turbo 200 build

If injector overheat is the issue, it may be easier to upgrade to a modern high impedance pencil style injector that handles heat better. Another thing I can't tell from the pictures or the video is how the fuel flow is routed. Fuel should be circulated from the pump through the rail from one end to the other, then to the regulator and back to the tank.

At modern EFI pressures, vapor at the rail is not common. I highly doubt you're able to get the fuel inside the rail to 195+*F that's needed for the fuel to vaporize at 43+psig, unless you're running a deadhead fuel system.

If you think it's the injectors sticking or seizing, you can try to listen to them while it's happening with a stethoscope. You can try logging injector voltage traces with an ocilliscope while it happens.

I'd certainly get a data log with the Holley while it happens and have a look.
 
When I built my engine, and had originally planned to use a log head, the whole issue of how to deal with the 1000 degree " furnace" that would be directly beneath the intake gave me all the reasons in the world not to. When the opportunity came up here to buy the Crossflow head I jumped on it.
Despite all of the additional modifications required to make that head fit a us block, and all of the logistical issues getting parts from Australia to make it work, the fact that I can put my hand on the intake manifold and leave it there when the water temp gauge reads 200 becomes the number one reason to do it.

The looks you'll get at the cruise-ins is directly related to that. Nobody here in the us has a Crossflow headed banger.
Which brings me to this story:
Last year, I was at Cruisin the Coast. A big giant car show for domestics from 1987 down. The last day, I backed in under a huge Spanish oak right next to a 1961 Corvette on one side, and a 80's chromed out short bed Chevy p/u on the other. The Vette owner, typical for Vette owners, sat in his chair at the back of his car with his wife, seeming mildly perturbed that my androgynous ford was parked next to his pristine classic. I complimented his car as I was getting my chair out of my trunk, and ol Vette dude just grunted something back at me. I set up at the front of the car. All day long, spectators streamed by, glancing at his car, but stopping to talk with me about mine. After a few hours, Vette dude sends his wife to look at what was under my hood that was causing all of the commotion ( he himself was too proud to spend anytime looking at a " Non C2" Corvette). She goes back, and had to tell him " I don't know what that thing is", because after a while,he drags himself outta his chair, and says " I have to see what the hub-bub is with your car,....what am I looking at here" ( probably the 100th time I had to answer that question that day). I don't remember exactly, but I think he actually returned the compliment.
I considered that the high point of the day,...that my pieced together, science experiment managed to get him out of his chair and... Made him look.

Now..back to your dilemma. If that mess of tubes isn't coated that should be priority 1. The may be a radiant barrier that you can have your intake coated in to insulate it better as well, but I still think you're gonna have heat issues.
You do great work, and looking at your engine pics I kept saying to myself, " that's how I'd have done it." Having welded that intake together, you know full well how quickly aluminum takes, and spreads heat when it's applied.

Had I kept the log head, I fully planned to put the plenum on the opposite side of the engine like the factory does sometimes to minimize the heat soak. ( although that'll do little to minimize the exposure of the injectors as they are still immediately north of the exhaust. I also wouldn't have buried the turbo under the tubes, and put that glowing red hot orb in a place to just add even more radiant heat that needed to rise up and just roast everything above it.

But that's just me.

The problem with having to build heat shields is that it ruins all of the beautiful design aesthetic you've got going on.

About the only thing you can do is to maybe build a partition plate that will sequester the header. Maybe add some additional heat insulation blanket to one side of that plate. maybe dedicate a fan that blows directly at the header to try and blow some of that hot air out from under the car.

Or...maybe you put a Crossflow head on it......I know a guy that has one. ;)
 
Well this is a little alarming. I wonder if I will run into the same heat issue......

picture.php
 
mike1157":39hkvuvv said:
When I built my engine, and had originally planned to use a log head, the whole issue of how to deal with the 1000 degree " furnace" that would be directly beneath the intake gave me all the reasons in the world not to. When the opportunity came up here to buy the Crossflow head I jumped on it.
Despite all of the additional modifications required to make that head fit a us block, and all of the logistical issues getting parts from Australia to make it work, the fact that I can put my hand on the intake manifold and leave it there when the water temp gauge reads 200 becomes the number one reason to do it.

