Incognito Turbo

[timtiminy]

For those of you who care or live in cali....we all have been thinking of ways to pass our cars off with performance mods without trouble from the authorities and even possibly smog centers. well in thinking about this i saw the post anyone thought of this where the guy proposed that we try to make some fancy engine covers like new cars have for their engine bays, which is a good idea, but has its drawbacks especially with having something like that manufactured. well my idea is a tad different. about a year ago i stubled across a turbo system for trucks where the turbo takes the spot of the muffler and piping is routed back up to the engine. i figure we look more into this as an option. if done correctly we could pop our hoods to any cop and show off a completely stock looking motor (ka-t of course) with no turbo even close to the engine. All charge piping could be ran through the stock intake parts, or manufatured stock looking air box and piping specifically made for this application. there are also performance benfits of having a turbo further from the engine, keeping it cooler which in turn will allow it to last much longer. With smogging it may be as easy as keeping wastegate open so no boost is made and bringing the fuel map back to stock essentially bypassing the turbo and everything passing emissions way easier than unbolting the entire turbo kit. This will pass visual as the smog technition will look everything over and it will be completely stock looking at the engine bay, even a heat shield could be incorporated to go around the turbo making it look like a muffler. Take a look at http://www.ststurbo.com/ and tell me what you think.. i think this is a huge possibility for us who live in cali, and those who want to be incognito about their turbo cars.

[ThatGuy]

Already been discussed here before. Let me re-state some key points from the last converstaion about it.

"If the police check for aftermarket exhaust, what makes you think they wouldn't see a turbo strapped to your aftermarket exhaust?"

"If you were worried about theft before, now the thieves will only need a hacksaw and about 5 mins. and you don't have a turbo anymore."

"Don't plan on driving in the rain."

etc., etc., etc...


I'll allow it to be discussed again, but plain and simple, the ONLY way around being harassed by the police.... go buy a minivan.

[neverlift]

I completely thought of this route down here in florida but decided that with rain around any corner that this probably wouldn't be great on a low ass nissan,but with proper shielding of the turbo and filter/ dirt,water,mud,and rock's shouldn't be a problem,plus you might not need an I.C.,but I'd rather go traditional turbo.
but in cali. you gotta watch your heat(police)

[timtiminy]

yeah i hear you on the mini van. Im sorry if it was already covered, i have just been seeing more people talking about ways to make performance mods less noticable. as for the muffler part... could be heatshields incorporated to look like muffler.. rain..route the intake to the turbo from somewhere that doesnt get drowned. theres a video clip on the sts site that shows a tacoma with there system blowing through some pretty big puddles near a lake, with what seems to be no problems. they even have systems for covettes, mustangs, and camaros i think that they forsaw the rain problem and designed the system with that problem in mind. possibly an after turbo muffler could be used to quiet it down to almost stock decibles. If i had the resources and money i would do this in a heartbeat. as for criminals if they really want to steal it they will. if they have no idea its there than its no less likely than getting a sr stolen out of your car. my oppinion though. i can see how it would be easier to hack off but realalisticly they wont be able to take the entire sytem unless they stole your entire car and took everything off of it in a more "civilized" manner, they may just make it away with the turbo. all of this imho, you guys make up your own minds, i just thought i would bring it up for discussion

[axiomatik]

How about a bottom-mount manifold for the KA that would allow you to use the stock heat shield. Use the stock SR piping and side-mount intercooler and it would look completely factory unless you did some serious digging, since the turbo would be covered by the heat shield. Wouldn't make a ton of power, but certainly more than an NA KA.

[timtiminy]

okay i thought of another idea with this rear mounted turbo setup. idea is, to basically have a dual exhaust stetup with remote controlled dump pipe that can switch between one muffler or the other directing exhaust flow to either the turbo or to the other muffler, bypassing the turbo and running n/a. this would be cool cause you could save gas on a long trip and not have the turbo being spun at all by just switching the exhaust flow remotely from the inside. and would make it easy to smog as you could "turn off" the turbo and have the sniffer in the appropriate tailpipe, running essentially stock n/a. tell me what you think guys?

[NemeGuero]

Your costs are sky-rocketing by this point.
Lag will be terrible...

No, just no.

[timtiminy]

its all theoretical, cost is always an issue. although i dont think that adding a dump pipe before the turbo, some extra pipe and another muffler would be too much cost. lag actually shouldnt be any different because the exhaust gas should be cooled down to a point where it is denser than at the manifold, this should actually spin the turbine with greater response than a manifold mounted turbo.

[NemeGuero]

Yes but you have tons of feet of piping.. and that takes time to fill. Air density doesn't matter at that point.

And you were mentioning remote triggered dump tubes which will need circuitry, motors to move the actuators... blah blah blah... and then, the idea won't sell because the cost will be too high.

People who could afford to do it that way.. could also afford a car with more HP stock. Or afford to get their car out of impound.

[CaoBoY]

dont drive like a retard. get a 'stock' looking exhuast like ThatGuy's or Phlip's. paint your intercooler black/stick with a sidemount. basically...know the law...and know when you dont have to pop your hood if the cop asks you to. even with a heat shield...a cop is still going to notice the intake piping for the turbo, and all they have to do is look under your car (which they can do, they WILL jack it up and look) and they would still see the turbine. you gotta pay to play, and having those stupid rear mounted turbo kits are not going to help. they are not worht the money you spend on it to be 'safe' from the cops.

[S13Eye]

HAAAAA!!!! I have been dealing with this clusterf*** of an engine bay when you say i could have mounted the turbo in the rear, and it would have stayed cooler and would last longer?!

Its a horrible idea and its impractical. A simple turbo kit can be hidden with heat shields, and can be quickly removed for emissions. Turbochargers are powered by heat - by remotely mounting the turbocharger so far in the exhaust, the plumbing itself will act as a heat exchanger. A small engine like a KA24 does not produce enough BTUs to spare. That kind of setup would require a very small turbine or low A/R, and a comparatively large compressor. The ammount of exhaust backpressure would have to be immense due to the lack of heat.

The charge side of the turbo is less of an issue since there is so much plumbing to dump off the heat. With proper sizing it wouldn't be much more volume than a good sized FMIC on a standard turbo system. Then you have huge lenghts of oil lines, speed bumps, vibration, minorities with saws (i kid)...

[jdm_s14_zenki]

u can do what i did. i have a 3" from turbo back, no cat. i cut the muffler tip off and welded on 2 stock looking tips. painted the piping on the exhaust black so they cant see its size when theyre behind me. dont blow off when u d ont need to blow off. keep your body style "sleeper" instead of "ricer" hide your gauges, afc, ect. if you have fmic, paint it black. and you shouldnt have any problems with cops noticing your car.

[joncorreia]

actually for something different it looks like a viable idea. For all out performance an engine mounted turbo would be best, but for cars where aftermarket turbo parts arent exsistant, this would be a pretty good thing. It retains the everything stock from the car, so the only custom work would be on the piping to the intake manifold, i think with the proper turbo sizing to have little lag (lag doesnt just come from piping, there're other factors) i think it would be a good option for car that arent supported by the aftermarket and want a little bit more power.
From the media reviews on their site there seems to be just positve comments on the system, even on a small dislpacement USDM Integra Type R. I have to say though, my most favorite things about it is it keeps the engine bay so clean and roomy.

[heartcooksmouse]

best way of not getting noticed is.... to not get noticed. cuz it sucks when cops give you a fix it ticket for anything.
so just don't get pulled over in the first place. RUN!

[axiomatik]

this is what running will get you:

http://www.zilvia.net/f/showthread.php?t=90050&highlight=nitekids

[Pank]

its all theoretical, cost is always an issue. although i dont think that adding a dump pipe before the turbo, some extra pipe and another muffler would be too much cost. lag actually shouldnt be any different because the exhaust gas should be cooled down to a point where it is denser than at the manifold, this should actually spin the turbine with greater response than a manifold mounted turbo.

huh?


msglength

[S13Eye]

Before you start engineering turbo systems, you may want to find out how a turbo works. This is definitely not a viable idea for a small engine, and there is a good reason why turbos are mounted so close to exhaust ports. You may as well get a centrifugal superchager and write "POw3r steRRing poOmp" on it with permenant marker.

