as the SHOs, but with a different final gear ratio. I'm not modding my transmission because it's in good shape and I don't plan to drive the car too hard, but if you have a lot of miles on your tranny/it's having problems, you might want to do something with it. Also, I read somewhere that the heads on the 3.8L Essex were changed in the 1994 year because they had a tendency to fail, so you might want to look into that. I don't really know all that people should do to cars before adding a supercharger, so

Question directed at anyone: What are the usual modifications made to a car before adding a supercharger or turbo?

 

QUOTE (mike_6289 @ Oct 8 2009, 08:34 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758854

QUOTE (ChaceMasteFlex @ Oct 8 2009, 11:21 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758735

mike_6289. are you doing any other mods to support your turbo? cuz i also have thought about putting in a trubo or supercharger in my 93 3.8[/b]

I haven't really made any mods to the car, but I do have new springs/shocks/brakes/tie rods/ball joints/tires. Also had the transmission flushed. The engine in the car I have only has 20,000 miles, transmission 70,000 (treated well by my grandfather). The car handles really well, so I'm not doing anything with the body. I'm pretty sure the 3.8s have the same transmission as the SHOs, but with a different final gear ratio. I'm not modding my transmission because it's in good shape and I don't plan to drive the car too hard, but if you have a lot of miles on your tranny/it's having problems, you might want to do something with it. Also, I read somewhere that the heads on the 3.8L Essex were changed in the 1994 year because they had a tendency to fail, so you might want to look into that. I don't really know all that people should do to cars before adding a supercharger, so

Question directed at anyone: What are the usual modifications made to a car before adding a supercharger or turbo?
[/b][/quote]

Wasn't there a post here somewhere recently about a 3.8L SuperCoupe transplant?
It's running and has video...
Transplant has to be cheaper than a custom....

 

QUOTE (mike_6289 @ Oct 8 2009, 08:34 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=758854

Question directed at anyone: What are the usual modifications made to a car before adding a supercharger or turbo?[/b]

Read: Maximum Boost

Everything you need for turbos.

You will need larger fuel injector, larger fuel pump fuel pressure regulator, tuning and larger MAF.

 

To put this in prespective (sp?), my buddies mustang required different injectors, different plugs, a mod to the fuel pump, a tune, and of course, the blower.

We put almost an extra 200hp to the wheels.


This won't likely happen on a head gasket happy 3.8l v6 taurus.