The looks you'll get at the cruise-ins is directly related to that. Nobody here in the us has a Crossflow headed banger.
Which brings me to this story:
Last year, I was at Cruisin the Coast. A big giant car show for domestics from 1987 down. The last day, I backed in under a huge Spanish oak right next to a 1961 Corvette on one side, and a 80's chromed out short bed Chevy p/u on the other. The Vette owner, typical for Vette owners, sat in his chair at the back of his car with his wife, seeming mildly perturbed that my androgynous ford was parked next to his pristine classic. I complimented his car as I was getting my chair out of my trunk, and ol Vette dude just grunted something back at me. I set up at the front of the car. All day long, spectators streamed by, glancing at his car, but stopping to talk with me about mine. After a few hours, Vette dude sends his wife to look at what was under my hood that was causing all of the commotion ( he himself was too proud to spend anytime looking at a " Non C2" Corvette). She goes back, and had to tell him " I don't know what that thing is", because after a while,he drags himself outta his chair, and says " I have to see what the hub-bub is with your car,....what am I looking at here" ( probably the 100th time I had to answer that question that day). I don't remember exactly, but I think he actually returned the compliment.
I considered that the high point of the day,...that my pieced together, science experiment managed to get him out of his chair and... Made him look.

Now..back to your dilemma. If that mess of tubes isn't coated that should be priority 1. The may be a radiant barrier that you can have your intake coated in to insulate it better as well, but I still think you're gonna have heat issues.
You do great work, and looking at your engine pics I kept saying to myself, " that's how I'd have done it." Having welded that intake together, you know full well how quickly aluminum takes, and spreads heat when it's applied.

Had I kept the log head, I fully planned to put the plenum on the opposite side of the engine like the factory does sometimes to minimize the heat soak. ( although that'll do little to minimize the exposure of the injectors as they are still immediately north of the exhaust. I also wouldn't have buried the turbo under the tubes, and put that glowing red hot orb in a place to just add even more radiant heat that needed to rise up and just roast everything above it.

But that's just me.

The problem with having to build heat shields is that it ruins all of the beautiful design aesthetic you've got going on.

About the only thing you can do is to maybe build a partition plate that will sequester the header. Maybe add some additional heat insulation blanket to one side of that plate. maybe dedicate a fan that blows directly at the header to try and blow some of that hot air out from under the car.

Or...maybe you put a Crossflow head on it......I know a guy that has one. ;)


Nice one Mike. Best wishes with the Jay Zee.

(y)



If ever there was an icon coated in red, gold and black that created as much spark...it's your Gila Monster.

Your advice is welcome.



Right, another seven steps:-


1. Ford used Tickford for there development work on in line sixes well before they picked up Aston Martin and Jaguar. The acquisition of Volvo and access to plug and injector data on the modular in line five and six also brought information back to Dearborn. The squirrel blower was the out come of fixing a whole bunch of TFi and Injector heat issues that really caused some problems at FoMoCo.

2. The Aussie Ford and Holden guys worked through this from 1983-1992 the same way BMW did with the Siamese bored M30 2.0/2.3/M21 Diesel 2.4/Eta 2.7 engines.


3. In BMW'S, the heat sink was controlled by slanting the engine for BMW, but Ford OZ and GM Holden just decided to keep the air entry point cold. The

4. The famed squirrel blower duct, um, " Anti Vapor Lock Cooling Fan" was a F150/250/350 E van solution for injector heat.

attachment.php


heaterhose49l.jpg


attachment.php


5. When Tickford did the 1992 Falcon XR6, Adding headers in a non cross flow or even the EFI X-flow Ford sixes always hurt performance due to heat saturation close to the injectors.



6. For Ford USA, the 12 or 14 pound per hour injectors run hot, and the blower was Ford USA's response before changing the injectors. (4.9 F-truck/E-Van, or to a lesser extent, but still enough to be a problem, the Aussie 4.1 EFI cross flow or SOHC 3.9/4.0 EFI engines, same deal, but they decided to elimante headers and only use an iron header).


7. Same with the 3.3 liter Electronic Injection 3.3 Holden Commodore 142 hp six from 1985

BerlinaEngPic_0.jpg




holden-vk-black-motor.jpg



It has a stainless steel header. The made a really good cold air scoop for it, and figured out how to use the intake runner to be separate, and shielded from the exhaust.

When turboed, generally, people move to ductile iron or higher iron content tube bends.



post-12789-0-26446000-1318235587.jpg



An " Anti Vapor Lock Cooling Fan" or an ellipsoidal fuel rail cooler will be elegant and will work if you figure out a way to mount it.


Back in my Mini 1275 engine days, the Lotus Engineering conversion to the Turbo 1275 MG Metro used engine heat as a means of making the huge 1-3/4" SU carb heat up. They couldn't care less how much heat hit the carb....one 225 cfm carb would always juice the so called 95 hp 78 cube engine to make well over its advertised hp.


EFi brings with it a duty cycle and fuel handling temperature restriction, and straight off, I'd copy what other car companies do. It is a fine, easy way of making a non cross flow engine change from a stupid 57 hp plodder to a twice as powerful stalwart without problems.



1300turbodiagram.jpg


http://www.hybrid-mini.co.uk/metro/Grap ... iagram.jpg


mg-mini-metro-turbo-t3-rebuilt_360_0455005005cf1099812f636a5d522471.jpg


Ford never made a double the Horsepower 1987-1996 300 hp low pressure turbo 4.9 six. If they did, it wouldn't have been any different to the stock 4.9.


The Cross Flow 4.1 AIT Turbo... It had the injectors on the other side, but it had a whole gambit of other problems which required a Anti Detonation Injection system to cover off as canted valve engines run much closer to detonation than wedge head non cross flows.


When Ford Australia and Honda did the first cross flow alloy head, it was always prone to pre-ignition or pinking. Its a Boss 302/351/ X-flow issue that only ever gets fixed when you use a knock sensor. So going another road might seam fair enough, but it also has Sounds like Detonation issues.


Injectors are easy to cool.


A detonation prone X flow requires a specific RX to nail it. The best 1972 351C HO 4V makes 350 hp net verses the best 1969 Shelby's 351w 4V 290 hp net's. 60 extra horses. But the detonation prone engine could break and not finish races despite the extra horsepower.


So you've got to go back to Fixing the Problem.


The Aussie Dick Johnson found an easy another 47 hp net extra with the Cross flow head in the planned 2305 500 CFM carbed 1987 SVO Falcon, 196 hp verses about 149 hp net with the 1972 250 2V. Both ran 9.3:1 compression, but the extra cfm and power came with a lowered detonation threashold. A lot of the turbo guys spend a sh!+ load of money fixing that problem....

Advanced Induction Technologies' David Inall,

MVT's Mike Vine,
DJR's Dick Johnson

....all failed to make it commercially viable, and the used Japans HKS and NormalAIR Garrets best technicians and engineers to fix it.

Look at this beauty....


eca0ee0f07813d9e388ca58790dd43f3.jpg


But look at the extra doo-dads.


caeb9c91a35d7fe65c80669279021a5f.jpg


:unsure: My un-tendered advice?


Use the Sixth Finger, the blQQdy Squirrel Blower. (y)

A Rule 12v boat cabin blower would do the same job.

Try one of those whistles out and be done with all this henium coated trying.

IMHO, The thermodynamics are all wrong. Yes, NHRA style Crome coating or even the the old Jay Leno Porcelain coated Maserati GT 3500 iron headers...or NASA coating...that works. But Coatings, they do work, but simple wind rush works better.
 
67Straightsix":jfl2hsww said:
First,thanks for the replies on air-fuel ratios. Last week I got the rear gears changed. I now have a true-trac with 3.55 gears. I've driven about 60 miles on the new rear end. Big difference, much more power from idle. No more finessing clutch and throttle to get it going.The car runs much better at all rpms. Driving at 60 in fifth is just under 2000 rpm. With the new gears the turbo compensates for the big cam at lower rpms.
The car is running rich,I didn't want to start playing with the tune until I changed gears.Now I'll start data logging and dial in air fuel ratio.
Now a bit of frustrating news. Rear main is dripping oil. I've been following the other threads on this problem. thinking about trying vacuum pump solution.The biggest problem is I'm running out of space to put anything.


See Mike and addo's post on permetex sealant.

viewtopic.php?f=76&t=28235&p=202325#p202325
 
Finally figured out my stalling problem - it was heat related, but not the way I thought it was. The crank sensor bracket is made out of aluminum and when it got hot it expanded and pulled the crank sensor out of alignment. When cooled down it would re-align - so when I visually checked it, it always looked correct (tricky). Took it on several short drives and then a 100 mile trip with no problems! So after many hours of trouble-shooting by many different people, we have finally found the problem :beer: Also figured out the oil leak - the oil pan mating surface to the block is a little warped and needs to be flattened - so another problem solved. So I'm really enjoying driving the car - it's running reliably and performing as I'd hoped. I'm still running it a little bit rich so I need to fine tune and make a few adjustments to get it to it's peak performance.
 
Pleased you avoided all the other work around's. I know you've had this talk before.

I am delighted your turbo and cam selection has been proven right. I'd say the old Richard Holdener rules prove true. I really despise under-camming an in line six. David Vizard always said. When woking on a tiny Stage 2 cammed 2000 OHC engine with 4-bbl and 20 pounds of boost TO4B V1 trim turbo, he said Reduce boost if its surging, or Increase cam if its not giving you enough. Your axle ratio and trans choice, just magic.


Having no heat soak, and no fuel pump problems is just the icing on the cake.


On the Prox.

Prox senors are very much an acquired art form. I've had my a$$ handed to me seven times times, which on my 100 dollar per hour charge out rate is like 20 grand, and I've had access to the best techies in the world. Well they are rocket scientists.


1. Once with the Opus Haldameter, simple rally distance meter. Toyota digital sensor issue in 1997.

2. When using my Dakota sensor on my early road roughness meter, the sensor got crud on it, and stopped. We had a spare, but the tech killed it by reverse polarity, just like I did three times later with my other Honeywell and Bernstein sensors.

3. Then Brantz meter, where the suppliers components were bootlegged , and we had a range of issues due to the unscrupulous being involved. I sorted out by going back to the authorized supplier, who wasn't being fed counterfeit parts. The Bernstein sensor fixed that, and who ever stole Brantz's supply line, may they rot for theft. Problem is, I fused three of them sorting it out.

4. The forth time was with my own instrumentation for road roughness. Hall effects have north and south poles, and you know my testimony a few pages back on what happened after epoxying in the trigger bolts and special Rare Earth Magnets. I had to take it all out and redo it. Then we had to use a pull-up resistor to create load so the Digital equipment could be triggered.

Then the 5th, 6th and 7th.

5. Nissan, 6. Toyota and 7. Ford Variable Reluctor ABS and Speedo sensors did it to me again.

Pre-scalers won't work on VR sensors.

On my in line Fords, the Ford 1981-1984 EECIII prox is just great, and works well. People are slowly learning how good the stock Ford stuff was back in the day. 39 years ago. Its never done me wrong.
 
I came dangerously close to dropping a V-8 in it - had to walk away from the car for awhile :banghead: But things are back on track and now I can finish the 10,000 little details on the rest of the car! :LOL:
 
pmuller9":2xdn11p6 said:
What does the power band look like?

On the freeway the car cruises at 1800rpm (about 60mph) I don't get a real feel of acceleration until 2500rpms - at around 4000rpms the car really comes alive! I've been short shifting it so I don't have a sense of the upper rpm range. After I fine tune it, I'd like to find a good dino so I can find out what this sucker does and post accurate numbers.
 
Been sorting out the suspension and almost have that dialed in. Now that I have some miles on the car, I've been running it at full boost - it runs and drives well and appears civilized until you bury the throttle then it accelerates like a bat out of hell :D I'm rethinking my cam choice (I'm conceding to pmuller that my cam is too big) When I really get on the throttle it revs 5000rpm in the blink of an eye and wants to rev a lot higher - I have to watch my rpms very closely or I'll over rev the turbo. I have been talking to Schneider Cams about a more appropriate grind. They have been very helpful and he seems to think with my engine combination and a milder cam that 500 horsepower is realistic - which surprised me! So I'm going to try a milder cam. Don't know the cam specs off the top of my head but I'll let you know when I get it. I'm also thinking of switching to E85 - any thoughts?
 
Ive been told that off idle torque holes as a result of a lack of boost growth or because the cam is to big is the reason turbo and cam suppliers are si conservative. Its easy to quickly loose that lovely American Mustang low end torque.



That would be really sad if you de cammed it.


So well before this, an Aussie Chrysler turbo sedan provided the answer.A sort of Dodge Lancer is the Answer....

Id be putting a harder spring in it, and upstream of the turbo, a gate valve made out of a 70 mm (2.76 inch) 5.0 throttle body and its TPS. You have it restricted after idle to 2500 at 1.2 volts, and release it after that point, any time your looping out of open loop. This can be done electronically by a method shown to us back in 2004.

http://fa5t-drive.blogspot.com/2011/07/ ... 4.html?m=0


This is brings the turbo on so the 2.61 inches of turbo wheel is forced to make 3 pounds of extra boost from 1500 to 2500 rpm by a triple spring limited throttle body.

Richard Holdener said that Ish and the team at WesTech never even get into the advanced turbo and other forms of boost features that Holley HP and XFi EFi has. Most engine and chassis dyno guys go for jugular changes. The whole gammit and list of boost modulation and low speed injector dead time features that you get from part sequential or full sequential are left farrow.

The great thing about this feature is its like a waste gate noise wise, but works like a smaller turbo off idle to the onset of boost.

This is Ak Millers TC-1 boost controller concept.

I did link it to you a while ago. Colin and Violet Townsends 500 hp LP Gas Plymouth Valiant Hemi 265, and 11 second towing car. It used the same system. If your happy with peak power, but sad abiut off idle boost growth....then do like the Townsends.
 
I beg to differ.
The original plan was to make big boost from 1500 to 5000 rpm and that is how the turbocharger is sized.

Right now the wastegate is closed shut until full boost at 4000 rpm.
You can't make significant boost at 1500 rpm if there is very little exhaust volume to spin the turbine.
I can see if the cam profile was simply on the large side and you wanted to get a little more boost at the low end but the present camshaft is so grossly mismatched that there is no exhaust energy to work with below 2500 rpm.

I've been here before.
As a band aid I ended up advancing the cam as far as possible while keeping a .100" piston to intake valve clearance.

I will be interested in the cam profile from Schneider.
 
:beer: Exhaust compressor AR can be taken down.


:unsure: Im on the same page...just working backwards through the same solutions. Flow velocity can be rasied by exhaust diameter change via low speed single, higher speed dual pipe.

Im agreeing in sorts, just working through tge ways Vizard and Holdener have avoidef cam swaps when everything except boost origression off idle is good. Vizard nailed it n page 132 of SOHC Pinto engine turbos...he didnt have Colin Townsends upstream butterfly trick. I offer it to you. And appluad your efforts.
 
If the turbine A/R or piping diameter is reduced then low rpm response in increased at the expense of high rpm power.
The smaller A/R or exhaust plumbing becomes a choke point later on.

The problem here is there is no exhaust to work with at all below 2500 rpm period.

There is no substitute to sizing everything correctly for the desired power band and power level.
 
I debated between bigger turbo or smaller cam -decided to stay with my original goal and go smaller on the cam (also, it's cheaper and easier ;) ) I am curious, however, what the horsepower potential would be with a bigger turbo.
 
The cam that is in there will make power beyond 7000 rpm but the head flow will be the restriction at that point.
If you stay with 15 lbs of boost you are somewhere around 450 hp.
If you push it to 20 lbs of boost the power should exceed 500 hp.

You would need the aftermarket connecting rods and custom pistons.

If you had a ported aluminum head you could do some serious damage.
 
Back
Top