# twin charged 16v



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

ya I know! before everyone tells me the new turbos or superchargers could have done the job, this was built a long time ago before bb turbos, and stand alone was a luxury for the rich, besides whats the fun in doing the same as everyone else, with this set up I was able to run a .96 hot side giving me allot more top end rpm and pull, the supercharger does its thing boosting the bottom rpm range 5 to 10psi then I think the turbo ignores it after that, off we go! some have said they had poor results with similar ideas but they used positive displacement superchargers, I am quit happy with the results for years now, anyway I have been doing some upgrades since my first post in vortex forum car/vw/scirocco that has most of the build info if interested, looking forward to some open road driving this summer since moving to Montana to get out of rush hour traffic in Seattle area, 1000 mil dyno 
these are pix of some updates I have been doing
BBM manifold








supercharger set up








original setup








USRT linkage








new wiring of innovate dl32+lc1+xd16 instead of lm1 auxbox








love these seats! carbon fiber backed AeroDesigns ACIS same as Bride Cuga without the high price, $820 pair shipped








the car its all in
















thanks and have fun!


----------



## dub_slug (May 12, 2008)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

thats soo sick http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif







i've been wanting to see this thing
looks like alot of fun


----------



## jimivr6 (Feb 18, 2003)

*Re: twin charged 16v (dub_slug)*


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: twin charged 16v (jimivr6)*

loving it.. twin charging is the way forward http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 16V VW (Aug 1, 2004)

*Re: twin charged 16v (dubinsincuwereindiapers)*

hehe, that's cute.


----------



## MaxVW (Nov 4, 2004)

awesome car


----------



## MarsRed84Roc (Dec 6, 2006)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

Awesome set-up! 
A couple questions for you....why twin intakes (ie: 1 for the turbo and 1 for the charger)?
Would not having the charger feeding the turbo help with reducing the lag?
What are the benefits of your set-up? 
I ask because I"m starting down the road to build something similar myself in my RoccoII. 
PG block (strengthened)
Stage II G-ladder (with stock pulley)
Turbo (not sized yet)
Twin intercoolers
Utilizing the G-60 TB w/ bypass for off throttle feeding back into the charger.

Cheers


----------



## Glegor (Mar 31, 2008)

*Re: twin charged 16v (MarsRed84Roc)*

nowhere do i see a pic of the piping actually hooked up. usually you feed one charger with the other charger, in a series. 
i was wondering about the 2 intakes also?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (MarsRed84Roc)*

that was the first set up with check valves, didn't work! I then ran the super into the turbo but I think the turbo slowed the boost down for the puper then made it hard to control boost at the higher rpms because the super spooled the turbo, I now run the turbo though the super with the EBS map sensor at the intake so the turbo sees overall boost and backs off when the super catches up at higher rpms, if it does! the turbo blows right through the charger like its not even there, positive displacement supers are a problem it seems from other forums I have read, I used a cheap eBay IC piping kit to mess around until I found what worked best for me, there are no pipes in it at the moment, I am building permanent SS pipes, pix are just currant progress on my upgrades, I have been posting in the Scirocco forum but thought I would show it here encase there is any interest, bottom line! its been a lot of fun for many years now, certainly a learning experience as technology changes and new ideas come out that have helped get it too where it is now.


----------



## RipCity Euros (Sep 23, 2007)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

I dont care if the haters say this is bunk... This car is badass!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

sorry I meant EBC map sensor, and there's no (puper) installed anywhere


----------



## MarsRed84Roc (Dec 6, 2006)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

Dang...I need to pick your brain!

No hating here, this is kick ass!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (MarsRed84Roc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MarsRed84Roc* »_Dang...I need to pick your brain!

No hating here, this is kick ass!

OK shoot.....


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

fuel system almost done, waiting for filters and filter mounts


----------



## 2.0t mk2 (Dec 23, 2007)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

verry nice http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## jezzag60 (Aug 26, 2006)

Couple of pics of my twin charged setup..... still work in progress!


























_Modified by jezzag60 at 3:44 AM 4-8-2010_


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: (jezzag60)*

ooohhh...
watching this....
doing a similar setup


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (jezzag60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jezzag60* »_Couple of pics of my twin charged setup..... still work in progress!

























_Modified by jezzag60 at 3:44 AM 4-8-2010_

pix didn't work for me! maybe because I am dialup


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_
pix didn't work for me! maybe because I am dialup








Fail....

This is one incredible build my friend http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I also want to thank both your wife, and you for proudly serving our country


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (jezzag60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jezzag60* »_Couple of pics of my twin charged setup..... still work in progress!


----------



## jezzag60 (Aug 26, 2006)

Cheers for fixing my pics!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (jezzag60)*

nice set up! looks tight, does anyone have trouble blowing though a g60? 
looking at the design I was thinking having a flapper valve in the intake track of the charger where the halves meet that boost would open and bypass the charger otherwise vac would keep closed, looks like a strait shot, probably just one of my crazy ideas and risky if it didn't work, just a thought!


----------



## EL DRIFTO (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

i was considering other twin charged oe setups & it seems like they always blow a laggy high eff turbo through a screw charger 
the screw charger is set to a low boost ratio like 1.5 where screws are still efficient
screw chargers also operate in vacuum behind the tb, but the g60 compresses internally & is not meant to operate in a vacuum, it has to reroute any unused boost energy through it's oe recirc, constantly pumping full atmosphere air, like an aftermarket centrifugal.......
modern screws the new vette uses 2 sets of screws in series to keep low boost load on each set for eff sake 
i can't find the compressor maps but they tend to help


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

*FV-QR*

APPROVED. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## jimivr6 (Feb 18, 2003)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

where did you get that charger from ?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (jimivr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jimivr6* »_where did you get that charger from ?

eBay before the china invasion, $400, there used to be like one or two pages of superchargers and turbos mixed, then came the china crap and electric superchargers and ruin eBay for me!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

finished my fuel system today, pix show pump filter and hoses, extra hoses for fuel transfer from stock tank, then with cell installed, just need carpet on the sides http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

That's awesome my friend. I'm currently building an 16v/ABA GT3076R Lysholm, just waiting on parts. This will be run on megasquirt and with an 02m w/ LSD. Also not using the tubular exhaust manifold, I bought a cast one.
Here is what I have so far
























I want to run it sequentially, I haven't decided how i'm going to route everything as I don't want either to choke the other, but ignoring any compounding factors my thoughts are that;
Either air filter - blower (12psi stock pulley) -air/water log style intercooler - turbo (25psi?) - intercooler - throttle body. 
Or
Air filter - turbo (25psi) - intercooler - bypass - blower (12psi) - intercooler - throttle body
- bypass - piping - throttle body
In the second scenario for the bypass I was thinking I would take a obd1 vr throttle body and rig it to a VES actuator and have that controlled by my electronic boost controller. It would be normally open, then at whatever psi tuning determined, it would close. Thus bypassing the blower and have the turbo predominately feeding the intake directly. My thought is that the bypass throttle body unit would not seal completely and allow enough air to pass to not choke the blower. 
The VES actuator idea spurred off these vacuum actuated exhaust cutouts
SP boost activated exhaust cutout
Any thoughts on this?


_Modified by c_hundley86 at 6:26 PM 4-14-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

All twin charged set-ups should be:
filter-maf (if you have one) - turbo - SC - intake
install intercoolers as you feel fit. For bypasses, you can use wastegates. Normally diverter valves are used, but wastegates provide better partial-vacuum control of the diaphram than diverters. 
btw, that's a nice looking set up. Is that a g60 bracket with the BBM g60/lysholm charger kit?


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*FV-QR*

Thanks for the input, I hope I'm not taking this thread in the wrong direct OP

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
btw, that's a nice looking set up. Is that a g60 bracket with the BBM g60/lysholm charger kit?


In those pics I posted it is just a stock g60 bracket I was using for charger mock-up, I will actually be using a modified g60 bracket and alternator setup from Issam Abed, who has been great to work with. But yes, the charger setup is a BBM lysholm.








I have also ordered a Zornig/Racecraft short runner intake, which should clear the charger.


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (c_hundley86)*

a fellow vortex user pointed me to this thread.... I figure I might as well chime in....
I'm doing the same...... here's my setup as it sits in construction at the moment...


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

vary nice set up, what kind of car is it going in? I wish I had a 02m, it's on the list, should be real fun retrofitting into my scirocco


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (BellCityDubber)*

what car are you putting this in? seems we got a new trend going here http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

In the second scenario for the bypass I was thinking I would take a obd1 vr throttle body and rig it to a VES actuator and have that controlled by my electronic boost controller. It would be normally open, then at whatever psi tuning determined, it would close. Thus bypassing the blower and have the turbo predominately feeding the intake directly. My thought is that the bypass throttle body unit would not seal completely and allow enough air to pass to not choke the blower. 
The VES actuator idea spurred off these vacuum actuated exhaust cutouts
SP boost activated exhaust cutout
Any thoughts on this?

I looked at a lot of bypass info, on a engineers forum it seems the wastegate used as a bypass is the most successful and easier to set up, here is the link it takes you to one guys questions but look around at this forum there is a lot of really good info for twin charging, I would do the turbo to charger set up, it's easier to control the turbos boost, I heard BBM tried a system just like yours and failed! blown motor on the dyno, so it will be really cool to see ya make yours work, do you have a build thread?
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewth...ge=21


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

thanks for all the input, it keeps me motivated, so after I wrapped up my fuel system I got the dash back in, now has new electronic programmable speedo, two fuel gauges, volt, water temp and the XD-16 air fuel gauge, need to do a oil pressure soon, anyway here's a pic IC piping next week, then tune and drive


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_
do you have a build thread?


I have a few progress pics up on a local forum, but I don't think I'm far along enough to make real build thread. Thanks for the info too








This will be going in my mk2


----------



## sdezego (Apr 23, 2004)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

Nice!


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: (sdezego)*

as for my setup... I plan on installing it into a mk1.... but we'll see what happens when I get to that point.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_
In the second scenario for the bypass I was thinking I would take a obd1 vr throttle body and rig it to a VES actuator and have that controlled by my electronic boost controller. It would be normally open, then at whatever psi tuning determined, it would close. Thus bypassing the blower and have the turbo predominately feeding the intake directly. My thought is that the bypass throttle body unit would not seal completely and allow enough air to pass to not choke the blower. 
The VES actuator idea spurred off these vacuum actuated exhaust cutouts
SP boost activated exhaust cutout
Any thoughts on this?

I looked at a lot of bypass info, on a engineers forum it seems the wastegate used as a bypass is the most successful and easier to set up, here is the link it takes you to one guys questions but look around at this forum there is a lot of really good info for twin charging, I would do the turbo to charger set up, it's easier to control the turbos boost, I heard BBM tried a system just like yours and failed! blown motor on the dyno, so it will be really cool to see ya make yours work, do you have a build thread?
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewth...ge=21

You WANT the turbo always blowing in to the super charger. Always. This compounds your boost (multiplies pressure ratios). The only bypass should go from the supercharger outlet to the supercharger inlet to let the supercharger "free wheel" when the throttle body closes. Like I said, use a waste-gate for this, tial 38mm would suffice.


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*FV-QR*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
The only bypass should go from the supercharger outlet to the supercharger inlet 


You mean *turbo* outlet to supercharger inlet, right?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (c_hundley86)*


_Quote, originally posted by *c_hundley86* »_
You mean *turbo* outlet to supercharger inlet, right?

no! Pat had it right, the bypass of the supercharger is for idle and cruz, the turbo doesn't make boost until under load so no bypass needed there, when bypassing a super you should send the pressurized air back to the super inlet or vent to atmosphere like I do for light throttle and idle, otherwise you will have poor vac at idle and poor mpg for hwy cruz, as you open the throttle the bypass should close sending boost to the engine, you can also set up a bypass to isolate the super after the turbo surpasses it for turbo boost only after it spools, this eliminates the compound effects which in some cases is desirable


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

gotcha, I was thinking about it differently


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

my dial up finally loaded your car pic, looks really clean, it otta fly! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

do you have GPS that does speed bumps


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

Thanks! the front lip is just plastic so it can take some abuse from speed bumps http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
This is what I am thinking now, let me know if I am still misunderstanding you
At idle and cruise the wastegate will be open and recirculating, just like how a stock g60 is setup. Then once under load the wastegate will close, making all the boost go through the throttle body. Is this correct?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

looks right, you will want a BOV between the turbo and super though for shifting when the turbo is making boost! I'm not using a wastegate myself for the charger, I found the Procharger pro-flow bypass valve's work real well and is adjustable, they use a flapper valve like most stock supers instead of like BOV's, they are 1.5" so might use two in my new piping, there only $165.00 new each http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

if you use the wastegate you need to mess with the spring rates until it works right for your eng vac, and run the pressure line backwards from how it works as a wastegate, someone suggested hooking the vac line up to it inside the the car so you can watch it when driving before installing to get it right, not a bad idea!


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

yeah the ProCharger ProFlo Bypass Valve is what I was thinking of making with the vacuum actuator and a spare TB, I didn't know such a thing already existed. I'll have to look into that.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

it's the shiz, I've been using one of there older ones, works great but ugly as hell, so going with there new billet style like your pic, should be a nice looking piece under the hood http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

Are they progressive, like a wastegate? OR off/on like a diverter valve?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

feels progressive to me, vary smooth, and adjustable as well, pre-load anyway, I have no complaints at all! its the same basic design as in Magnachargers which are used in more production cars then any other where drivability is mandatory


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_looks right, you will want a BOV between the turbo and super though for shifting when the turbo is making boost! I'm not using a wastegate myself for the charger, I found the Procharger pro-flow bypass valve's work real well and is adjustable, they use a flapper valve like most stock supers instead of like BOV's, they are 1.5" so might use two in my new piping, there only $165.00 new each http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

I don't know how well a bov would work between the turbo and supercharger. Ideally you would want the super charger AFTER the throttle body, with the bov before the tb, and a wastegate/bypass going from the supercharger outlet to the supercharger inlet.
Also, don't forget the wastegate controlling the turbo should use the boost source after the supercharger for its reference.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
I don't know how well a bov would work between the turbo and supercharger. Ideally you would want the super charger AFTER the throttle body, with the bov before the tb, and a wastegate/bypass going from the supercharger outlet to the supercharger inlet.
Also, don't forget the wastegate controlling the turbo should use the boost source after the supercharger for its reference.

thread is showing upgrades I am doing to my car, my charger system has been working fine for a long time, without the bov I split a silicone hose so it must be needed between the two chargers







the other poster pic has a pos. displacement charger, yea I forgot it would be a better system in his set up with the t-body before the charger







no benefit with my Powerdyne that I know of!


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Oh, don't think I'm saying it won't work like that. When I said I don't know how well it'll work, I mean I don't know. A BOV(diverter) is definitely needed for the turbo. That's not up to debate










_Modified by Pat @ Pitt Soundworks at 1:31 AM 4-18-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

interior is finally done with all the trim, just forgot what black carpet was like for the obsessive compulsive







vary disturbing, little dirt spots yelling at me
























here's some cool wiring loom I found on Summit, sorry its a little blurry 








cheers!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

got a couple IC pipes done, just stop for lunch, thought I would post pics as I go
Thanks


----------



## PSUCorrado (Sep 11, 2006)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

I thought the lysholm didn't like to compound compress air.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

neither superchargers or turbochargers care what goes in them. They multiply the pressure of whatever the intake charge is by a pressure ratio. For 14lbs of boost, that's a 2pr. If you have a turbo boosting at 16psi, and a supercharger with a pressure ratio of 2, the engine will see 32psi.
You control the amount of boost by using a wastegate on the turbo set to take the boost reference signal from the manifold, after the SC compounds the pressure. That way, example:
you want 18psi of "boost" at the manifold
supercharger has a PR of 1.4
atmospheric air pressure is 14.7psi at sea level (ATM)
supercharger boost alone = (atm)14.7*(pr)1.4-(atm)14.7= 5.88 "lbs boost". 
It's actually 20.58lbs of pressure at the manifold
now instead of the turbo making 18lbs of boost, it will only have to produce:
("boost" req + ATM) = actual manifold pressure (after turbo and super)
(manifold pressure)/(supercharger pr)= actual pressure before supercharger
(pressure before SC)-14.7 = "boost pressure" from the turbo charger"
[(18+14.7)/1.4] -14.7= 8.65 lbs of boost. The supercharger will compound in the rest.
That's the backwards way of figuring it out. The "forwards" way is:
[(turbo boost+14.7)*(supercharger PR)]-14.7=manifold "boost" pressure

I digress. Turbos do the same thing. You can have a big ass turbo feed in to a tiny turbo and achieve the exact same results.
The real benefits of twin charging come from allowing you to run a much larger turbo than the engine would otherwise be able to support - one that would normally surge all of the time.
for example: a 16v 2.0 engine spinning to 8000rpm and making 600chp on just a gt30r would look like the left chart. Obviously it'll work, but it's not at a very efficient level on the map.  
Now take a gt42r, the center chart. Again, this just the turbo. You can see at least you're more centered on the map, but at low rpm, you're going to surge badly. At high rpm, again, you fall off the map. 
Now the third chart is with a supercharger with a 1.4 p/r ("20psi - top) and 1.567 pr pulley (24psi - bottom) and the gt42. Airflow requirements remain the same, but the required boost from the supercharger is much less, keeping the required airflow centered dead in the middle of the compressors efficiency zone. This LOWERS the amount of intercooling you need, for the SAME end hp
















For a big hp street car, there is absolutely no reason not to twin charge. None.
sorry for the threadjack


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

An easy way to set and tac pipe rotation, had to quit though, migs don't like the wind! welds where suffering, WOW! lightning! OK storm's over, back to work!



























_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 1:07 PM 4-22-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (PSUCorrado)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PSUCorrado* »_I thought the lysholm didn't like to compound compress air.

I run a PowerDyne


----------



## 89cabby (Mar 29, 2008)

i cant wait to see videos of this beast driving around








SCIROCCOS!!!! \m/


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Hate to say it but you really should switch to a positive displacement charger. Centrifugal chargers don't work as well in a twincharged setup because they build boost based off of rpm.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_Hate to say it but you really should switch to a positive displacement charger. Centrifugal chargers don't work as well in a twincharged setup because they build boost based off of rpm.

seems pretty aggressive to me







went to 245/45's to hook up and they still spun, so just installed a LSD haven't driving with it yet, still finishing upgrades, my only performance complaint is I was running out of fuel on the top end, fixed that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
PS: the super is over driven, I can hit 20psi in neutral 




_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 6:03 PM 4-21-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Oh there's no doubt a centrifugal supercharger is better than no supercharger. It's just because the boost "builds" rather than "exists", the benefits of twin charging are harder to see. With a positive displacement SC, you'll spool up quicker.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

posting a question from PM.
so a pos.disp s/c moves you up on a turbo compressor map?
Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (8:53 PM 4-21-2010): Both positive displacement and centrifugal chargers move you down on a compressor map. The positive displacement is better because of the way it builds boost. The centrifugal charger increases boost pressure and flow with rpm - that is the superchargers pressure ratio increases from 1.0 to whatever it would be based on RPM. A positive displacement charger always has the same pressure ratio for every rpm, just so long as the blades are spinning.
There won't be a difference on the top end. Once the centrifugal charger hits it's peak pressure ratio, it will perform the same as a positive displacement charger.
The reason to choose positive displacement is in the lower revs. Lets say you'd see positive manifold pressure (1psi "boost") at 2000rpm. With a centrifugal charger, you're still at a 1.0 pr, so the engine will see 1psi "boost" at 2000rpm. With a PD charger with a 1.4 pr (for example), you'd see 5.8psi @ 2000rpm.
{[(boost + 14.7)* scPR)]-14.7}
Let's carry the example to 2500rpm. Just turbo, you see 5psi. With a centri charger (1.05pr), you'd see 6psi. With a PD charger (1.4 pr) you'd see 13psi.
see?








Just like to add, all numbers are relative. I have no idea what PR a centri charger has based on RPM, but if it builds to 1.4pr @ 7500rpm, it's safe to say it has a pr of 0.46 (no effect below PR of 1) at 2000rpm and 2500rpm, assuming linear PR progression. If it is in-fact linear (as I assume), you wouldn't see positive manifold pressure with a centri charger until 5200rpm. I really don't think that's right, but at least you can follow the logic.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

IC Piping almost done


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

woa, confused.


----------



## abacorrado (Apr 5, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

watched you crazy mofos


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

Only in Dillon


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (KubotaPowered)*

needed some open hwy!
moved from Seattle area, might as well ride a moped there its so congested


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

I've been to Dillon many times, definitely lots of open highway!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: twin charged 16v (KubotaPowered)*

found some locals on a forum here too, there's a big rally called YNP in June for VW Audi only, should be fun! BQ then cruz through yellowstone then back to gather and vote on cars http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

*Re: twin charged 16v (Autoboost-tech)*

I thought about making the drive back up for that but I don't have the time


----------



## .:V.R.6.6.6:. (Mar 30, 2007)

*Re: twin charged 16v (KubotaPowered)*

very interesting http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## MaxVW (Nov 4, 2004)

so what is your total boost pressure? at max?


----------



## EL DRIFTO (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: (MaxVW)*

the procharger air switch & 20 psi in neutral means they're not intending on the low pr but switching power adders mid range, i think


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

What?


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

ok so let me get this straight cuz you guys messed me all up.
im going to run a g60 on my set up (surprised to see so many compound systems being built)
now...
i want to have my turbo inlet piped to the air intake side of the g60.. then from the rsr outlet i run it to my intercooler and after that to the TB/intake mani.
now where should a bov/ diverter go?
do i get this right?
sorry to threadjack a bit


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

The diverter valve (you should use a diverter valve) would go between the intercooler and throttle body, and loop back to right before the inlet to the turbo compressor.


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

i only need one DV, i wont surge the g60 on part throttle or anything?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

With the supercharger before the throttle body, you can get away with one - as long as it's open at manifold vacuum (closed at 0vac or open throttle).
Ideally, you'd want the throttle body before the supercharger. In that instance, you'd need two diverter valves, one in front of the TB bypassing the turbo, and one going from SC outlet to SC inlet (both behind the TB).
But it'll work fine the way you have it - just so long as the diverter valve is bypassing BOTH super and turbo at the same time.


----------



## Roadhog_ (Feb 26, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

very very nice. Do my boost pipes next.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (c_hundley86)*

went to order this today and Procharger is out of stock and my old one leaks BAD!







[/QUOTE]
so I upgraded to one of these! WOOH-HOO00oo.....!










_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 10:20 AM 4-24-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Roadhog_)*

no problem! let me know when your ready with that vrt Raddo build! after 25 years in custom exhaust, IC piping is a walk in the park, certainly nothing like doing my SS 3" mandrel exhaust on my Scirocco's tight a$$


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (MaxVW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MaxVW* »_so what is your total boost pressure? at max?

no max yet, had a little fuel shortage, 044 couldn't do it! went Aeromotive http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

do you have the g60 t-body? it has a bypass in it you can use as well


----------



## mcdub (Jun 19, 2005)

Wow the sickness.
I hope theres a sweet video to this.


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_do you have the g60 t-body? it has a bypass in it you can use as well



nope, got a custom made intake for the vr TB


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (mcdub)*



mcdub said:


> Wow the sickness.
> Sickness is putting it lightly! it's become more of an obsession or insanity I can't seem to stop
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

OK! this may be the final outcome with wrinkle paint, just haven't decided if I want to try some other colors like red on silver over the wrinkle paint, I am doing a test on some extra pipe to see how well it would work! any colors I might be missing? what ever I go with the valve cover will be the same!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

here are the two colors I have on top of the wrinkle, ruby red and silver any input?


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

First off, very nice work man. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I like the silver, the other color doesn't fit in.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (GinsterMan98)*

yea the red I was hoping was a little closer to the FPR and line fittings when I ordered it, starting to like the black more and more, sinister!


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

is that a tial blow off valve?
i like the wrinkle black best myself


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

just looks like one, I am using it for fitment only! the real deal is coming, Tial Q 50mm blue to match the blue Vortech bypass


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_is that a tial blow off valve?
i like the wrinkle black best myself

black it is! done deal


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

that vortech bypass valve.. which one did you get? the 8 psi or the 12-25 one?
which would better on your set up?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

it 's the normally open spring rate at 6hg to 8hg for supercharging, the higher spring rate is set up to be a BOV but look the same, I will be using a TiAL BOV to back up the Vortech for higher boost discharge since it's only 1.5" inlet!

_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_that vortech bypass valve.. which one did you get? the 8 psi or the 12-25 one?
which would better on your set up?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Wait, I'm confused. Why are you using the vortech bypass and a tial BOV?


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

i assume the higher boost wont be able to go through the low psi (8 ) DV .. so anything more than that will go out the BOV... but then why use the DV? does the air HAVE to go back in?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_Wait, I'm confused. Why are you using the vortech bypass and a tial BOV?
 
the bypass does nothing when the turbo is making boost, unless I just vent it to air, in which case the BOV would just be a condom







a little added protection!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_i assume the higher boost wont be able to go through the low psi (8 ) DV .. so anything more than that will go out the BOV... but then why use the DV? does the air HAVE to go back in?

the DV is for light load, cruz, and idle only, otherwise I have poor vac because of the super, the BOV is for high boost when shifting or off throttle after boosting


_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 11:44 AM 4-25-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

remember! this is meant to be a street car! not race only car, DV's are needed for drivability http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
The BOV may end up being over redundant if I leave the DV open to air, I know how painful this sounds to the pocket book, but my BOV has worked so hard all these years to be part of the family and looked good doing so, I couldn't find it in my heart to euthanize it








cheers!











_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 12:53 PM 4-25-2010_


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_do you have the g60 t-body? it has a bypass in it you can use as well

That's the route I went with on my setup


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (BellCityDubber)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BellCityDubber* »_
That's the route I went with on my setup

pix?


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

they're waay back at the end of page one.....
here it is again








it's a mk1 rocco intake manifold cut and welded to the lower intake manifold, and the g60 throttle body is way over there.... ya cant really see it very well


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

^ are you any farther along than that pic?


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

no actually. you know how life gets......
busy.... pulls ya away from things.... I have my rabbit swap recipient that I want to get on the road and I haven't even had much time to do any work to it either. 
I presume things to pick back up in the summer.


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

totally understand.. im in the same boat


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

*FV-QR*


_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_totally understand.. im in the same boat


x2


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (BellCityDubber)*

yea! I wanted to see how you plumbed the t-body, you better get busy Mr Dubber!


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

I hope Autoboost-tech doesn’t mind the side track, as I want to understand the tech side of this and I think he does to.

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_ neither superchargers or turbochargers care what goes in them. They multiply the pressure of whatever the intake charge is by a pressure ratio. For 14lbs of boost, that's a 2pr. If you have a turbo boosting at 16psi, and a supercharger with a pressure ratio of 2, the engine will see 32psi.
You control the amount of boost by using a wastegate on the turbo set to take the boost reference signal from the manifold, after the SC compounds the pressure. That way, example:
you want 18psi of "boost" at the manifold
supercharger has a PR of 1.4
atmospheric air pressure is 14.7psi at sea level (ATM)
supercharger boost alone = (atm)14.7*(pr)1.4-(atm)14.7= 5.88 "lbs boost". 
It's actually 20.58lbs of pressure at the manifold
now instead of the turbo making 18lbs of boost, it will only have to produce:
("boost" req + ATM) = actual manifold pressure (after turbo and super)
(manifold pressure)/(supercharger pr)= actual pressure before supercharger
(pressure before SC)-14.7 = "boost pressure" from the turbo charger"
[(18+14.7)/1.4] -14.7= 8.65 lbs of boost. The supercharger will compound in the rest.
That's the backwards way of figuring it out. The "forwards" way is:
[(turbo boost+14.7)*(supercharger PR)]-14.7=manifold "boost" pressure

I digress. Turbos do the same thing. You can have a big ass turbo feed in to a tiny turbo and achieve the exact same results.
The real benefits of twin charging come from allowing you to run a much larger turbo than the engine would otherwise be able to support - one that would normally surge all of the time.
for example: a 16v 2.0 engine spinning to 8000rpm and making 600chp on just a gt30r would look like the left chart. Obviously it'll work, but it's not at a very efficient level on the map. 
Now take a gt42r, the center chart. Again, this just the turbo. You can see at least you're more centered on the map, but at low rpm, you're going to surge badly. At high rpm, again, you fall off the map. 
Now the third chart is with a supercharger with a 1.4 p/r ("20psi - top) and 1.567 pr pulley (24psi - bottom) and the gt42. Airflow requirements remain the same, but the required boost from the supercharger is much less, keeping the required airflow centered dead in the middle of the compressors efficiency zone. This LOWERS the amount of intercooling you need, for the SAME end hp
















For a big hp street car, there is absolutely no reason not to twin charge. None.
sorry for the threadjack


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_posting a question from PM.
so a pos.disp s/c moves you up on a turbo compressor map?
Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (8:53 PM 4-21-2010): Both positive displacement and centrifugal chargers move you down on a compressor map. The positive displacement is better because of the way it builds boost. The centrifugal charger increases boost pressure and flow with rpm - that is the superchargers pressure ratio increases from 1.0 to whatever it would be based on RPM. A positive displacement charger always has the same pressure ratio for every rpm, just so long as the blades are spinning.
There won't be a difference on the top end. Once the centrifugal charger hits it's peak pressure ratio, it will perform the same as a positive displacement charger.
The reason to choose positive displacement is in the lower revs. Lets say you'd see positive manifold pressure (1psi "boost") at 2000rpm. With a centrifugal charger, you're still at a 1.0 pr, so the engine will see 1psi "boost" at 2000rpm. With a PD charger with a 1.4 pr (for example), you'd see 5.8psi @ 2000rpm.
{[(boost + 14.7)* scPR)]-14.7}
Let's carry the example to 2500rpm. Just turbo, you see 5psi. With a centri charger (1.05pr), you'd see 6psi. With a PD charger (1.4 pr) you'd see 13psi.
see?








Just like to add, all numbers are relative. I have no idea what PR a centri charger has based on RPM, but if it builds to 1.4pr @ 7500rpm, it's safe to say it has a pr of 0.46 (no effect below PR of 1) at 2000rpm and 2500rpm, assuming linear PR progression. If it is in-fact linear (as I assume), you wouldn't see positive manifold pressure with a centri charger until 5200rpm. I really don't think that's right, but at least you can follow the logic.

Pat Thank you for the detailed info. here is some real world data on a 2.0L 16V with a centrifugal charger.
Time rpm	psi
16:16:09	2315	1.02
16:16:09	2506	1.21
16:16:10	2591	1.45
16:16:10	2745	1.52
16:16:10	2858	1.58
16:16:10	2968	1.65
16:16:10	3083	1.79
16:16:10	3225	1.86
16:16:10	3354	1.91
16:16:10	3455	2.01
16:16:10	3606	2.20
16:16:11	3762	2.49
16:16:11	3912	2.64
16:16:11	4073	3.15
16:16:11	4218	3.29
16:16:11	4403	3.61
16:16:11	4603	3.80
16:16:11	4881	4.48
16:16:11	5280	5.45
16:16:11	5604	6.78
16:16:11	5994	7.31
16:16:12	6410	9.61
Comp map








Compressor is being under driven while the setup is being developed. There is more RPM in this charger, so boost could come on earlier. This is not the same charger as autoboost is running but should be close enough to see whats happening.
So with this info could do your magical analysis again? It would be really cool to see (approx) where on the compressor map of Autoboost tech's turbo he will be operating. Of course having his centrifugal comp map would be better than mine. But if you dont mind I think all of us trying to understand this would really appreciate it.
Thanks!











_Modified by Rocco R16V at 7:24 PM 4-26-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*

Autoboost tech, could you post your comp map or specs for pat if he's willing to work his magic.
here is a link to lots of comp maps. 
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbosupermaps.html


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Need to get just turbocharger boost logs to do this accurately, but here's a guess. It's pretty inaccurate - just saying.
Blue lines are engine air consumption based on RPM, taken from this thread:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3980360
The top red line is the PR assuming 600whp for the full rev range (3000rpm I think) with the turbo at full boost
The curved red line on top pressure ratio based on spool for just the turbo
The curved red line on bottom is the pressure ratio (of just the turbo) with a twin-charge system
Bottom line is graph of the super charger based on RPM and maxing out the compressor.








Edit: base of the win-charge PR line should be moved over to the left more



_Modified by Pat @ Pitt Soundworks at 1:30 AM 4-28-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_Autoboost tech, could you post your comp map or specs for pat if he's willing to work his magic.
here is a link to lots of comp maps. 
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbosupermaps.html

Powerdyne never provided compressor maps and are now out of business too, I can say that belt driving chargers have larger volutes and larger impellers and they move more air (CFM) at lower impeller speeds than gear driving chargers! this comes from 928 Motorsports, they don't have maps ether! best I can do is post real time numbers from my dl-32 when I get going again, I will log rpm and psi and see where it's making boost, also "Pat" my turbo is a Turbonetics t3/t04b not sure on trim ceramic bb .70 a/r cold .96 a/r hot if this helps your numbers any! I will look up the turbo part number and see what trim it is ASAP
well no part number, it's been too long ago! I cant remember the turbo's size, I would have to take it apart and measure everything to know what it was, but I am pretty sure it said .70 a/r on the compressor at the outlet with 2.75"in 2"out that should make it a t04b housing, and it had a 3"wheel or exducer don't remember the inducer, fits the 2.75 inlet, turban side is stamp .96 a/r t-3 footprint from a banks system special housing with a large internal wastegate, my guess would be a (super-v trim) 
thanks all! keep posting so I eventually can break something












_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 10:40 PM 4-26-2010_


----------



## BellCityDubber (Jun 13, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_totally understand.. im in the same boat

Well, I did manage to go to our weekly meet and ran into both the parts guys for my local dealership..... and a few of the service techs too... they were given a good heads up for some of the stranger parts I may ask for in the next little while.
Until then it's all about paying off the credit card so I can "play" again









_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_yea! I wanted to see how you plumbed the t-body, you better get busy Mr Dubber!









You mean how my intake track/boost piping is going to end up?
I have a large box of couplers and pipes that I have to sort through... I'll keep everyone posted as I make progress on the engine
as for the technical info..... keep it comming http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rocconut (Feb 20, 2004)

*Re: FV-QR (BellCityDubber)*

Nice setup. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
What are the wheels?
http://i1001.photobucket.com/a...e.jpg


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (rocconut)*

So I put some more numbers together in a spreadsheet. I used boost logs from this thread:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4550093
gt3582R
2L FSI engine
16v head
.86 hot-side
I still need to find boost logs from a PD charger (twinscrew preferred, then eaton) with rpm. 
The numbers reflected do not show the influence of the supercharger on the spool of the turbo. It's significant.
In fact, with a 16v BBM Lysholm dyno and boost log (from the same car), I should be able to accurately predict the effects of spool up of the turbo.
Here's the results thus far
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Q2ERLWYB
When I get around to building one of these set ups, I just want it known I'll be aiming for a BBM (or similarly sized) Lysholm charger with a Holset hx52 turbo and PROPER exhaust manifold. The Holset has a .97 a/r hot-side, but is a twin-scroll manifold. With a proper twin-scroll manifold, the .97 a/r housing should spool just as well as, if not better than, the Garrett .86 housing.


_Modified by Pat @ Pitt Soundworks at 1:28 AM 4-28-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_Bottom line is graph of the super charger based on RPM and maxing out the compressor. 

Pat, Thanks for that thread link it helped me understand compressor maps better.
I converted the Kg/s to Lb/m on my compressor map and came up with a different line than you did, 
Using this chart,








And this Converter I made a new comp map using Lb/m instead of the KG/s 








did I do something wrong? Sorry for the thread jack. I'm not starting new thread as this info can still be usefull to autoboost-tech and is atleast somewhat relevant.











_Modified by Rocco R16V at 8:17 AM 4-28-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

with a 6"crank pulley and 2.5"sc pulley the Powerdyne is supposed to make 15psi at 6k rpm based on the 5.0 ford with the company I got the pulley from, of course this depends on motor and setup! it's close at best! but I think my boost numbers should be a little lower since my head is ported and have the large a/r turbo with 3"exhaust, it should out flow the 5.0 per cylinder I think! maybe it would be higher with less cylinders? boost is relative to resistances! (quote) charger output MINUS engine consumption = what's left to display on the gauge! more flow! more power with same or less psi, dyno is the bottom line! anyway! step ratio of 3.05 equals 43920rpm at the impeller, I used 928 Motorsport pulley calculator for sizing pulleys to calculate my impeller speeds at rpm, I have a 5" crank pulley with 2.5"sc pulley, I divided 43920/15=2928 ok! 2928 impeller rpm=1psi, on a 5.0! my impeller speed at 6k is 36600 so divide 36600/2928=about 12.5psi at 6k if correct, using this way to calculate through all the rpm's I came up with this graph, from memory this seems vary close in the lower rpms to what I seen before turbo spool, anyway see what this does to your numbers
this is rpm based only and doesn't reflect flow changes from cam and rpm or with turbo spool!
cheers!
rpm == psi
2000= 4.160
2500= 5.208 
3000= 6.250
3500= 7.291
4000= 8.333
4500= 9.375
5000= 10.416
5500= 11.458
6000= 12.500
6500= 13.541
7000= 14.583
PS: the reason I went with this charger was to make a survivable environment for the 020 trans, to much to low they break! if I had the time and money I would have gone 02m and PD charger http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 





_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 12:13 PM 4-28-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

Yeah i'm on a 020 too, that and the throttle response is why i went with one. 
Your boost #'s are closer to what i was expecting with with my large pulley. good thing for me is i've got lots of room (charger RPM) to go with a smaller pulley for more boost and more engine RPM once the motor is broke in and have the tuning sorted.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*

what charger did you have? the 928 Motorsports calculator works for other charges as well, I think they had the v1 step ratio and a few others as well, let me know what pulleys you have and I will check it out if they have your charger, or if you know the step up!


----------



## jettasmooth (Aug 7, 2002)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

this thing is ridiculous. Awesome project!


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*









This chart is one of the things I was hoping to find. It'll help determine spool rates







I really didn't want to crunch numbers to come up with airflow requirements. LOL Do you have this in an XLS so I don't have to go about manually typing it in?

_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V
did I do something wrong? Sorry for the thread jack. I'm not starting new thread as this info can still be usefull to autoboost-tech and is atleast somewhat relevant.








[/quote* »_
Not that I can see. My plot on your SC compressor map was based on the pure assumption that what pulley you're running would provide maximum flow. It's really funny, with centri chargers that the farther right you go, the farther up you go as well. Anyway, that graph isn't really necessary to determine the twin charge set-up. As long you aren't maxing out the charger in either PR, flow, or impeller speed, you're good to go. I mean, obviously you wouldn't want to run a gt35r through an Eaton m45, but that's common sense.


Autoboost-tech said:


> I have a 5" crank pulley with 2.5"sc pulley, I divided 43920/15=2928 ok! 2928 impeller rpm=1psi, on a 5.0! my impeller speed at 6k is 36600 so divide 36600/2928=about 12.5psi at 6k if correct, using this way to calculate through all the rpm's I came up with this graph, from memory this seems vary close in the lower rpms to what I seen before turbo spool, anyway see what this does to your numbers
> this is rpm based only and doesn't reflect flow changes from cam and rpm or with turbo spool!
> cheers!
> rpm == psi
> ...






Autoboost-tech said:


> Good info, I'll see if I can work crank speeds in to my chart tonight and see how that changes things. And I totally understand about the save-a-bility of the 020. Too much _anything_ and they break. HAH


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

What's happing for engine air consumption. I feel stupid but I'm stumped. I'm thinking it should be:
RPM (c/min)* displacement (m^3) * density of air (lb/m^3). 
The units work out to lb/min but my numbers aren't agreeing with that chart.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

next to last peace of the puzzle has arrived, quick install and took some pix, to cold to paint the pipe so will have to wait and see how the weather goes, just need a air cleaner system and it's done!!!!!!!!!!! 
WOOh......HOOoo.......


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

That chart is from the thread you said you were getting the flow rates from, http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...age=4
but after some more research i found this site http://www.lovehorsepower.com/...e.htm
I'll PM you the chart in an excell format, just have to convert it first.
the two charts do not agree at all, both are 2.0L but the first is for a VW 20V and the latter is a Toyota MR2 16V but there shouldn't be that much difference.
ie at a pressure ratio of 2 and 5000rpm 20v=28.6179 Lb/m and 16V=22.51 Lb/s is the VW head really that much better?


----------



## ALL.FOUR.32 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*

very nice build,,i love it http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_Quote, originally posted by Pat @ Pitt Soundworks »
neither superchargers or turbochargers care what goes in them. They multiply the pressure of whatever the intake charge is by a pressure ratio. For 14lbs of boost, that's a 2pr. If you have a turbo boosting at 16psi, and a supercharger with a pressure ratio of 2, the engine will see 32psi.
You control the amount of boost by using a wastegate on the turbo set to take the boost reference signal from the manifold, after the SC compounds the pressure. That way, example:
you want 18psi of "boost" at the manifold
supercharger has a PR of 1.4
atmospheric air pressure is 14.7psi at sea level (ATM)
supercharger boost alone = (atm)14.7*(pr)1.4-(atm)14.7= 5.88 "lbs boost".
It's actually 20.58lbs of pressure at the manifold
now instead of the turbo making 18lbs of boost, it will only have to produce:
("boost" req + ATM) = actual manifold pressure (after turbo and super)
(manifold pressure)/(supercharger pr)= actual pressure before supercharger
(pressure before SC)-14.7 = "boost pressure" from the turbo charger"
[(18+14.7)/1.4] -14.7= 8.65 lbs of boost. The supercharger will compound in the rest.
That's the backwards way of figuring it out. The "forwards" way is:
[(turbo boost+14.7)*(supercharger PR)]-14.7=manifold "boost" pressure

I digress. Turbos do the same thing. You can have a big ass turbo feed in to a tiny turbo and achieve the exact same results.
The real benefits of twin charging come from allowing you to run a much larger turbo than the engine would otherwise be able to support - one that would normally surge all of the time.
for example: a 16v 2.0 engine spinning to 8000rpm and making 600chp on just a gt30r would look like the left chart. Obviously it'll work, but it's not at a very efficient level on the map.
Now take a gt42r, the center chart. Again, this just the turbo. You can see at least you're more centered on the map, but at low rpm, you're going to surge badly. At high rpm, again, you fall off the map.
Now the third chart is with a supercharger with a 1.4 p/r ("20psi - top) and 1.567 pr pulley (24psi - bottom) and the gt42. Airflow requirements remain the same, but the required boost from the supercharger is much less, keeping the required airflow centered dead in the middle of the compressors efficiency zone. This LOWERS the amount of intercooling you need, for the SAME end hp 

_Modified by Rocco R16V at 7:24 PM 4-26-2010_

This guy correctly states that on a compound turbo/super system, boost MULTIPLIES on stages but then he just adds them...
If you have a turbo boosting at 16psi, and a supercharger with a pressure ratio of 2, the engine will NOT see 32psi, but:
taking the equation he has a few lines later:
The "forwards" way is:
[(turbo boost+14.7)*(supercharger PR)]-14.7=manifold "boost" pressure
[(16+14.7)*2]-14.7=(30.7*2)-14.7=61.4-14.7=46.7 !!!
You have ABSOLUTE pressures multiplying.
End in the end he says:
Airflow requirements remain the same, but the required boost from the supercharger is much less, keeping the required airflow centered dead in the middle of the compressors efficiency zone. This LOWERS the amount of intercooling you need, for the SAME end hp 
In order to do this we must assume we're using a positive displacement supercharger in order to keep the red line horizontal (assuming the SC has a constant PR throughout the RPM range). Then a pos.displ. SC with a PR of about 1.5 is nowhere near the 80% efficiency of the GT42. We sadly have the total efficiency dropping to somewhere in between the two power adders' efficiencies.
My $.02 is that you can't have efficient setups with compounding power adders. You will always loose peak HP except of some cases like on diesels with extreme PRs. The only real use of a compound system would be to broaden the torque curve. Like what VW has done with the 1.4 TSI: (low)SC alone - (mid)compound system - (upper)turbo alone. That's the best case scenario and the only one that yields proper results.
A thing I don't understand is how would a turbo-centrifugal SC compound system would work: You loose the low RPM capability of the SC AND the turbo. It's much better to just put: A bigger turbo!
I'd love your opinions on my thoughts...


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_
A thing I don't understand is how would a turbo-centrifugal SC compound system would work: You loose the low RPM capability of the SC AND the turbo. It's much better to just put: A bigger turbo!
I'd love your opinions on my thoughts...

as I said in my opening post this was built a long time ago and turbo choices where a lot less, at least that I knew of, no internet! just monthly mags for new products, though I upgraded later to a ball bearing t3/t4 turbo with .96 a/r hot, also "huge" hp numbers wasn't my goal for a daily driver, but can tail tuck parts hangers!

The centrifugal charger needs to be overdriven and use a quality EBC or BLV (boost limit valve) this way the large turbo comes on much earlier and doesn't over boost when the charger increases PR, I have good progressive low boost from the charger! 5psi to 8psi before turbo spool, and better performance in the low end than when waiting for a large turbo alone, exactly what I wanted for using my 020 trans and traction, bottom line is! this was an already working system with the exact results I aimed for, I am only posting upgrades I have been doing! compounds do work and have big advantages on smaller engines, if I had the time and money as I said before, I would go with a 02m & posi charger! or VRT AWD like the r36 big turbo build here would be nice! now that I left the congested Seattle area and in the wide open Montana big sky state http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 



_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 11:44 AM 4-29-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_My $.02 is that you can't have efficient setups with compounding power adders. You will always loose peak HP except of some cases like on diesels with extreme PRs. The only real use of a compound system would be to broaden the torque curve. Like what VW has done with the 1.4 TSI: (low)SC alone - (mid)compound system - (upper)turbo alone. That's the best case scenario and the only one that yields proper results.
A thing I don't understand is how would a turbo-centrifugal SC compound system would work: You loose the low RPM capability of the SC AND the turbo. It's much better to just put: A bigger turbo!
I'd love your opinions on my thoughts...

I wasn’t really following the math so I didn’t catch that. 
I don’t know why you would lose any low RPM capability of a centri-charger in a twin charge system? 
Cenrti-chargers sized properly runs in the most efficient area all the way thru the rev range with the operating line running up and to the right on the compressor map, a turbo runs left to right on the map and doesn’t spend very much time in its max efficiency range, heating the air more.
A bigger turbo only would have WAY more lag than a centri with the same boost at max rpm. Yes the turbo puts down more power under the curve, but if you cant get the power down what use is it anyway? The linear power delivery of a centri makes the motor act like a bigger N/A motor. And they do add torque at lower RPM’s. Having great throttle response at any rpm and not having to deal with a huge torque spike makes a car much more predictable and fun to drive IMO.
One thought I had was to use a smaller turbo, that spools fast for low rpm boost then as it starts to lose capability to flow enough to keep the boost up the charger takes over. So the turbo would spool real early and be regulated in its peak efficiency. The centri-charger would make up the extra air as RPM’s rise and would always be run right along the peak efficiency range as well. The problem I can see with this setup is the smaller turbo might choke the charger at high rpm’s. And a system to make it changeover would be complicated. 










_Modified by Rocco R16V at 2:12 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
One thought I had was to use a smaller turbo, that spools fast for low rpm boost then as it starts to lose capability to flow enough to keep the boost up the charger takes over. So the turbo would spool real early and be regulated in its peak efficiency. The centri-charger would make up the extra air as RPM’s rise and would always be run right along the peak efficiency range as well. The problem I can see with this setup is the smaller turbo might choke the charger at high rpm’s. And a system to make it changeover would be complicated. 
the smaller turbo would choke the exhaust as well, reducing top end flow through the head, it works great as a twin turbo system! 









_Modified by Rocco R16V at 2:12 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
I don’t know why you would lose any low RPM capability of a centri-charger in a twin charge system? 
Cenrti-chargers sized properly runs in the most efficient area all the way thru the rev range with the operating line running up and to the right on the compressor map, a turbo runs left to right on the map and doesn’t spend very much time in its max efficiency range, heating the air more.

The VW TSI has 0.7 bar [email protected] idle RPM, 1.5 [email protected] I can't see how you would do that with a centri...

_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
A bigger turbo only would have WAY more lag than a centri with the same 
boost at max rpm. 

How can a turbo have lag at max rpm? Maybe you mean something else or I can't understand...

_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
Yes the turbo puts down more power under the curve, but if you cant get the power down what use is it anyway? The linear power delivery of a centri makes the motor act like a bigger N/A motor. And they do add torque at lower RPM’s. Having great throttle response at any rpm and not having to deal with a huge torque spike makes a car much more predictable and fun to drive IMO. 

I assume you're talking about FWD which is right but on AWD you want the biggest area under the curve you can get. And how much torque do they add at low rpms? With 5 psi?










_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
One thought I had was to use a smaller turbo, that spools fast for low rpm boost then as it starts to lose capability to flow enough to keep the boost up the charger takes over. So the turbo would spool real early and be regulated in its peak efficiency. The centri-charger would make up the extra air as RPM’s rise and would always be run right along the peak efficiency range as well. The problem I can see with this setup is the smaller turbo might choke the charger at high rpm’s. And a system to make it changeover would be complicated.









If you put the turbo first blowing to the centri it would be ok at low rpms but on high rpms it would of course choke the centri... Not to mention you would probably have to put an IC in between because the centri could not stand the heat from the turbo.
Won't work.
If you put the centri first blowing air to the turbo you would have problems at low rpms as the turbo would try to suck air through the slow-moving centri and fall out of efficiency and probably suck oil through it's impeller like it does with a clogged air filter.
Won't work again...
The VW TSI setup can't be beat...


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

Ok I see what happened so it's fine...
Your project is great http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif anyway even with these components, although:

_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_
The centrifugal charger needs to be overdriven and use a quality EBC or BLV (boost limit valve) 

Doesn't this kill efficiency?


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_
If you put the centri first blowing air to the turbo you would have problems at low rpms as the turbo would try to suck air through the slow-moving centri and fall out of efficiency and probably suck oil through it's impeller like it does with a clogged air filter.
The VW TSI setup can't be beat...









On second thought you could easily overcome this by putting a large one-way valve after the centri so that the turbo would by-pass the centri at low rpms and suck air from ambient, and on higher rpms as the cenri builds boost the valve would close and have a compound system.
BUT:
The small turbo would still be worse than a pos.dispSC regarding lag and the centri would still be worse than a turbo regarding peak HP.
So:
The logical way would be to use a pos.disp.SC for low rpms and a turbo for the higher.
So again:
The VW TSI is the best compound-sequential setup I've seen.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_Ok I see what happened so it's fine...
Your project is great http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif anyway even with these components, although:
Doesn't this kill efficiency?

why would it kill efficiency? a BLV wouldn't open until the max boost you want, key word want! lot's of people use wasegates for this on centuri chargers systems and crank up the rpm's for a turbo-like boost effect with dyno# and et's to back it up, I run the EBC for twin charging to back off the turbo at the max boost I want, the Apexi I have also learns the boost characteristics and adjust the duty cycles for faster spool up! you should use one or the other for engine safety, a manual boost controller or set wastegate wouldn't be a good idea with a centuri without doing the math right! unless you are making a full race engine with all the trim to handle 40+psi, remember this is a street car with an occasional race day, and fun as heck! if I was building a race car I would be looking for all the efficiency I can get, and that includes traction! pure power doesn't win races. 
PS: the VW twin charge system had to be more efficient for a small displacement engine and fuel economy 




_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 3:55 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

Because having a centri blowing half the air to the engine and half to the atmosphere can not be efficient.
It's like welding a turbo's wastegate shut and controlling boost with the blow-off valve. It's not very efficient... Imagine now that on a blower you're robbing crankshaft HP just to blow air through the blow-off valve and it makes things even worse. Not to mention that this should put you on the far right of the comp. map.
Of course we're not after the largest HP number, we're playing on the street, but being inefficient also means high fuel consumption and of course we're talking theoretically now like we would start a new project, I know yours is a couple of years old...


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*

The TSI setup is just perfect with no inefficiencies whatsoever:
You get blistering throttle response and lots of boost on low rpms from the pos.displ.SC working in his efficiency island.
On mid rpms as airflow increases the SC is pushed lower on his comp. map keeping it's efficiency (unlike a centri would) with the turbo starting to boost and working in compound. it's the least efficient part of the three but that's what's making it have a horizontal torque line and not a mountain-like one.
On high rpms it's just the turbo with the SC turning off by it's electric clutch and making itself practically not existant. Nothing beats the turbo on high rpms with no lag of course.
This is what we should replicate.


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_The smaller turbo would choke the exhaust as well, reducing top end flow through the head, it works great as a twin turbo system! 

A big wastegate will bypass the excess flow.

_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_I assume you're talking about FWD which is right but on AWD you want the biggest area under the curve you can get. 

I didn’t realize autoboost-tech had AWD. 

_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_And how much torque do they add at low rpms? With 5 psi?









More than a turbo at 0 psi!









_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_If you put the turbo first blowing to the centri it would be ok at low rpms but on high rpms it would of course choke the centri... Not to mention you would probably have to put an IC in between because the centri could not stand the heat from the turbo.
Won't work.

I didn’t say it would work I said it was a thought. Hence the comment on a changeover system. Don’t know why that setup would be any different than any other twin charge system in regards to heat. 

_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_The VW TSI setup can't be beat...









In regards to twin charge systems it may be theoretically best. but I think is too complicated and we have yet to see if its reliable. It certainly isn’t mod friendly. It was built with efficiency not performance in mind. IMO for the money one of those would cost me I, can think of a few motors that would beat it all day and night long!


----------



## Roadhog_ (Feb 26, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*

this thread makes my brain hurt.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_Because having a centri blowing half the air to the engine and half to the atmosphere can not be efficient.
It's like welding a turbo's wastegate shut and controlling boost with the blow-off valve. It's not very efficient... Imagine now that on a blower you're robbing crankshaft HP just to blow air through the blow-off valve and it makes things even worse. Not to mention that this should put you on the far right of the comp. map.
Of course we're not after the largest HP number, we're playing on the street, but being inefficient also means high fuel consumption and of course we're talking theoretically now like we would start a new project, I know yours is a couple of years old...

I didn't say I was using the BLV, and wouldn't use it as a boost controller, nor is it meant to be one, it is a good backup for boost spiking, if I set up for 25psi I would have it open at 28psi to protect my engine in case I miss a gear racing, I only mentioned the wastegate as one way to limit boost because of an article I read on a 1000hp v8 centri system using this method and ran vary low ET's don't remember what they where, but it was fast! you also can use a wastegate to switch over to turbo boost and leave the charger neutral after it does it's thing, with equal pressure on both sides of the charger or higher on the inlet it wouldn't produce much drag to the crank, by the way! 5psi to 8psi makes a lot of difference over NA, and turbo response time is greatly improved, especially with a high flow head, most stock turbo systems run 5psi (ie Saab) or 8psi to 12psi, with exceptions of coarse! but with great results for a factory street car.
I just don't see all this down side to centri chargers at all, sure there's a better mouse trap! and I would use it if the need arises! but I'm sure I will kill my share of rodents along the way












_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 6:33 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_
In order to do this we must assume we're using a positive displacement supercharger in order to keep the red line horizontal (assuming the SC has a constant PR throughout the RPM range). Then a pos.displ. SC with a PR of about 1.5 is nowhere near the 80% efficiency of the GT42. We sadly have the total efficiency dropping to somewhere in between the two power adders' efficiencies.
My $.02 is that you can't have efficient setups with compounding power adders. You will always loose peak HP except of some cases like on diesels with extreme PRs. The only real use of a compound system would be to broaden the torque curve. Like what VW has done with the 1.4 TSI: (low)SC alone - (mid)compound system - (upper)turbo alone. That's the best case scenario and the only one that yields proper results.
A thing I don't understand is how would a turbo-centrifugal SC compound system would work: You loose the low RPM capability of the SC AND the turbo. It's much better to just put: A bigger turbo!


Ah you're right. I edited the post several times and missed the initial number. If you ignore the "16" and check the other numbers, they should work out properly.
If you look at the chart I'm working on with pressure ratio vs rpm logs, you'll see 80% efficiency dips as low as 1.8 PR, and 78% efficiency goes as low as 1.55PR. At 1.55 PR and a SC pr of 1.4, that's still 17psi, 32psi absolute. Even still, staying low on the map and running the compressor in to less efficient zones is not really and different than those guys who push huge pressure ratios out of small turbos.
I'm working on a graph of the pressure ratio change as effected by rpm. My current numbers are showing a steady, even rise up the graph right through the most efficient zones. You'd be surprised at how they look, with PD and centri.... That is, for now - until I can work in increased spool due to the charger.
I feel compounding set ups are the ideal for efficiency. Yes, you'll be lower than the maximum amount of power from just using the turbo alone. Yes, the super charge DOES require power to spin. But the trade off is more power in the middle of the power-band. I would be willing to trade maximum top-end efficiency for a strong low and mid range. I don't know how the tfsi bypass works, I have an idea, but until I can come up with a reliable and efficient way to create a supercharger bypass, I will continue to recommend conventional pure compound set-ups.
And as I said, granted it'll work with centri-chargers, I can only recommend PD chargers. Hell, I wouldn't even recommend Roots chargers. Straight, twin-screw. We're definitely on the same page with this one!
Now I'm just thinking. Since we can't really add a clutch disengage to the chargers, we can bypass them using something like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5gaAuGNk5M with one before and after the supercharger, and a third between them. Biggest problem with using waste-gates to divert the flow is the pressure drop they cause. This is about maximizing efficiency. Even the big-bad 44mm wastegates are still too small when you're ruining 63mm or larger piping - never-mind the 90 degree turn.... With three boost-operated butterflies, the turbo would be "forced" to go in to the supercharger at low-boost levels, and bypass at higher. The charger could then be "free wheeled" resulting in now power-wasted. This whole set-up could even be used behind the throttle body (remembering it's best to keep the SC behind the TB), although plumbing it would get really nasty.
Edit:
look at how smooth that thing opens. Rotational speed is linear, surface area grows exponentially. That would provide enough time for the wastegate on the turbo to adjust and allow the turbo to shoot up and increase pressure without worrying about a drop-off in boost pressure from the switch.


_Modified by Pat @ Pitt Soundworks at 9:42 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_And as I said, granted it'll work with centri-chargers, I can only recommend PD chargers. Hell, I wouldn't even recommend Roots chargers. Straight, twin-screw. We're definitely on the same page with this one!
 were all the same page there, no argument PD's are best for a twincharge.

_Quote »_Now I'm just thinking. Since we can't really add a clutch disengage to the chargers, 
 there are some chargers that came with a electromagnetic clutch (like an ac clutch) but they were roots type i think. 
hey Pat, any thoughts on the two different flow charts?
It looks like the MR2 one is just using this calculator with formulas shown here. with this calulator we can make our own charts, cool! I’m more inclined to believe someone who shows their work. what do you think?


_Modified by Rocco R16V at 8:35 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

just started up the motor for he first time a few minutes ago to set the fuel pressure, purrr.... didn't have the last pipe camped down so didn't rev it much, and it's to cold out to have the doors open to the garage, just glade to hear it run again, SOooo....sweet..! nothing like a 16vt/sc with 3" exhaust










_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 9:43 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

hello guys,
im from brazil, and im very interested in doing this project here....
it would be the first vw16v to have twincharger setup...
our car with this engine is vw gol, as you can see in this vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L3Wik70S94

my goal is to go drag racing on the fwd category, witch is very popular to use vw gol on these.. but everybody goes turbo.. and i found very interesting to use twincharger and kill the turbo lag...
i have some experience with turbo, but i dont know where to start on the charger...
if you can help me out choosing the right components i would be grateful, maybe a assembly scheme... or the recipe of the cake, hehe
just confirming, our engine is a 2.0 with 157mm rods and 16v head (the head im sure is the same one)
about horse power, my intention is to have it ready to run from 300 to 600 hp, so change settings to use it in the streets, and using booster to get some extra hp for the dragway
thank you all
regards from brazil


_Modified by howit at 11:04 PM 4-29-2010_


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
I didn’t say it would work I said it was a thought. Hence the comment on a changeover system. Don’t know why that setup would be any different than any other twin charge system in regards to heat. 


When you have a charger blowing to a turbo (TSI) there's no problem with heat: the turbo can take it. But on the other way around you have to put a second IC not to fry the charger.

_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
In regards to twin charge systems it may be theoretically best. but I think is too complicated and we have yet to see if its reliable. It certainly isn’t mod friendly. It was built with efficiency not performance in mind. IMO for the money one of those would cost me I, can think of a few motors that would beat it all day and night long!


It's no more complicated than any other sequential/change-over system and it has proved itself: there are thousands of TSIs running in Greece with minimal problems stated and some have done 300.000Km. It's not of course an easy mod but I think it will pay you back if you can actually replicate it. If you factor in fuel consumption, there isn't any motor at this moment that can beat the TSI. Now the cost is not really that great: I was thinking of trying this on my Renault Clio 2.0 16V, using an old T4 turbo and a Mercedes kompressor. You can find them cheap here and they come with a built in electromagnetic clutch also.


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
If you look at the chart I'm working on with pressure ratio vs rpm logs, you'll see 80% efficiency dips as low as 1.8 PR, and 78% efficiency goes as low as 1.55PR. At 1.55 PR and a SC pr of 1.4, that's still 17psi, 32psi absolute. Even still, staying low on the map and running the compressor in to less efficient zones is not really and different than those guys who push huge pressure ratios out of small turbos.


That's what I'm saying: this setup is inefficient, so you could just use a small turbo instead. The SC drops the systems efficiency to a point that you loose the big turbo's advantage at high RPMs. I don't know if you were talking about an MR2 with a compound setup a few posts back, posted on the Turbo magazine some years back (called the MR6 I think). On that setup it clearly showed that the compound setup made less Hp than turbo only. Of course they should optimise the compound setup with a bigger turbo but I think it would still make less HP.

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
I'm working on a graph of the pressure ratio change as effected by rpm. My current numbers are showing a steady, even rise up the graph right through the most efficient zones. You'd be surprised at how they look, with PD and centri.... That is, for now - until I can work in increased spool due to the charger.


It's hard to believe. I'd sure be surprised and I'm curious to see them.

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
I feel compounding set ups are the ideal for efficiency. Yes, you'll be lower than the maximum amount of power from just using the turbo alone. Yes, the super charge DOES require power to spin. But the trade off is more power in the middle of the power-band. I would be willing to trade maximum top-end efficiency for a strong low and mid range. I don't know how the tfsi bypass works, I have an idea, but until I can come up with a reliable and efficient way to create a supercharger bypass, I will continue to recommend conventional pure compound set-ups.


I'm with you on this one especially on a street machine where you don't care just for top end HP but more for fun-to-drive, I just believe that the TSI setup is a worth upgrade from a simple compound. The reliable and efficient way to bypass the SC is the computer controlled electric TB.

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
And as I said, granted it'll work with centri-chargers, I can only recommend PD chargers. Hell, I wouldn't even recommend Roots chargers. Straight, twin-screw. We're definitely on the same page with this one!


Problem with the twin screws is that they eat-up energy when free-wheeling because of their internal compression design and if you put them in-vacuum (after the TB) you won't be able to use an IC (like on some V8s) so you have XS fuel consumption. This is why almost all OEMs use the Roots. If I wanted to just build a performance car and have the PD charger push more than 7 psi I would use a twin screw also.

_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
Now I'm just thinking. Since we can't really add a clutch disengage to the chargers


Have you thought of reto-fitting one from a VW or Mercedes charger?


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_
, we can bypass them using something like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5gaAuGNk5M with one before and after the supercharger, and a third between them. Biggest problem with using waste-gates to divert the flow is the pressure drop they cause. This is about maximizing efficiency. Even the big-bad 44mm wastegates are still too small when you're ruining 63mm or larger piping - never-mind the 90 degree turn.... With three boost-operated butterflies, the turbo would be "forced" to go in to the supercharger at low-boost levels, and bypass at higher. The charger could then be "free wheeled" resulting in now power-wasted. This whole set-up could even be used behind the throttle body (remembering it's best to keep the SC behind the TB), although plumbing it would get really nasty.


Instead of using a wastegate couldn't you use a 2way BOV like the one Autoboost-tech has in his car? It's basically like a WG but without the WG's extreme heat capability which you don't need.
But I think the boost-operated TB is better still.
Other than that TSI uses an electric butterfly like the TB. The best bypass would take rpms in account and not boost only, that's why it's electric and computer controlled. For example on high rpms you need it to stay wide open all of the time because the PDcharger is disengaged and there is no boost to push it open in this setup. 
Also you want crisp throttle response, so having to wait for the bypass to open is not good.
If you put the charger behind the TB you won't be able to put an IC so you won't have power.


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

good info , hey s3.2 .. do you have pics of your car?


----------



## S3.2 (Sep 19, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*

Thanx. My car is nothing special, just a regular turbo conversion.
Here you go:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (howit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *howit* »_hello guys,
im from brazil, and im very interested in doing this project here....
it would be the first vw16v to have twincharger setup...
our car with this engine is vw gol, as you can see in this vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L3Wik70S94

my goal is to go drag racing on the fwd category, witch is very popular to use vw gol on these.. but everybody goes turbo.. and i found very interesting to use twincharger and kill the turbo lag...
i have some experience with turbo, but i dont know where to start on the charger...
if you can help me out choosing the right components i would be grateful, maybe a assembly scheme... or the recipe of the cake, hehe
just confirming, our engine is a 2.0 with 157mm rods and 16v head (the head im sure is the same one)
about horse power, my intention is to have it ready to run from 300 to 600 hp, so change settings to use it in the streets, and using booster to get some extra hp for the dragway
thank you all
regards from brazil

_Modified by howit at 11:04 PM 4-29-2010_

600hp? you will need AWD to hook up! or built 02m trans at least, and the motor will need to be built to take it, for racing I would run a Lysholm supercharger with a Garrett GT4088R or ball bearing version, with .85a/r or .95 a/r turban housing, you will need to find a t4 footprint turbo exhaust manifold to run it, blow the turbo though the supercharger and have the t-body before the supercharger in between the turbo and super with a bypass for the supercharger, then a BOV to dump boost for shifting between the turbo and the t-body, plus run water/air intercooling, one inline type between the turbo and supercharger then one side mount for after the charger, and some water/methanol spray! I also would run a boost limit valve to protect from boost spike or runaway boost like what blew up (name withheld)'s twincharge attempt with this type system, also run a"good"stand-alone engine management like 034EFI, Autronic, Haltech, Motec, or megasquirt I guess? it's come a long way from starting out as a Heath-kit type product, but I know vary little about them, I run a Haltech! 1000cc or more injector's , I would use dual stage injector set up (fazed) to run street as well, 550cc(genesis twin spray) primary! 650cc secondary! if the SEM runs them together, this would give you better idle, economy and drivability, and kick it on race day!







the rest is common stuff, tires, brakes, parachute







most important read up on all this as much as possible, there are many sites with forums for twin charging with good info in them. 
if I was building a motor for this, it would be a ABA block beefed up , with a Audi v8 head conversion with porting, but that's me! 
good luck and have fun!



_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 7:29 AM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_When you have a charger blowing to a turbo (TSI) there's no problem with heat: the turbo can take it. But on the other way around you have to put a second IC not to fry the charger.

A centri-charger uses the same comprssor housing as a turbo, why would it not take the heat of compression, espcially since it doesnt have to deal with all the heat transfered from the exhaust.
I really dont consider fuel consumption a factor at all, except on my daily driver, truck and boat. For my track cars and motorcycles, performance and reliablity are the only considerations.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (S3.2)*

I really don't want to start a quote-off but I don't think we can discuss the multiple topics without it









_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_
That's what I'm saying: this setup is inefficient, so you could just use a small turbo instead. The SC drops the systems efficiency to a point that you loose the big turbo's advantage at high RPMs. I don't know if you were talking about an MR2 with a compound setup a few posts back, posted on the Turbo magazine some years back (called the MR6 I think). On that setup it clearly showed that the compound setup made less Hp than turbo only. Of course they should optimise the compound setup with a bigger turbo but I think it would still make less HP.


I wasn't talking about the mr2, I still have to look over those charts. There was one I remember seeing with twin turbo, twin centri chargers. Stupid. 
In my eyes, there are two camps with twin-charging. Performance minded, and efficiency minded. Can't go both ways. Performance minded, meaning area under the curve and having the supercharger let you use a MUCH larger turbo, and a lot of compounded boost (40+psi). Then there's efficiency minded, such as the TSI, trying to crank usable power out of a smaller engine. It's no surprise the twin-charge makes less peak power than the turbo only. That should be a given. But it makes up for a lot more than it looses. 

_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_
It's hard to believe. I'd sure be surprised and I'm curious to see them.


As soon as I'm confident with my numbers, I'll get some final graphs printed up.


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_I'm with you on this one especially on a street machine where you don't care just for top end HP but more for fun-to-drive, I just believe that the TSI setup is a worth upgrade from a simple compound. The reliable and efficient way to bypass the SC is the computer controlled electric TB.

Have any info on these? Or are you thinking of using something along the lines of an EBC to control a DBW tb? 


_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_Problem with the twin screws is that they eat-up energy when free-wheeling because of their internal compression design and if you put them in-vacuum (after the TB) you won't be able to use an IC (like on some V8s) so you have XS fuel consumption. This is why almost all OEMs use the Roots. If I wanted to just build a performance car and have the PD charger push more than 7 psi I would use a twin screw also.

You could still use an intercooler after the supercharger in a behind the tb system. This is how "stage 3" bbm kits with silencers were designed. Thankfully we have so much more room than those big v8s. Although it is impressive to see two stacked Eatons sitting through the hold of old muscle. 
Don't forget, W/M injection has become quite advanced with rpm and load compensations.

_Quote, originally posted by *S3.2* »_Have you thought of reto-fitting one from a VW or Mercedes charger?

Have an etka printout? If I could get info, I could see if it would be worth making it work. When the charger is disengaged, does the turbo just blow through it or is a bypass activated?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (howit)*

howit, If you're drag racing, forget all about twin-charging. Twin charging is only useful when you're not always running WOT, such as auto-cross, road racing, or hill-climb. I wouldn't even want to use on on a rally car. It's for more power on low RPM courses.
You'll loose too much peak power efficiency to make the low-rpm gain worth the cost and effort.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_howit, If you're drag racing, forget all about twin-charging. Twin charging is only useful when you're not always running WOT, such as auto-cross, road racing, or hill-climb. I wouldn't even want to use on on a rally car. It's for more power on low RPM courses.
You'll loose too much peak power efficiency to make the low-rpm gain worth the cost and effort.

assuming he is just drag racing yes! he said street use too! and I'm inclined to believe there would be more street driving than drag racing.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*



Rocco R16V said:


> A centri-charger uses the same comprssor housing as a turbo, why would it not take the heat of compression, espcially since it doesnt have to deal with all the heat transfered from the exhaust.
> not to mention the turbo doesn't need to make as much boost therefore lowering temps as well, I think it's only a problem with some chargers using nylon seals or what ever they have and all out boost from the turbo, on a different forum it was suggested to run water/methane before the charger which they claim helps the charger seal and cool as well, might be worth looking into for PD chargers, but no it's not a problem for centuri at all according to an engineers forum thread for twin charging, or other chargers without seals for that matter, few of them claimed to be on pro race teams and they seem to know what they where talking about, even getting into resonance pulses in the intake manifold, hitting the first or second pulse for charging, 3ed for NA, explains the SRI for FI.
> 
> 
> _Modified by Autoboost-tech at 10:39 AM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

3rd pulse for FI, 1st or 2nd pulse for NA


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_3rd pulse for FI, 1st or 2nd pulse for NA









your right! it was a long time ago and I wasn't too interested in that part vary much, I stumbled into it looking for something entirely different, thank's!


_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 10:52 AM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Yeah that's Helmholtz resonance. Each pulse gives an added boost to port velocity and it's based on port diameter, length, and effective cam duration. The higher the pulse, the less of an effect there is. It's interesting stuff.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_3rd pulse for FI, 1st or 2nd pulse for NA









If you ask Cosworth, they'll tell you that pulse tuning is a waste of time on a FI motor, and they dont bother with it.


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

i thought for pulse tuning 3rd order was for N/A and 4th or 5th for FI. tunig for 3rd order pulses results in a 16" to 20" runner where tuning for 2nd was about 3feet and 1st about 4.5 feet of intake. 
I could be wrong going off of memory from a few years ago, cool stuff though.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_Yeah that's Helmholtz resonance. Each pulse gives an added boost to port velocity and it's based on port diameter, length, and effective cam duration. The higher the pulse, the less of an effect there is. It's interesting stuff.

I just hope BBM was on to this stuff when they made my manifold, the only testing I seen was exhaust temps at each port, probably all that's necessary and it's got to be better than my home brewed manifold, didn't know any of that stuff back then, did make a flow test with playing cards taped over each port and blew through the plenum with the shop vac










_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 11:40 AM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_i thought for pulse tuning 3rd order was for N/A and 4th or 5th for FI. tunig for 3rd order pulses results in a 16" to 20" runner where tuning for 2nd was about 3feet and 1st about 4.5 feet of intake. 
I could be wrong going off of memory from a few years ago, cool stuff though.

Depends on what you're building the engine for. 3rd harmonic "tend" to be about 10-14" IIRC, 2nd is 22-24".

_Quote, originally posted by *TBT-Syncro* »_If you ask Cosworth, they'll tell you that pulse tuning is a waste of time on a FI motor, and they dont bother with it. 

I don't have the means to test, or the computer software or hardware powerful enough to test, but I would think if it works at 1atm, it will work at 3atm.


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_
I just hope BBM was on to this stuff when they made my manifold, the only testing I seen was exhaust temps at each port, but it's got to be better than my home brewed manifold, didn't know any of that stuff back then, did make a flow test with playing cards taped over each port and blew through the plenum with the shop vac









When i was there and asked john that question, he said they did not do any math on the intake runner length or plenum volume. the room to place the intake took precedence over those considerations and it would not fit if "done correctly by the math". a very valid reason.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
When i was there and asked john that question, he said they did not do any math on the intake runner length or plenum volume. the room to place the intake took precedence over those considerations and it would not fit if "done correctly by the math". a very valid reason.

good to know! and I don't feel so bad about my methods, I think the exhaust temps being equal says enough for me anyway, thing looks awesome too, inside and out!


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_Depends on what you're building the engine for. 3rd harmonic "tend" to be about 10-14" IIRC, 2nd is 22-24".

yeah that sounds about right, im sure your calcs are more recent and applicable to VW's.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Yeah I can't remember the numbers for the manifolds I designed last, but they were around there.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

I'm off to get a wisdom tooth pulled, last time I tried setting my base timing with the Haltech unplugged to the DIS, ended up digging though a bunch of wires looking for the problem under the dash, what an idiot







serves me right for working on it high on codeine


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (Autoboost-tech)*

schweet NOS and codine wohoo.


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

I think that i wasnt very clear








The main use is gonna be the streets, of course!
my intention is to use less boosting while using on the street, so i can handle it better...
And the drag competitions that I usually go, arent professional and stuff... but they not allow to use automatic transmission







(but im still interested in the transbrake 2 speed gearbox)
we do not have this kind of gearbox in brazil! so how do I find them? the best we have is the original 16v gearbox, with forjed components, and they do a hella loud noise, and arent that realiable...
About the brazilian vw's, this is the best we can do.... and the parts are much cheaper, because EVERYONE invest in this engine around here...
i thought about using VR6, or even another options, but... im gonna spend too much money.
About the engine parts:
ive got this rods (159mm long, and handle 750hp) please let me know if there are better rods, with lower price:
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CRO-B93781B-4/

i dont know what the rest to use.... like pistons, gaskets, rings, everything else...
ive got custom made cams, from some great brazilian engineer for a good price...
---
about the FWD problem....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated







this guy use a 1.8 vw (opened it to 1.9), and an old 8v head...


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (howit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *howit* »_I think that i wasnt very clear








The main use is gonna be the streets, of course!
my intention is to use less boosting while using on the street, so i can handle it better...
And the drag competitions that I usually go, arent professional and stuff... but they not allow to use automatic transmission







(but im still interested in the transbrake 2 speed gearbox)
we do not have this kind of gearbox in brazil! so how do I find them? the best we have is the original 16v gearbox, with forjed components, and they do a hella loud noise, and arent that realiable...
About the brazilian vw's, this is the best we can do.... and the parts are much cheaper, because EVERYONE invest in this engine around here...
i thought about using VR6, or even another options, but... im gonna spend too much money.
About the engine parts:
ive got this rods (159mm long, and handle 750hp) please let me know if there are better rods, with lower price:
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CRO-B93781B-4/

i dont know what the rest to use.... like pistons, gaskets, rings, everything else...
ive got custom made cams, from some great brazilian engineer for a good price...
---
about the FWD problem....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated







this guy use a 1.8 vw (opened it to 1.9), and an old 8v head...



just as I had figured it would be street driven more!
I left some supercharger and turbo suggestions a few lines up on this page that would work well for doing both street and occasional drag racing if you didn't read it already.
as for rods and pistons I highly recommend the site in the link below, just enter the car info the engine is from and you will get a lot of options to choose from for rods and piston to suit your needs, and some of the best manufactures for our engine upgrades, plus I have heard nothing but good things about there customer service! 
those summit rods are too expensive if you ask me, the Wossner rods in the link are about the same price! but there are Integrated Engineering rod's I would use for $369.99us for 4 rod's and ARP bolts
link 
http://www.fourseasontuning.com/?product=637



_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 5:16 PM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

One thing about those brazilian drag cars... there's 8v engines making 700whp down there








Guys are crazy


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

check out the prices on this polished SS IC pipe I found!








at least I can use it for my air intake http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
it's almost the same as the aluminized steel from Columbia mandrel
https://vecco.com/products.php?sub_cat_id=10 




_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 5:56 PM 4-30-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_check out the prices on this polished SS IC pipe I found!








at least I can use it for my air intake http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
it's almost the same as the aluminized steel from Columbia mandrel
https://vecco.com/products.php?sub_cat_id=10 

_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 5:52 PM 4-30-2010_

dude, why couldnt you have found that two months ago?







i just bought from columbia and would have loved to get stainless at that price!


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

*Re: FV-QR (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
When i was there and asked john that question, he said they did not do any math on the intake runner length or plenum volume. the room to place the intake took precedence over those considerations and it would not fit if "done correctly by the math". a very valid reason.

the biggest problem/weakness with that manifold will probably be uneven flow across the 4 intake ports. When i was talking with Geoff Raicer of Full-Race he claimed that this was one of the most important items to get right on a FI intake manifold, and the one that is the most overlooked.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_
dude, why couldnt you have found that two months ago?







i just bought from columbia and would have loved to get stainless at that price!

I know! probably should have someone hide my wallet from me









tempting to do over! i would still come out less than had I bought any other"polished"stainless from somewhere else, my piping at this place would be about $200, it would have been $350 at Columbia for none polished SS, guessing $450 for polished had I found some other than this deal!










_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 8:35 PM 4-30-2010_


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_One thing about those brazilian drag cars... there's 8v engines making 700whp down there








Guys are crazy

and its pretty easy to accomplish that!
the head itself, is compatible with your block, and is pretty cheap around here... all you need is to work on the flow, get a 200$ cam, forjed internals, and .70 turbo...

-----
back to my topic:
- built 02m trans at least - ok this seems great, where do I find it to buy? i may use a golf mk3, because itll be easier to find parts like this, since our gol uses longitudinal engine... maybe its the secret haha..
Lysholm supercharger - what model, and where to buy? is it a centrifugal charger? from what i understood there is a discussion on what charger use in the topic..
Garrett GT4088R - perfect, it can be found in here








you will need to find a t4 footprint turbo exhaust manifold to run it, 
ok, i do not know what is this, can you give me some heads up, pictures, more explanations, and again, where to buy?
blow the turbo though the supercharger and have the t-body before the supercharger in between the turbo and super with a bypass for the supercharger, - I do not understand this part either... on my conception, it would be correct to make the supercharger blow air into the turbo, to wake it up, isnt it?
then a BOV to dump boost for shifting between the turbo and the t-body, - im sorry, what is a BOV? its kinda hard for me to understand words abreviated.. my school didnt teach english for cars








plus run water/air intercooling - got it, how to choose the correct size?
one inline type between the turbo and supercharger then one side mount for after the charger, - can you do some explanation regarding this?
and some water/methanol spray! - we use ethanol over here... 100% its the cheapest over here..
I also would run a boost limit valve to protect from boost spike or runaway boost like what blew up (name withheld)'s twincharge attempt with this type system,- more explanation regarding this aswell..
also run a"good"stand-alone engine management like 034EFI, Autronic, Haltech, Motec, or megasquirt I guess? we use a standalone called FUELTECH over here.. its the best, all the 700 plus hp cars in here use it, and they just made a new version with touch screen and some nice ****.. has datalogger, wideband controller, eletronic boost controller, launch control, and so on..
it's come a long way from starting out as a Heath-kit type product, but I know vary little about them, I run a Haltech! 1000cc or more injector's , I would use dual stage injector set up (fazed) to run street as well, 550cc(genesis twin spray) primary! 650cc secondary! if the SEM runs them together, this would give you better idle, economy and drivability, and kick it on race day! - this is very interesting, i didnt know about these injectors... over here we usually use 4 semi-original injectors (opened up), and 4 ford-racing injectors as suplementar injectors... I love the idea of using dual stage injectors, please give me more info, reommend me a model, and where to buy... how about their impedance? if its low i problably will need a peaknhold module...
the rest is common stuff, tires, brakes, parachute - like toyo r888 tires... they are semi-slick tires, cheap, great grip, only 1 problem... wont last more than 5000 miles hahah... braking, suspension i have enough information







parachute? its not gonna be that brute! haha
most important read up on all this as much as possible, there are many sites with forums for twin charging with good info in them. - please give me some links I can find good infor about twincharger... i googled about it and ended here!
if I was building a motor for this, it would be a ABA block beefed up , with a Audi v8 head conversion with porting, but that's me! - tell me little more about this audi v8 head mod! i cant do it, because of the costs, like i told you before, there are a loooooot of 2.0 16v and 8v around here for cheap.. so we gotta use the tools we got around huh? but it interested me to show around to my friends..

i soon will take some pictures of my brothers car, he has a 8v near 600hp, he just built the motor, and hes taking easy for the first kilometers, but soon ill give you some nice videos!
thanks for the help so far, i promise you wont regret doing it, and ill reward you guys with pics and videos once i done the project..
best reggards


_Modified by howit at 1:08 AM 5-1-2010_


----------



## EL DRIFTO (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: (howit)*

5 pgs of good read
anyway, i was trying to keep a pro audio amplifier cool & the stock fan wasn't cutting it.
i took a $12 bathroom ex fan & plumbed it in to the amplifier fan inlet...
when i did that, more air certainly moved through the amplifier fan outlet, BUT both fans dropped significantly in rpm - WEIRD
anxiously awaiting the 600 hp 8v








edits
i thought the 600 hp 8v was reserved for 1/1/2011 
looks a little late with ethanol & no AWD


_Modified by EL DRIFTO at 3:21 PM 5-1-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (EL DRIFTO)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EL DRIFTO* »_5 pgs of good read
anyway, i was trying to keep a pro audio amplifier cool & the stock fan wasn't cutting it.
i took a $12 bathroom ex fan & plumbed it in to the amplifier fan inlet...
when i did that, more air certainly moved through the amplifier fan outlet, BUT both fans dropped significantly in rpm - WEIRD
anxiously awaiting the 600 hp 8v








edits
i thought the 600 hp 8v was reserved for 1/1/2011 
looks a little late with ethanol & no AWD


When compounding fans, you have to make sure they're both the same exact blade count & design, pitch, and rpm, but one has to spin in the opposite direction as the other. If the models are the same, you'll keep the same flow but increase pressure. If you use different designs, you'll drop pressure.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (howit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *howit* »_
and its pretty easy to accomplish that!
the head itself, is compatible with your block, and is pretty cheap around here... all you need is to work on the flow, get a 200$ cam, forjed internals, and .70 turbo...
*you sure about that? Aren't the serous Brazilian guys running pure alcohol too? Highest hp 8v I've seen state side was ~560whp. You'd need a .86 or higher hot side, completely undriveable (except wot) head, and custom grind cam, never mind all the bottom work







*

-----
back to my topic:
- built 02m trans at least - ok this seems great, where do I find it to buy? i may use a golf mk3, because itll be easier to find parts like this, since our gol uses longitudinal engine... maybe its the secret haha..
Lysholm supercharger - what model, and where to buy? is it a centrifugal charger? from what i understood there is a discussion on what charger use in the topic..
*I don't know the size that BBM used to use, but for a moderate machine, that would be fine. With bigger chargers, you'll lose more power driving them.
Normal one: http://www.bahnbrenner.com/vw_...r_Kit
big boy :http://www.bahnbrenner.com/vw_audi/products/2510/SR3_3150_Lysholm_Supercharger*
Garrett GT4088R - perfect, it can be found in here








you will need to find a t4 footprint turbo exhaust manifold to run it, 
ok, i do not know what is this, can you give me some heads up, pictures, more explanations, and again, where to buy?
*t4 is the design of the flange the turbo bolts to. You'll have to get one made as I don't know of any 16v t4 flanged manifolds you can buy*
blow the turbo though the supercharger and have the t-body before the supercharger in between the turbo and super with a bypass for the supercharger, - I do not understand this part either... on my conception, it would be correct to make the supercharger blow air into the turbo, to wake it up, isnt it?
*No, blowing through will actually slow down the turbo. Pull through won't inherently increase spool, but the overall flow through the engine from the supercharger will increase the spool*
then a BOV to dump boost for shifting between the turbo and the t-body, - im sorry, what is a BOV? its kinda hard for me to understand words abreviated.. my school didnt teach english for cars








*BOV means blow-off valve*
plus run water/air intercooling - got it, how to choose the correct size?
determine your hp goals, plot out the required air flow (lb/min) and convert to CFM. Then choose the intercooler based on that. I'd go 20% larger
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/turbo_tech103.html[/b]
one inline type between the turbo and supercharger then one side mount for after the charger, - can you do some explanation regarding this?
*just discussing intercooler locations.*
and some water/methanol spray! - we use ethanol over here... 100% its the cheapest over here..
*lucky guys running pure alcohol... We have pump and race gas. W/M injection just increases the octane rating and lowers air temp*
I also would run a boost limit valve to protect from boost spike or runaway boost like what blew up (name withheld)'s twincharge attempt with this type system,- more explanation regarding this aswell..
*With the properly sized supercharger pulley and proper waste-gate spring on the turbo, you shouldn't overboost at all*
also run a"good"stand-alone engine management like 034EFI, Autronic, Haltech, Motec, or megasquirt I guess? we use a standalone called FUELTECH over here.. its the best, all the 700 plus hp cars in here use it, and they just made a new version with touch screen and some nice ****.. has datalogger, wideband controller, eletronic boost controller, launch control, and so on..
it's come a long way from starting out as a Heath-kit type product, but I know vary little about them, I run a Haltech! 1000cc or more injector's , I would use dual stage injector set up (fazed) to run street as well, 550cc(genesis twin spray) primary! 650cc secondary! if the SEM runs them together, this would give you better idle, economy and drivability, and kick it on race day! - this is very interesting, i didnt know about these injectors... over here we usually use 4 semi-original injectors (opened up), and 4 ford-racing injectors as suplementar injectors... I love the idea of using dual stage injectors, please give me more info, reommend me a model, and where to buy... how about their impedance? if its low i problably will need a peaknhold module...
* You can get some 1600 or 2000cc high impedance injectors now that will run just fine on the street







*
the rest is common stuff, tires, brakes, parachute - like toyo r888 tires... they are semi-slick tires, cheap, great grip, only 1 problem... wont last more than 5000 miles hahah... braking, suspension i have enough information







parachute? its not gonna be that brute! haha
most important read up on all this as much as possible, there are many sites with forums for twin charging with good info in them. - please give me some links I can find good infor about twincharger... i googled about it and ended here!
if I was building a motor for this, it would be a ABA block beefed up , with a Audi v8 head conversion with porting, but that's me! - tell me little more about this audi v8 head mod! i cant do it, because of the costs, like i told you before, there are a loooooot of 2.0 16v and 8v around here for cheap.. so we gotta use the tools we got around huh? but it interested me to show around to my friends..

i soon will take some pictures of my brothers car, he has a 8v near 600hp, he just built the motor, and hes taking easy for the first kilometers, but soon ill give you some nice videos!
thanks for the help so far, i promise you wont regret doing it, and ill reward you guys with pics and videos once i done the project..
best reggards

_Modified by howit at 1:08 AM 5-1-2010_


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

you sure about that? Aren't the serous Brazilian guys running pure alcohol too? Highest hp 8v I've seen state side was ~560whp. You'd need a .86 or higher hot side, completely undriveable (except wot) head, and custom grind cam, never mind all the bottom work
*i forgot to mention about block reinforcement, but besides it, thats pretty much it... ill show you my brother results toon...*

-----
back to my topic:
- built 02m trans at least - ok this seems great, where do I find it to buy? i may use a golf mk3, because itll be easier to find parts like this, since our gol uses longitudinal engine... maybe its the secret haha..
* ok i just noticed that 02m is a code for the gearbox, can anybody give me the fullcode of the gearboxm and a website that i can buy it? ALSO is there a kit to make it stronger? because from what i see on the specs, it can handle 35nm torque only, id break it in the first try







please more info about this, here in brazil we dont know anything about this gear box... we use the regular one with forjed internals (hella lot of noise!" *
I don't know the size that BBM used to use, but for a moderate machine, that would be fine. With bigger chargers, you'll lose more power driving them.
Normal one: http://www.bahnbrenner.com/vw_...r_Kit
big boy :http://www.bahnbrenner.com/vw_audi/products/2510/SR3_3150_Lysholm_Supercharger
*ok, ill read some about these chargers!*
t4 is the design of the flange the turbo bolts to. You'll have to get one made as I don't know of any 16v t4 flanged manifolds you can buy
*- oh i see... we have lots of this in brazil







*
No, blowing through will actually slow down the turbo. Pull through won't inherently increase spool, but the overall flow through the engine from the supercharger will increase the spool.
* is there a chart of scheme about this? *
BOV means blow-off valve
*perfect... we use it on here, and call priority valve, haha..*
determine your hp goals, plot out the required air flow (lb/min) and convert to CFM. Then choose the intercooler based on that. I'd go 20% larger
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/turbo_tech103.html[/b]
* too bad i ran from math school haha. i have no clue how to do all these calculation... my goal is 600hp at the top boost... (ill use eletronic boost in 3 stages, street, street plus, and im getting owned mode







)
*
just discussing intercooler locations.
okie..
lucky guys running pure alcohol... We have pump and race gas. W/M injection just increases the octane rating and lowers air temp
*w/m injection would be? lowering air temp seems interesting, hehe... we dont have race gas over here, but our alcohool will do... plus we can have some nice drink with it, brazilian absynth... hehe just kidding, they add something to make it undrinkable *
With the properly sized supercharger pulley and proper waste-gate spring on the turbo, you shouldn't overboost at all
*
what is a good size of wastegate?
*
You can get some 1600 or 2000cc high impedance injectors now that will run just fine on the street
*thanks, ill look into it, any advice of brands/model? dual stage injectors is a must...*



_Modified by howit at 9:34 AM 5-1-2010_


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (howit)*

You could cryo treat the stock gears. I assume the forged ones you are talking about are straight cut, which would be the cause of the noise. You might be able to find helical gears that are forged. This I don't know much about.
W/M injection is basically injecting a mix of YOUR fuel with our pump gas. You shouldn't need it.
You want the smallest waste gate that you can get, without getting too much boost creep. Small waste gates are for high pressure systems, big waste gates are for low pressure systems. What size will depends on your set up as a whole and will probably take some testing to get right. Something to keep in mind, when positioning a waste gate, you want the air to flow through the waste-gate and out in the same direction as the rest of the exhaust flow. This helps cut down on the restrictive 90 degree turn in the waste gate. And keeping the gate open-dump helps as well
Like this:
exhaust flow -----> manifold ----> turbo -----> exhaust
............................................↓→ waste gate----------------->
Not like this
exhaust flow -----> manifold ----> turbo -----> exhaust
<------------------waste gate ←↓
If that makes sense
Injectors, check out Wizard or Injector Dynamics.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (howit)*



howit said:


> if I was building a motor for this, it would be a ABA block beefed up , with a Audi v8 head conversion with porting, but that's me! - tell me little more about this audi v8 head mod! i cant do it, because of the costs, like i told you before, there are a loooooot of 2.0 16v and 8v around here for cheap.. so we gotta use the tools we got around huh? but it interested me to show around to my friends..
> here is a link to a thread here on the vortex that someone is in the middle of doing the Audi v8 head swap to a 2.0 4 cylinder, interesting stuff!
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4739230
> the injection system I mention is a dual stage! the twin spray Genesis is a spray pattern that has some benefits for multi valve heads, if the new 1600cc can handle idle now then this would be easier to set up, I have no experience with them, I am kinda still old school
> ...


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*

quick question for ya!
I have been playing with this injector timing calculator I found a few months ago on the Haltech forum and posted it here http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4834598
will need to download, it's xls I think
I understand it well enough and have come up with a good map for my set up, I think?
I have always had a fuel issue in this car going lean at higher boost and kept it lower until I got my fuel system installed which is done!, had no problems in the 87 with twin pumps! but turbo only then, it's still faster at lower boost though, I have made adjustments after the calculations to accommodate for rpm, the calculator doesn't do rpm, it's for base map only, but can get vary close if you use some common sense! I plan on fine tuning with data logs, there are no dynos around my area so this is it for now!
my question to you! if you know, the calculator uses displacement as well for VE calculations, do you think with twin charging the displacement should be increase in the calculator for map values when compounding accrues? just want it as close as possible before data logging, don't want what looks like a two year old's etch A sketch pic







check it out, you might like it too! 
my thinking is the charger makes the turbo react like it's on a larger motor, but actual displacement or VE may be the only factor, just want it clarified 






_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 3:45 PM 5-1-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

I downloaded it and played around but quicky realized it has no usefull info to help me tune a 034EFI.
Why does changing the RPM not change anything?
those sort of calculations might be usefull to help estimate a starting inj pulse width but it really isnt hard to just guess and adjust without doing any math. after that it useless. for me anyway.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Rocco R16V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rocco R16V* »_I downloaded it and played around but quicky realized it has no usefull info to help me tune a 034EFI.
Why does changing the RPM not change anything?
those sort of calculations might be usefull to help estimate a starting inj pulse width but it really isnt hard to just guess and adjust without doing any math. after that it useless. for me anyway.

I am using the calculator because my Haltech doesn't do VE tuning! I thought the 034 does! so yea it would be of no use, I need a new fuel map because I have switched to sequential injection, have consistent fuel pressure now, and heading into uncharted psi with my setup http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif the developer of the calculator didn't include rpm because it's just for a base start up map only, so left it out, with some SEM's that have no starting point or VE mapping it is fairly helpful, I am just using it outside of it's intended design to develop a much more accurate map instead of a 12:1 a/f ratio across the board to start from, with some guess work for rpm! and go from there! I did all the "from scratch" work before, just time consuming with my fuel issues I had, thought I would give this method a shot and see how far it can go, if I had VE tuning I would still have the same question! would changing the displacement with twin charging during compound values get a closer effect? probably not! but thought I would ask since more people here know whats going on







ask somewhere else and you get a "what"







or WTF







with twin charging, so if no one now's for sure I am staying with my engines displacement for VE and just fine tune from data later, it makes more sense! I guess I should wait and see what Pat's charts look like in the end. 




_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 4:01 PM 5-1-2010_


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (howit)*

here is one of the twin charging forum threads I stumbled into
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewth...ge=21


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

*Re: (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pat @ Pitt Soundworks* »_You could cryo treat the stock gears. I assume the forged ones you are talking about are straight cut, which would be the cause of the noise. You might be able to find helical gears that are forged. This I don't know much about.


im pretty sure in brazil doesnt have cryo treat for the stock gears, can you give me the part number for the 02m box, and where to find treated gears to buy? are they better than forged...
about our forjed ones, they're helical, and they still have a lot of noise.. like 10x worse then reverse gear haha
--
its not clear for me on how to set the charger with turbo... its like them both blowing into the engine, separetely? like an Y?
----
here are some pictures of my brothers car, its a 8v, but the engine is the same... 600 hp

















-----
he rebuilt the motor to put some crower rods and block reinforcement... ill post photos of it running later...
--


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (howit)*

looks like a twisted tranny shaft there! impressive!
This guy below in the link is running 1000hp through a 02m AWD trans (same as 2 wheel drive) but harder on tranny with all the hook up, and quote (here in Denmark people put 650-700hp into a stock 02m without any problems) you will just need to search the internet or eBay for 02m to find them used, saw one on ebay used for $850us months ago, new are expensive, reman around $1600us core may be needed for that price, look for newer factory 1.8t turbo cars to find them, not sure what the first year was they made them, 2002 I think, most where 6 speed! I don't think the vr6 tranny fits a four. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4108171




_Modified by Autoboost-tech at 8:47 PM 5-1-2010_


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Autoboost-tech* »_I would still have the same question! would changing the displacement with twin charging during compound values get a closer effect? probably not! but thought I would ask since more people here know whats going on







ask somewhere else and you get a "what"







or WTF







with twin charging, so if no one now's for sure I am staying with my engines displacement for VE and just fine tune from data later, it makes more sense! I guess I should wait and see what Pat's charts look like in the end. 

I skipped that cause I dont know. my edumacated guestimate would be; No, the motor doesnt know whats adding the boost all that matters is the air flow and pressure being put into it. 
Howit, WOW







thats one hell of a girdle,







and the twisted trans shaft, how did that not break?


_Modified by Rocco R16V at 9:16 PM 5-1-2010_


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

haha.. it was his old trans shaft.. now he has new ones







these were stock...
@autoboost-tech..
the biggest problem on brazil, is that our streets condition are mostly crap... full of holes, so it has to be more resistant!


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

*Re: (howit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *howit* »_
im pretty sure in brazil doesnt have cryo treat for the stock gears, can you give me the part number for the 02m box, and where to find treated gears to buy? are they better than forged...
about our forjed ones, they're helical, and they still have a lot of noise.. like 10x worse then reverse gear haha
--
its not clear for me on how to set the charger with turbo... its like them both blowing into the engine, separetely? like an Y?


I don't know any more about the gears. I haven't gotten to studying that part of the engine yet







I know you can get some from atpturbo.com though.
to set the charger and turbo I'll get a pic up for you in a bit.



Autoboost-tech\
I would still have the same question! would changing the displacement with twin charging during compound values get a closer effect? probably not! but thought I would ask since more people here know whats going on ask somewhere else and you get a "what" or WTF with twin charging said:


> No, I don't think so. Think of the supercharger as a very fast spooling turbo and go from there
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

*FV-QR*

hey autoboost.. not sure if this was asked or whatnot.. what size injectors are you running?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: FV-QR (syracusegli)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syracusegli* »_hey autoboost.. not sure if this was asked or whatnot.. what size injectors are you running?

750cc


----------



## howit (Apr 29, 2010)

Guys, I've made a topic on the 8v area, to show a little more about my brothers car, so i dont keep posting pics in here, enjoy, ive added new pics.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4875155

-----

im still looking into the trans issue, sent messages to aptunning service to see what they recommend to me..
awaiting new pictures!
regards


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Re: (Autoboost-tech)*

OK! this should be the last week of work, arriving this week! new surge tank, mine stands out like a sore thumb, a new dual port wastegate actuator, t-body gasket and blue vac hose, couple of fuel hose ends, I used one old -8 hose I had, and it is fuming up the inside of the car, and a boost sensor for the turbo side to log with to see when the turbo kicks in, also a interestingly different K&N air filter, I will need to order pipe yet when the filter arrives for mounting, but should be able to run the car some, managed to paint the last pipe, even with a heat gun it didn't turn out the best, at least you can't really see the none wrinkled parts when installed, I will redo in warmer whether, just need to get on the road! !!!!pix!!!!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

this is the interesting K&N filter I found, (RX-3900-1) hoping I could just install it on the turbo, but not enough room, looks like I will need a couple pipes after all, sore thumb it gone!


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

Its getting there, keep it up man


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

ran my car this weekend for a couple hr's and did some tuning, and adjustments to the bypass, then logged a couple neutral rev's to post, A/F looks real close to what I wanted to start with! need to add and subtract fuel for rpm yet, I guess the injector timing calculator works! also had some higher psi at lower rpm than I had figured when punching full throttle, maybe the turbo is helping even in neutral  

LC1-O2	DL32 DL32 
(AFR)-	(RPM)-	(PSIa) 
11.75-	5670-	13.4 
12.63-	6130-	11.7 
12.88-	5990-	11.6 
11.23-	5090-	10.7 
11.22-	5500-	10.6 
10.80- 5430-	10.4 
10.51-	5340-	10.4 
10.32-	5340-	10.2 
15.39-	6580-	10.1 
12.89-	5800-	9.4 
10.97-	5260-	9.3 
10.78-	4870-	9.2 
10.98-	4970-	8.4


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

First test drive... and some logs! only did a (half throttle pull to 23psi) clutch is brand new and needs to be broke in, all felt "awesome" so far, getting boost from the turbo much faster than before, feels more like the .48 a/r t3 it had in the 90s in boost response than the .96 a/r t3/t4 it's had! probably helps that I no longer have a leaking bypass and got fuel :thumb: here is some real time numbers listed from highest boost on down with rpm and a/f. 

AFR seems consistent enough to lean it out now, working on that tonight, plus some timing retard backed off, now that I have fuel! 
............going to be a fun summer.............. 

half throttle 3rd gear:snore: 
who said it wouldn't work:rofl::super: 

LC_1 DL32_ DL32_ 
(AFR) (RPM) (PSIg) 
10.63- 4010- 23 
10.5-- 4030- 22.8 
10.75- 3990- 22.6 
10.54- 4050- 22.5 
10.78- 3960- 22.3 
10.48- 4080- 22 
10.79- 3940- 21.9 
10.89- 3910- 21.5 
10.5-- 4100- 21.4 
10.72- 4310- 21.3 
10.89- 3890- 21.2 
10.83- 3860- 21 
10.76- 3840- 20.8 
10.51- 3820- 20.6 
10.78- 4270- 20.5 
10.63- 4360- 20.4 
10.75- 3800- 20.3 
10.73- 3770- 20.1 
10.67- 4230- 19.7 
10.53- 3750- 19.7 
09.98- 4400- 19.5 
10.57- 3730- 19.2 
10.72- 4200- 19 
10.41- 4140- 18.8 
10.51- 3710- 18.8 
10.6-- 3680- 18.4 
10.73- 4160- 18.3 
09.98- 4120- 18.3


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*finished upgrades*

finished!..... found a way to get the air filter on with some firewall mods, and installed the 2 port wastegate actuator, this is pretty much how it's going to look! I'm sure I will always find something, like painting the valve cover when the weather is better, but as far as this winters upgrades, I am done! just need to finish tuning and enjoy! and fix one leaky fuel connector when it gets here, defective I guess! 

the final build pix of the motor


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

pushed the boost a lot harder today, I tell you! I am impressed with this clutch! only 50 miles and it held 30psi in 3rd gear, hit 100mph quick! the new 2 port controller works much better, obviously! now has higher boost at lower rpm than before, here's some numbers from the 3rd gear pull logged by the dl-32 

LC_1	DL32_	DL32_ 
(AFR)	(RPM)(PSIg) 
11.00-	4830-	29.9 
10.94-	4880-	29.9 
10.95-	4780-	29.8 
11.33-	4740-	29.7 
10.67-	4720-	29.7 
11.32-	4690-	29.6 
10.91-	4680-	29.6 
10.92-	4700-	29.6 
10.92	-4650-	29.5 
10.88-	4620-	29.4 
11.30-	4640-	29.3 
10.92-	4600-	29.3 
10.89-	4580-	29.2 
10.82-	4560-	29.1 
11.25-	4590-	29.0 
10.76-	4530-	29.0 
10.75-	4510-	28.9 
10.85-	4480-	28.8


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

Any plans to dyno in the near future?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

finally got my 02 sensor working again, had to install a heat sink into the 02 bung and use my other 02 sensor, the one I had was damaged from the last few years without the heat sink, so I found out! but had an extra from when I bought the DL-32, seems much more stable too, getting the AFR a lot closer, almost done tuning, this thing halls ass!:laugh:

LC_1- DL32-	DL32
(AFR)-(RPM)-(PSIg)
11.79-	4820-	23.9
11.98-	4790-	23.8
11.82-	4760-	23.7
11.85-	4740-	23.5
11.89-	4710-	23.2
12.11-	4680-	22.8
12.01-	4650-	22.4
11.98-	4630-	22.0
11.29-	4840-	22.0
12.07-	4600-	21.5
11.91-	4570-	21.2
11.94-	4540-	20.9
11.86-	4510-	20.7
11.97-	4480-	20.4
11.92-	4460-	20.1
10.88-	4860-	20.0


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

OK done with top end tune, still working on cruz for MPG, been backing off the timing retard and it's getting faster and faster, figured I would get AFR first then do timing, all going well!
LC_	DL32_	DL32_
(AFR)	(RPM)	(PSIg)
12.16-	4660-	28.6
12.10-	4700-	28.4
12.29-	4630-	28.2
11.77-	4730-	28.1
12.10-	4590-	27.7
12.20-	4560-	26.9
12.32-	4520-	26.2
12.19-	4490-	25.2
12.23-	4450-	24.2
12.32-	4420-	22.9
12.22-	4390-	21.6


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

miner set back! what ever the max hp for a ABA block was I exceeded it, three holes from busted rods, seems a boost controller hose came off, I was working on clamping them all, but hadn't got to that one yet, anyway, got on it and it hit 33psi so fast I couldn't get out of it in time, boom!!!! so guess it's time to build a tough block :laugh:


----------



## Jeebus (Jul 8, 2001)

Sh!tty deals man sorry to hear.


----------



## M90SyncroRallyeGolf (Sep 29, 2009)

Nice thread !! 

Sorry to ear such bad news ... 

BTW have you got more tune up LOGs seems interesting !! 

Good luck in rebuilding the block !


----------



## NeverEnding... (May 9, 2007)

what sort of power are u looking to make?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

I intended to keep it under 400hp until I built a better bottom end, I don't think my block was the forged version and when the boost ran out of control it didn't stand a chance, anyway, I will be building for a safe 600hp engine but still don't have the tranny to run that high, at least I wont be throwing rods

OK, open casket it is, she lived life in the fast lane but was addicted to boost, eventually over indulged and it took her life, may we have a moment of silence please.........................
I also included some of her last writings in her diary right up to the end.

God speed my child 









LC_-	DL32_-	DL32_-
(AFR)	(RPM)	(PSIg)
11.45-	5020-	33.1
11.66-	5010-	32.9
11.66-	5000-	32.6
11.80-	4940-	32.0
11.17-	5060-	31.6
11.82-	4880-	31.4
11.88-	4820-	30.3
10.73-	5090-	30.0
11.79-	4760-	29.2
12.01-	4700-	28.0
11.94-	4640-	26.8
11.80-	4590-	25.3
11.82-	4530-	23.9


----------



## V-KLAN (Sep 8, 2003)

Oh damn that sucks to see!!!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

well it was just the #2 rod, all the other holes are from the intermediate shaft braking, has two slightly bent intake valves on #2 as well, they still open and shut fine just don't seal, so will need two valves as well, luck really! no signs of detonation just couldn't take it, wasn't meant too! some rods and forged piston's are needed anyway since the boost is working so well, engine is mostly torn down just need to drop it and get a block coming ASAP then start ordering some parts to beef it up once I know the condition of the block I get, found a low mileage 94 ABA for $350 plus $40 for a 16v intermediate shaft, and some shipping cost, should do the trick! should be the forged crank, add the rods and pistons and problem solved.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

here are a few more snuff pix for the morbid viewer

new block vent's









piston is sideways









a better view









some spare parts for keep sakes









here is a pic of my t-3/t-4 turban compared to a typical t-3 turban, check out the wastegate size, it may be the larges t-3 footprint internal wastegate available I have found


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

OK! so it's a done deal, I just bought a 94 Jetta ABA 2.0 with "41k miles" for $400 plus shipping, $250 from Palmetto, Georgia, there's an all VW wreaking yard that had it up on eBay, yep!....that's right eBay! verified CarFax mileage of 41k run tested and inspected with 120 day warranty and company stock number plus eBay sale # and PayPal buyer protection to ensure I get the vary motor I paid for, :thumbup: Absolute German was going to just pick one out that looked "OK" and wouldn't tell me mileage, they had one that said low miles advertised, but would only say (quote) "it's probably gone" not much customer service if you ask me! and wouldn't give me a strait shipping answer ether, guess it was to close to a long weekend and didn't care, anyway! so the ball is rolling, I thinking of going with JE pistons and IE con-rod combo deal from IE! the stronger 2618 T6 aluminum alloy piston sounds like the shiz! and can be coated top and sides but cost extra, unless someone can tell me why Wössner 4032 pistons would be better for my app? price is the same both ways except the Wössner comes with side coating, the JE pistons would cost $100 extra for side coating, or are there any other options?

link: http://www.intengineering.com/ABF-JE-Pistons-IE-Rods-p7205086-1-2.html

also considering a main bearing girdle, any idea what HP it's recommended to get one? or would ARP main studs cover this weak little boost job  Haltech only covers 30psi :screwy:

link: http://www.mjmautohaus.com/catalog/...98601MBG_Main_Bearing_Girdle&products_id=1588 

any input opcorn:


----------



## Clay.0 (Jan 12, 2005)

I got the JE/IE setup from IE with no coatings. Quality stuff but took forever to get, they say they stock them, but they are really made to order.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

good to know, I am in a time crunch to get back on the road, tired of asking for rides everywhere, also I found a place to by Scat rods with 20mm and 21mm pins for $312 + $10.95 shipping, 

ò NEW Forged High Tensile 4340 Chromoly Steel
ò 3/8" ARP 2000 Cap Screw
ò Fully Profiled for stroker engines
ò Each forging is x-rayed, sonic tested & magnafluxed
ò Shot peened to stress relieve surfaces
ò Packaged in weight matched sets ▒ 1 grams
ò Rated to 650 HP

http://www.cnc-motorsports.com/brand.asp?MnfID=1001&CtgID=8189

so pistons are the only hold up maybe, might be able to get these!

http://www.bildon.com/catalog/DetailsList.cfm?ID=9204DA&Nav=6&SubNav=none


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

my new engine showed up today, tore it down and it checked out awesome! no boring needed, no ridge in the cylinders, everything is tight! has forged crank and piston squirters, I also got the BBM IM shaft custom timing gear and dizzy thing thing, 

I found a deal on Pauter I beam rod's for $600, normally 7 hundred something, supposed to be stronger than H beam type, anybody have some input on theses?


----------



## vfarren (Sep 11, 2000)

Pauter rods are top of the line. People running these put some serious hp through them, 600+. Depending on what your goals are Scat might be enough. Also might want to check out Brute rods (I think that is what they are called) sold by Killa. I think they are an rod that is in between Scat and Pauter. I don't have any personal experience with them though.


----------



## tg60dd (Nov 23, 2005)

I bought these from Integrated and got them in 4 days. Ordered them last Fri.
Save a little on piston/ rod combo...

http://www.intengineering.com/ABF-JE-Pistons-IE-Rods-p7205086-1-2.html


----------



## The Green (Oct 5, 2002)

See with INA engineering for rods


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

ya! I have been looking at those as well, I ordered Wossner pistons Thursday through four seasons, and plan to go with the IE rods now because they have them with riffle drilling and the Pauter rods I found weren't drilled for pin oiling, I plan on running it more than race day so longevity is important as well


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

new block is ready, just waiting on the pistons and rods to arrive next week, Wednesday I hope, so ya! I painted the block blue, figured black and blue fit the bill, so here is the first pix of the new build!


















peace out!


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

i spy a painted socket and wrench :laugh:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

yea that was my expensive Jessie James tool set :laugh:

new parts starting to arrive, pistons and rods yea! aren't they sexy? just ordered Supertech valves for the head, since I needed two intakes might as well do them all right?


----------



## M90SyncroRallyeGolf (Sep 29, 2009)

I love this thread man !!
:beer:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

pistons and rods installed with new rings and bearings, all went perfect, match ported and cleaned the intake and exhaust tracks back in 96, now that the valves are out I finished the port job around the valves, Supertech valves are all lapped and ready just waiting and thinking over putting springs and cams in, Hummm........?


----------



## spdrace11 (Oct 27, 2003)

:what:


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

You said you were doing cams too, No?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

cams? maybe, not that I need more power but a turbo grind would be more efficient and better emissions too, but mostly looking for best mileage at cruz! I could do cams at any time right now I am thinking more about a 02m tranny, this 020 is next to blow I am sure!


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

The head and valve cover all painted and ready to install, except I'm now waiting for HD valve springs to arrive, dig the blue!


























hear we have ARP bolts on anything that moves :laugh:
and the new rods/pistons too!


















more cool parts due this week to post yea!!...... :thumbup:


----------



## jasonbend79 (Jul 19, 2007)

Looking real good...:beer:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

I meet a sexy new friend! everyone meet "Billet" say hi Billet! sorry she doesn't speak English yet! 

what a hottie!  










and a cornucopia of fun parts, still more to come!


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

Those motor mounts are pretty decent mounts. Especially the main rear tranny mount is a good solid polythane. The other that you insert are okay. You may eventually want to just go with all BFI mounts. 
Looking great! Love the valve cover color.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> You may eventually want to just go with all BFI mounts.


 I have yet to find full poly mounts for the sides, what are BFI mounts? the tranny mount should take care of my jumping at slow start up, most of which came from the stock t-mount, I could mess with it and all would be fine but then come back, mainly because I am seeing boost during slow starts now with the better IC pipes and Vortech bypass valve :thumbup:


----------



## jasonbend79 (Jul 19, 2007)

Black Forest Ind. 


http://www.blackforestindustries.com/


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Sucks mang. Didn't realize you were doing that on a stock bottom end. That's just plum nuts. At least it's getting done right this time. Get your fueling ready for 35psi


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> Sucks mang. Didn't realize you were doing that on a stock bottom end. That's just plum nuts. At least it's getting done right this time. Get your fueling ready for 35psi


 there wasn't any aftermarket rods and pistons back when I built the motor, in fact the motor had only been out a few years then, I did have ARP head studs and added ARP rod bolts later in 2003 but that's not going to cut 33psi, I think the piston broke first!, I wanted to build a better bottom end anyway with the forged crank and squirters, I will have to change SEM for 35psi :banghead: 

good to hear from ya, where you been?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Lost the thread during the vbulliten change and then just forgot about it 


Hone still looks good. Throw some foam over those holes and reuse the block. Those things can use some extra crankcase vent.


----------



## groundupjetta (Feb 1, 2010)

Autoboost-tech said:


>


 I have that same turbo that I'm going to slap on my 8v soon. What's the A/R on the turbine and compressor? Is very hard to find someone with this turbo on a vw, at what rpm where you seeing boost? 
Looking good with the new engine, this one is going to be bullet proof :laugh:


----------



## vfarren (Sep 11, 2000)

Just FYI: No personal experience but I have heard of (and seen pics) of those rear poly motor mounts splitting in half. It seems like the choice is either the VW motorsports rubber mount of solid aluminum.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> I have that same turbo that I'm going to slap on my 8v soon. What's the A/R on the turbine and compressor? Is very hard to find someone with this turbo on a vw, at what rpm where you seeing boost?


 the turban housing is a .96 a/r the stock compressor was .70 a/r but I switched the center section and compressor with a Turbonetics .70 a/r turbo and just used the turban housing from the 93 ford powerstroke banks turbo system turbo, as for spool up, not sure! I have a supercharger helping the spool, I don't think a 8v would spool it up till 4500 or higher, I have data logs that show spool up posted here with my set up.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> jasonbend79
> 
> Black Forest Ind.
> 
> ...


 thanks much! just ordered there stage 1 mounts, they where out of upper tranny mounts for stage 2 so just went with the stage 1 mounts, they look awesome and should do the trick! 

thanks again!


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

http://techtonicstuninginc.com/main...id=217&zenid=ec48b8b000b6534a657b1290266db6a0


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

which pulley is that? mk3 tdi?(from gruven)


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> which pulley is that? mk3 tdi?(from gruven)


 Gruven 1.8t! also works for ABF builds with ABA serp system, did a lot of checking on this because they claim it replaces the harmonic balancer as well, and said it is perfectly true and balanced so the harmonic balancer is no longer needed, and was thoroughly tested on several engine setups, hope so! 

read from there site! 



> Lose the boat anchor of that OEM steel crank pulley with this 230 gram lightweight billet aluminum version. It is the lightest crank pulley out there and will allow the engine to spool up faster while reducing inertial losses caused by the overweight OEM pulley. This pulley is NOT underdrive and will therefore not underdrive the alternator and cause charging problems. For underdrive applications, check out our specially designed underdrive power steering pulley below.
> 
> This pulley fits all MK4 Golf, Jetta, GLI, New Beetle, and 337 1.8T and 2.0 engines, as well as all Audi TT MK1 1.8T 180hp and 225 hp. Buy them as a set and save!
> 
> Please note, this crank pulley is also compatible with ABA engines with the 16V head swap, G60 Limited 16V Engines, and also for 1.8T Engines using ABA brackets.


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

oh ok , good to know. 
i currently have the mk3 tdi pulley(and the v-belt pulley still jammed in it) 

that gruven one is now on my things to buy list


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

so I got a little board today and took some mock up pix, can't work on the car till next week, just had a tonsil removed and have to take it easy, also the billet pulley didn't line up as advertised, they are not sure why but had me send it back to make it right no matter what the cause, I checked it against my modified g60 pulley to make sure it wasn't something with the motor, nope! the billet pulley it 6mm short, and the ABA pulley is 8mm long along side my g60 pulley that lines up perfect, anyway I like the look with the blue motor with black and silver and really need the silver pulley for the right mix of contras :thumbup: 
though most wont see it, I will know it's there! :screwy:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

BFI motor mounts came in late yesterday so installed engine and trans today, check these out! yum........banana :thumbup:


----------



## krazykolour (May 15, 2008)

how does your 020 hold up ?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

so far it has held for years with turbos and now with twin charging, stripped second once! but a 02m is coming soon! real soon! I make my boost in higher revs so not to bust it up, if I was making 30psi at 3k it would be done already :banghead:


spent a few hours today and got some work done, pulled the exhaust valves to clean plus lapped the seats, then reassembled the head with new stem seals and cam seal, and of course the Supertech intake valves and all the porting, then installed the head, here are some pix!

ARP studs and 3 layer metal head gasket









head's on! here you can see a little more of the intake porting!









VC, love that blue!









and final mock up pix with intake set in place!

























thought I was going to be driving it this weekend but forgot I am waiting on the billet pulley to come back fixed, they screwed up on there add saying it would work on my setup, "NOT" anyway I sent them my old timing sprocket so they can make a spacer with a centric center milled into it, in the mean time they will send back my modified G60 pulley so I can run it next week and install the fixed billet pulley when it's done.

PS: install they K&N oil filter for you concerned citizens :laughing:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

here's a couple update pix from when I was taking a break, then it's back to work, wha.....who...

PS: I also drilled and pined the crank nose today that took a lot of time, but worth it!

cool angle to see both blowers









slurp system









getting closer









the nut behind the seen









OK.... I'm going back to work, later!


----------



## groundupjetta (Feb 1, 2010)

Autoboost-tech said:


> the turban housing is a .96 a/r the stock compressor was .70 a/r but I switched the center section and compressor with a Turbonetics .70 a/r turbo and just used the turban housing from the 93 ford powerstroke banks turbo system turbo, as for spool up, not sure! I have a supercharger helping the spool, I don't think a 8v would spool it up till 4500 or higher, I have data logs that show spool up posted here with my set up.


Mine is straight garrett T3 .82 a/r turbine housing and .70 a/r compressor . I'm hoping to see boost between 4k and 5k rpm and rev to 7 ~ 8k redline :screwy:


----------



## swagger rob (Aug 13, 2009)

this thing is going to be a beast


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

the beast is real close, might start her up here real soon, cranked over fine to get oil up top end, and all sounds great! and good compression, still need to put the rad in and coolant and rap up some stuff under the car, so hopefully I will be driving it tomorrow, but now I need to get plates and tabs, the wash tabs expired last month, 










I don't know why I get nervous every time I rebuild a motor when about to start it, but I do! for years and years, god knows how many motors, I can't count them, I hate this part :laugh:

PS: don't know what the ghost image is in the top left? the old motors spirit?


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

OK.... all on top is done, cooling system finished, defiantly will rap up tomorrow and run the motor, I just ran out of steam tonight!


----------



## Jeebus (Jul 8, 2001)

Congrats... the starting them up doesn't bother me anymore.. it's always the first few passes breaking them in on the dyno that scares me. 

Good luck... looking good.


----------



## ValveCoverGasket (Mar 20, 2002)

keeping an eye on this one :beer:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

drove it about 20 miles, running much better than before, ether the added compression or porting makes it pull better before boost! and feels a lot faster at 10psi than before as well, hell it feels fast enough a 10psi period, didn't want to run any higher yet, needs more miles first, just wanted to load it a few times to seat in the rings, I'm sure 20psi will be a kick in the a$$, and I feel more confident in the timing as well when it's time to test out some real boost, time to pray to the 020 gods! :thumbup:


----------



## Jeebus (Jul 8, 2001)

Congrats, what are your power goals?


----------



## huichox4 (Nov 8, 2004)

Jeebus said:


> Congrats, what are your power goals?


X2


Nice build man :thumbup: congrats


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

I guess from the beginning I was looking for 500hp, but will have to wait until I install a 02m trans first, for now around 300hp and hope the 020 holds, I installed a LSD and DSS axles and that's all I am willing to invest into it, when I get the 02m I can swap inner cv joints on my DSS axles and use them still, at 1k a pair they better do there job, supposed to reduce shock load off the trans


----------



## huichox4 (Nov 8, 2004)

Autoboost-tech said:


> I guess from the beginning I was looking for 500hp, but will have to wait until I install a 02m trans first, for now around 300hp and hope the 020 holds, I installed a LSD and DSS axles and that's all I am willing to invest into it, when I get the 02m I can swap inner cv joints on my DSS axles and use them still, at 1k a pair they better do there job, supposed to reduce shock load off the trans


just one comment, either paint the battery top the same color as your valve cover or paint the engine bits the same color as your battery top (INTERSTATE) LOL ....... J/K 


no but seriously it is impressive and would like to see some videos showing how the SC is spooling up the turbo and how all its working together.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

When you're looking to let go of that 020 LSD, let me know. I could use of for my auto-x scirocco


----------



## Jeebus (Jul 8, 2001)

I did alright with my bunny with 300whp with an 020 with LSD. Got two years with some pretty good beatings before I swapped it out. Only issue I had was I ate 5th gear in it. 

May I asked why you're swapping to the more expensive 02M? Most guys with decent power don't seem to like the 6th gear because they're shifting all the time to stay in power, plus it's more money when sh!t breaks.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

the 02m runs 3 internal shafts instead of 2 as in 020 and 02a or j, o2m's are known to handle 500hp stock and a full swap runs about $1500 not counting fab time and labor, but I do it my self anyway, so put a LSD in the 02m and fix the shifter fork issues and its a lot cheaper than a 02a that needs 3k to 4k worth of gears to handle 500hp, plus there are some 02m 5 speeds, but 6 speed is fine with better mpg on the hwy, also 02m's for the 1.8t are geared well for a turbo 4 cylinder already, it's a win win in my opinion :thumbup:


----------



## Jeebus (Jul 8, 2001)

Oh I get it.. I was just curious. I'm actually going with the 5spd 02M when the car gets AWD. I just see most FWD do 02A's because of cost (like myself). But I know it all costs in the end.  

Anyways, looking forward to seeing how you make out on the dyno. I'm heading back with my new setup on Monday.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

Autoboost-tech said:


> plus there are some 02m 5 speeds, but 6 speed is fine with better mpg on the hwy,


5 and 6 speed get the same mileage on the highway, as the top gear on both is the same (as are 1-4).

:beer:


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> 5 and 6 speed get the same mileage on the highway, as the top gear on both is the same (as are 1-4).


yes! but you can gear taller with a 6 speed without the rpm gap's, 6th would only be use on 75 to 80mph hwy or autobahn runs :laugh: no matter what, it will be better gearing than my 16v 020, I had a .75 5th and the jump sucked so I took it out, .80 would be best I just don't want to invest more into this 020 trans, even so with my 245/16 I run 2600rpm at 60mph but over 3k a little at 70mph, remember I am in Montana now :thumbup: 

150 miles and flawless, running better every time I take it out, hit 12psi a couple times, fantastic exhilaration, everything just seems stronger with this motor, must be the porting, valve springs and better compression, 9:1 instead of 8:1 probably made the most difference, or the old motor was worn out more than I thought from years of boost and hard play, owe well! started running a little cooler too, a good sign it is breaking in, I'm convinced 20psi is going to be plenty of fun, save 30psi for the 02m, I need my car right now so don't want to push the envelope at all, but I know it's there when the time comes for the trans, also want to find a truck to tow it to the tracks for racing, then the gloves come off!

PS: I agree! the interstate battery gotta go, red top gel soon!


----------



## syracusegli (Jan 22, 2005)

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

Autoboost-tech said:


> PS: I agree! the interstate battery gotta go, red top gel soon!


if its just a weekend car. throw a Deka battery in there. its a nice way to save 25lbs off the front of your car.

:beer:


----------



## spdrace11 (Oct 27, 2003)

Any video yet??


----------



## scramblingvw (Aug 10, 2007)

been watching your build ,did something happen to the motor ?
you haven"t posted 4 a little bit.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

> been watching your build ,did something happen to the motor ?
> you haven"t posted 4 a little bit.


""""""""""""""""""""""VIDEO"""""""""""""""""""""""" finally""""""""""""""""""""""""""""":laugh: 

still haven't pushed it "all out" but nothing happen to the motor besides getting broke in and now tuning leaner and getting faster, I have been out of town and away from my computer, now I have my notebook with me and bought a HD camcorder, so finally here is some video for your enjoyment, there are 7 videos total just follow this link and then you can open up the other videos by clicking on the drop down at the top of the video, first few where test to get the mount working better, this link is the walk around vid the rest are from inside the car, you can hear the motor kick it and one you can see the gauges and one is a mountain twisty run, I will be posting more soon, keep tuned in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6F2AU9MtXw


----------



## crashnburn987 (May 11, 2004)

OMG Those seats are soooo coooool!!!!!


----------



## Rocco R16V (Oct 7, 2008)

looking good dude! :beer:


----------



## carsluTT (Dec 31, 2004)

nice project


----------



## krazykolour (May 15, 2008)

what type of pulley did you use on your water pump, i have a mk3 but i want a water pump pulley with grooves


----------



## The Green (Oct 5, 2002)

My appologies for not finding it myself (at work), but how do you run the boostlines? 
Pull, push or compound? 

Yup, another 8v thinking of doing something similar


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

post 254. turbo in to the sc


----------



## simple_man (Jun 18, 2006)

Free bump for a great build :thumbup:


----------



## mad rallye (Apr 29, 2007)

My goodness i have spent the last 3 hours reading this twin charge set up and i'm really considiring having a go at this do you have a sketch for your set up, also will a eaton comprresor work.:thumbup: 



Nas


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

Well it's official...! me and my car are moving to Phoenix area by the end of april, the sub zero winters here suck, and cracked my fender flares, anyway there will be more events down south I can attend including southern cally stuff, look for it soon, maybe coming to your area....!


----------



## scramblingvw (Aug 10, 2007)

I know the feeling ,8 inches snow today on april fools,
not funny,up here in maine, wondered if you drove it in winter,
how many miles on it now


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

never drove in the snow, I bought a jeep cherokee this winter to deal with the winters here, so plan to use the jeep to tow it down to Phoenix on a dolly, right know the car has been completly rebuilt in every detail 2000 miles ago short of paint and a windshield witch is hard to find, the new motor has less then 2k on it, didn't look but it is broke in, 

I don't think my spec 3+ clutch is going to hold though, it slipped at 120mph on the boost passing a truck on the freeway and now feels softer, anyway my next choice will be competion clutch or south bend, any input I'm listening? need to stay 020 for now.....!


----------



## simple_man (Jun 18, 2006)

Wanted to share another thread with VW TDI build: 
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=270527

Guys are puting together Twin Sequential VGTurbos on Diesel VW engine.


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*Video*

so I am in Las Vegas on my trip to Phoenix, did some runs around town today smoken tires, owe...! here's the vid that goes with it

Have Fun

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3SYEM2TKOo


----------



## Autoboost-tech (Dec 27, 2009)

*car is for sale best reasonable offer over 19k in parts 8k last year in upgrades, car is in Phoenix, thanks Guy*


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

Whycome?


----------



## agks128 (Apr 29, 2008)

*Price?*

How much for the car?


----------



## sha-d (Jul 13, 2007)

more than you can afford pal

BUMP!


----------