[timtiminy]

i understand that it takes a longer time for the exhaust gas to get to the tailpipe than right off the engine to the manifold, and this is why people think there will be turbo lag with a system like this, but I believe that once the engine is started and running the moment you tap the throttle the velocity of the exhuast should be the same at the tailpipe and manifold because the exhaust at the manifold is pushing the exhaust at the tailpipe, thus increasing the tailpipe exit velocity of the exhuast to the same speed as at the manifold. this is of course without taking into consideration that exhaust does indeed travel faster with higher temperature. this brings up another point that seems to support the idea of lag with a remote mounted turbo vs. manifold mounted. with that in mind you must also take into consideration that hot gas is less dense than cooler gas, and therefore hot gasses have less inertia then do a cooler gasses. a turbo's turbine is driven by exhaust gasses, which in itself has resistence to turn, this resistance is why there is turbo lag (in any system) and why a smaller turbo has less lag because of its direct relation to having a smaller turbine which has less mass and therefore less resistance to turn. with this taken into account, that which propels the turbine has a specific velocity and density which makes up its inertia. a higher velocity and lower density (manifold exhaust gasses) equaling a certain inertia, should be almost the same as, lower velocity and higher density's inertia (tailpipe exhaust gasses). therefore concluding that there shouldnt be that much lag difference between the two different turbo mounted positions. I know that some of you questioned my understanding of how turbochargers work (S13Eye). i indeed do understand how they work. i believe that manufactures do have their reasoning behind manifold mounted turbo systems. using longer oil lines, intake tubing ect., and having the risk of those being subject to the elements as well as anything else that can find its way to the undercarriage as opposed to underhood in the engine bay are good reasons to manufacture manifold mounted turbo systems for the everyday consumer. i feel this as an option to the maniflod mounted turbo systems, it is unorthodox compared to the norm of regular turbo systems, but it doesnt mean it shouldnt be considered. there are good points and bad points to both systems. I'm not at all saying that this is the only way or the best way, but just stating that it could be done and be a viable option.

[Pank]

WOW, you typed a whole lot of WRONG SHIT.

1. Remote mounting a turbo WILL RESULT IN LAG. Exhaust gasses are not a liquid. They can be compressed. That is exactly what happens when the expanding hot gasses come out of the cylinder head. They will push against the colder gasses (especially the much colder and considerably slower gasses past the catalytic converter) and press into them, and slightly compress themselves. The density, at this point, does not even come close to making up for it. You cannot fun faster on a mountain, just b/c the air is thinner.

2. Charge piping will be extremely long, and not only will this result in a HUGE loss of throttle response, you could actually experience a pressure drop. let alone compensating for the time it takes to up the pressure in a 13 foot long tube. You have to introduce more pressure to compensate for a larger enclosure. this is simple physics. this is how lag is created.

3. Turbos take time to spool up. You cant just give it instant 5k load pressure, and expect it to immediately be in full boost.

Theres a reason that zero cars come with remote mount turbos from the factory.

[NemeGuero]

WOW, you typed a whole lot of WRONG SHIT.

1. Remote mounting a turbo WILL RESULT IN LAG. Exhaust gasses are not a liquid. They can be compressed. That is exactly what happens when the expanding hot gasses come out of the cylinder head. They will push against the colder gasses (especially the much colder and considerably slower gasses past the catalytic converter) and press into them, and slightly compress themselves. The density, at this point, does not even come close to making up for it. You cannot fun faster on a mountain, just b/c the air is thinner.

2. Charge piping will be extremely long, and not only will this result in a HUGE loss of throttle response, you could actually experience a pressure drop. let alone compensating for the time it takes to up the pressure in a 13 foot long tube. You have to introduce more pressure to compensate for a larger

3. Turbos take time to spool up. You cant just give it instant 5k load pressure, and expect it to immediately be in full boost.

Theres a reason that zero cars come with remote mount turbos from the factory.
Bravo! I never wanted to take the time to type that all out, but you said it perfectly.

[S13Eye]

I don't even know where to start, so i won't. Get Corky Bell's Maximum Boost and actually read it.

[Pank]

I don't even know where to start, so i won't. Get Corky Bell's Maximum Boost and actually read it.


uhh, I did, thats where i got all the information. Lag/throttle response will be hampered by trying to pressurize all that tubing.

did YOU read it?

[axiomatik]

You also have to consider the fact that a turbo gets a lot of its energy from the actual HEAT of the exhaust gasses. Running 50 cfm of air through a turbo at 150 deg is not the same as 50 cfm at 900 deg. The turbo uses the actual heat of the exhaust gasses to do some of the work of spinning the tubine. You can't expect to make as much power with a remote turbo as one mounted on the manifold. I have heard that lag isn't as bad on these systems as you would think, considering the long tubing, but that doesn't mean its good either.

[S13Eye]

uhh, I did, thats where i got all the information. Lag/throttle response will be hampered by trying to pressurize all that tubing.

did YOU read it?

