News:

Need a manual?  Buy a Clymer manual Here

Main Menu

pics of turbo project

Started by 94gsrider, March 28, 2005, 02:23:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dom

I know for cars the cap for compression ratio on blowers and turbos is 9:1 with 6:1 being widely agreed upon as the "magic number" so 11.5:1 seems a little high, but singe our bikes redline at 10k the ideal compression ratio might be bumped up a bit as well.

Just wondering why you didn't utilize any of the space behind the carbs?  Without the airbox it's pretty much empty.  Understood that when plumbing the intake manifold running pipes back any further than you did you would risk some leg burns, but that could have been alleviated with some pipe wrap.  I imagined running the headers down each side into the turbo which would be placed directly behind the engine, but then again, you proly thought of this all and came to the conclusion that it was unfeasable to mount the turbo anywhere other than where you did.

94gsrider

Mounting the turbo on the right side was not my original plan.  Originally I had wanted to mount the turbo in original location of the airbox.  However, there simply is not enough room.  The space narrows to about 6.5" there, which is not much more than  the turbo.  Also you'd have a very very hot turbo right under your seat and next to the battery, not exactly ideal.  Also, I wanted to keep the manifold as short as possible, the longer then manifold and more bends, there would be more pressure, friction, and temperature losses.  I believe you could mount the turbo right in front of the engine, but you'd have to modify the frame to fit it, and probably use a smaller turbo.  

Like I said before, this is for my senior design projecttat for school.  Being that it will determine if I get to become a real mech engineer, if there aren't calculations showing my reasoning, there are at least logical explanations.  

Anyway, still looking for help with jetting and oiling!!

GeeP

Quote from: 94gsriderThe engine and drivetrain are being left stock.  Our stock compression ratio is 9:1, I've calculated the effective compression ratio to be 11.5:1.  This is reasonable, will obviously at least require 93 octane though.  [/list]


(14.7 PSI + 8 PSI)(9.0) = 204.3 PSI

204.3 / 14.7 = 13.9

13.9:1 is the equivalent compression, which is on it's way into Diesel territory.  13.9:1 will autoignite gasolines.  

Another thought comes to mind in deciding how high to run this thing.  At an effective compression ratio of 13.9:1 you're seriously eating into the safety factor of the cylinder head bolts and main bearing cap bolts, which I wouldn't suspect is over 2:1 anyway.  I'd be worried about plastic deformation of the bolts or their threaded holes leading to a blown gasket or thrown crank.  In fact, I wouldn't assume that the threaded holes for the cylinder head bolts are capable of bringing the bolts to plastically deform.  There may not be enough thread engagement there.

Just curious.
Every zero you add to the tolerance adds a zero to the price.

If the product "fails" will the product liability insurance pay for the "failure" until it turns 18?

Red '96
Black MK2 SV

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk