I know everybody here says that you cant power a turbo with two cylinders, so fine, power it with 4. But after the turbo, instead of connecting the downpipe, what if we connect another turbo? So both turbo's run off of 4 cylinders.

Of course lag would be pretty big but if we use really small turbo's, and do all the other quick turbo spool mods it might spool slightly quicker then a 20g or 25g, but producing just as much psi or more.

Or maybe conecting a bigger turbo for the second one for a sequential setup.

What do you think? Good idea, bad idea? Not even possible?

anything is possible but what would be the point?

Spool time would probably be slower if not the same and it would hold less boost.

Where would you put all this stuff in the engine bay wanyway?

Im sure it would fit, but why do you say boost would be less?

all of these threads have to deal with the TT concept and why it hasnt been done yet

http://forums.2gnt.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=50433&mesg_id=50433&listing_type=search

http://forums.2gnt.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=48990&mesg_id=48990&listing_type=search

http://forums.2gnt.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=2818&mesg_id=2818&listing_type=search

extremely pointless and a waste of money

You must not be a very creative person if you think this is extremely pointless and a waste of money. I think it would be awesome to actually see someone who had the time and money to put it all together. Thats why it's called a concept... maybe it would work good, or it might suck, but all the fancy engineering and problems solved teach you a lot, and a lot of people would be really impressed with the end result. If I had rediculous amounts of money I'd probably try it.


1996 Eclipse RS / 5-Speed / Body Components by Aerogear / Coated in Magnetic Red Metallic v2 - More at http://home.insightbb.com/~mgalyan/
Mark Galyan - Greenwood, Indiana

I dont understand why it would be so much money. Maybe you guys arent reading what I'm talking about correctly. But i'll probably try this when I get a stroker bottom end...a long...long...time from now.

If you are trying to do a sequential setup like the supra, I think it would be sweet. If you were going to just make a junction of the 2 compressor outlets, that would be pointless. There has been one twin turbo 4g63 that I have seen (not in person) that did a sequential t25 setup. I would be curious to see how a sequential setup would work out with a t25 as the 1st turbo and a 16g as the 2nd. I love how you can feel when each turbo kicks in with sequential setups though. I'd love to see someone do it just for fun.

If you are trying to make as much power as possible, don't bother with going twin turbo though. There is a good reason why the fastest supras have one huge single turbo.

Nick
97RS

turbo8u> shut your SUCK

i actually had a concept or idea for a twin turbo TURBO. basically its 2 compressors powered by 1 turbine wheel. my only problem is trying to figure out how to or where the exhaust gas would go. the compressors would not be on the same side but turbine in middle with comressor on each side of it... which is why getting rid of exhauts gasses may be a problem but still. the idea is cool. and there may be a little more resistance but not much. look at a jet engine. the turbines on them have maybe 2 - 5 stages and those 2-5 stages power the 5-9 stages of the comrpessor. heck if a 2 stage turbine can turn a 9 stage compressor..i think this would not be totally out of the question. so i would think that 1 turbine powering 2 compressors would not take too much more work. either way its an idea andy maybe one day when i know how to do more work i can think about trying to make one someday.

Why don't you just use one supercharger for low boost and a turbocharger for the high boost. Kinda like the honda civic maguier that they showed at super street magazine last year making almost 500hp on the wheels that's with high compression (11:1 ratio) type-R b18 engine with stock internals with coated piston and a HKS piggyback fuel management ecu.

IT ISNT TOTALLY POINTLESS IF YOU HAVE MORE MONEY AND TIME THAN YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH. LETS PUT IT THIS WAY, IF IT IS A NEED MORE POWER ISSUE, YOU CAN MAKE ENOUGH POWER WITH A SINGLE TURBO TO BLOW THE GUTS OUT OF A 420A NO MATTER HOW WELL IT IS BUILT.

hey lookie! my post made it into this thread. woo hoo. but yeah, twin turbos would rock ass in shows. got cash? instead of this i think college is more important. we just need really cheap fuel that has a really high octane. like propane!!!!!!!!!! someone please make me a bolt on propane injection kit!

>IT ISNT TOTALLY POINTLESS IF YOU HAVE MORE MONEY AND TIME
>THAN YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH. LETS PUT IT THIS WAY, IF IT IS
>A NEED MORE POWER ISSUE, YOU CAN MAKE ENOUGH POWER WITH A
>SINGLE TURBO TO BLOW THE GUTS OUT OF A 420A NO MATTER HOW WELL
>IT IS BUILT.

Im not neccessairly wanting more power with two turbos than a single turbo. It's more into finding quicker spool with two turbo's at the same PSI of a single turbo. Urm...that might be hard to follow.

How about...
Single Turbo = 30 Psi at 4500rpm
I want...
Twin Turbo = 15 Psi each at 3000rpm

And, I really don't think it would cost that much money for my concept. I'm talking about just welding two flanges to a pipe that connect both turbine sides together. 5 bolt pattern downpipe flange welded to one end of a pipe, and the other end to a T3 or any other turbo inlet flange. And place the turbos sort of like this.

All that is needed is the adaptor and just one new downpipe. And more piping. We can still use the star or HRC manifold and turbo, but after that its just a few more pieces. Who knows, if this goes well, every turbo owner can be TT with just a few bolt on pieces.

And our engine bay has tons of extra space for it. If not, make the adaptor an angled bend in any direction. Maybe flip the direction of the first turbo so that the exhaust side is facing drivers side so the intake is closer to the side where it enters the intercooler. Many possibilities, oh think of the possibilities.

But like what 420adave said, I think I'm going to devote more time and money into college. And college isnt cheap. I barely have enough to get my car running. This is just basically here cuz Ive been tinkering, and wondering what you guys thing.

Not sure I understand you idea fully.. are you suggesting two identical turbos running simultantiously, or a sequential twin turbo where you have a smaller turbo run until you reach a certain boost level for quick spool up, and then a larger turbo at, and above that pressure threshhold? That would be neat to see on a 2GNT, but probably not the best way to spend your money if you're looking for performance.


1996 Eclipse RS / 5-Speed / Body Components by Aerogear / Coated in Magnetic Red Metallic v2 - More at http://home.insightbb.com/~mgalyan/
Mark Galyan - Greenwood, Indiana

i understand what you are trying to do, but you have to look at it from an engineering point of view. If one turbo finally hits 30 psi at 4500 rpm, it is because it is at that point that the exhaust flow provides enough power to compress the air.
What you want to do is to make the same psi and same volume with less power.