I didn't mean you. You must have posted as i was typing. Sorry. Yes, i have read Corky Bell's book - it cured my insomnia.

nbrindley - Heat does virtually all of the work in a turbo. Its the expansion of gasses that power the turbine. Have you ever noticed how the exhaust of a turbocharged car is much cooler than an N/A? Engines are run on heat and their thermal efficiency is a huge factor in how much power they produce. Engines dump off a tremendous amount of this heat into the exhaust, and the turbo is there to recycle it. Thats why i was saying that the plumbing would act as a heat exchanger and waste too much heat, and thats also the reason why turbines are mounted so close to the ports. This idea can be used on large displacement engines only where space prohibits an engine bay mounted turbo, but not on a small 4 cylinder like a KA. You won't understand how pointless this is until you get it into your head that its heat powering a turbine.

[axiomatik]

ummm, I know that, that is what I said.

[timtiminy]

i did not take into account the intake charge pipe's length, which i think would actually be the bigest contribution to lag... im not too sure on the fact that heat is what powers the turbine, i belive the flow of the hot gasses does..either way the biggest hurdles for the lag on a remote system would have to be the intake piping length and catalytic converter before turbo.
wouldnt the reason for turbo exhaust being cooler be because of the absorbtion of heat by the turbo's mass (being the turbine housing is cast iron) and this is why the catalytic converter must be mounted cose enough to the turbo so it will still heat up and do its job?

[NemeGuero]

Turbines produce more work at higher temps. Thermodynamics FTW! Even though I just took the final and I don't think I did that well... haha

[S13Eye]

No, its the loss of pressure that cools the exhaust - basic thermal dynamics. Consider an extreme case like nitrous oxide, where its released out of a pressurized container. When the gas escapes it becomes cold because there was a loss of pressure. A similar effect takes place in a turbine, but on a less extreme scale because there is no change of state in the exhaust.

The catalitic converter before the turbo is not a hurdle and in fact it would be of benefit. This is described in Maximum Boost. By burning off remaining hydrocarbons, additional heat would be generated to help spool the turbo.

Also, nbrindley i explained the heat thing because you said heat does 'some' of the work spinning the turbine, when infact it accounts for nearly all the work performed.

[timtiminy]

okay so enthalpy is what is spinning the turbine as well as exhaust flow. i understand more completely now. i think that the efficiancy of a turbo is higher when it is closer to the engine, but work can still be done with lower temperatures and further away from the engine. so basically you wouldnt be able to produce as much pressure with a remote mounted system as a manifold mounted one with the same turbo. i was wrong in some instances, i do admit to fault. thank you for not being hostile and flaming me for somewhat of my lack of understanding to thermodynamics. you learn something new everyday..this goes to show me.

[Pank]

i did not take into account the intake charge pipe's length, which i think would actually be the bigest contribution to lag... im not too sure on the fact that heat is what powers the turbine, i belive the flow of the hot gasses does..either way the biggest hurdles for the lag on a remote system would have to be the intake piping length and catalytic converter before turbo.
wouldnt the reason for turbo exhaust being cooler be because of the absorbtion of heat by the turbo's mass (being the turbine housing is cast iron) and this is why the catalytic converter must be mounted cose enough to the turbo so it will still heat up and do its job?

ehh, you're half right and half a little off. its not so much heat that powers it, its the fact that hot gasses expand, and therefor have a higher velocity, and can spin the turbo. you cant just throw the hot side in an oven and expect to make power, although i know thats not what you're saying.

I think the biggest hurdle on this would be the huge charge pipe you'd have to use, and you'd give up a lot of throttle responsiveness and experience some hardcore lag. you CAN make power this way, but considering the alternatives, it certainly isnt feasible, at least not in our cars.

[chrisstroud]

You CAN make power this way, but considering the alternatives, it certainly isnt feasible, at least not in our cars.
It is feasible, it's just really fucking stupid.

[NemeGuero]

It is feasible, it's just really fucking stupid.

Well said...

[mjjstang]

simple as this, there are things meant for v8 powerd cars and there are things for 4 cyl cars, this happens to be a product meant for larger displacement v8 motors that can benefit from the setup, nuff said.

[axiomatik]

Also, nbrindley i explained the heat thing because you said heat does 'some' of the work spinning the turbine, when infact it accounts for nearly all the work performed.

eh, I had 'most' there instead of 'some', but then changed it because it's been too many years since I looked at the calculations to be that definitive, and I have a sucky memory. whatevers :bigok: