You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Squires Turbo
- Thread starter Kale
- Start date
unstoppable
Registered
RE: Squires Turbo
Why do you think the smaller turbo could only build 5-7 LBs of boost??
A larger turbo doesnt make MORE boost.
Why do you think the smaller turbo could only build 5-7 LBs of boost??
A larger turbo doesnt make MORE boost.
Stonecoldtx
Registered
RE: Squires Turbo
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Well it doesn't cost $4000, when i talked to them they said it would be $2800 for the system plus what ever amount for the piping to be run to the intake. I am not getting, but wanted to find out more about it so I called them.
[/div]
Well, maybe they've changed their pricing schedule or maybe they're quoting a no-frills package, but here is where I got my $4000 figure:
Popular Hot Rodding, November 2004 issue
Article name: "Boost Incognito", page 38
Last paragraph of the article, verbatim, on page 43:
"What do we think? We think it's time to check out the dyno numbers. We baselined the stock '02 at L.A. Performance Division for a grand total of 313 rear-wheel horsepower. After installing the system and going back onto the same dyno, we produced 463 horsepower and 511 pound fee of torque the very next day. What does this mean to you readers? Lots of bi, smoky burnouts for about $4000!"
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]"Why do you think the smaller turbo could only build 5-7 LBs of boost? A larger turbo doesnt make MORE boost."
[/div]
Well, first off--it appears that this system was designed for the 5-7lbs of boost pressure quoted (that's what the magazine article seems to point out), so with that in mind, let's take a look at the dynamics of it.
Every turbocharger has a maximum airflow, just as pretty much everything else has a maximum.
The turbocharger in this particular system is specifically sized so as to provide the specified amount of boost with little or no lag; as a result, it's maximum airflow is going to naturally be somewhat limited.
When you reach the maximum amount of airflow that that turbo can produce, you reach the maximum boost it can produce as well.
However, a larger turbo will have a higher maximum airflow than that smaller one, and so it will definitely make more boost pressure in the same system (i.e.: more airflow pushed into the same size opening as the original turbo); however, the side effect of that larger turbo is that it will also require more flow to spin it up to the speed at which it will make boost, and that is what will cause the turbo lag.
There are several ways to work around that, such as multiple turbochargers, different stages of when they start providing boost, etc., but then you're talking about a lot more money.
I'm not saying it's a BAD system, because it obviously works, but it's limited in it's potential, and according to the article, it costs $4000.
With this in mind, to me it just doesn't make it cost-effective, because if it's going to cost that much, it's not really worth it when you can do it the traditional (right) way and have so much more potential for just a few hundred dollars more. Last time I checked, I think the base systems for custom turbo kits were around $5000.
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Well it doesn't cost $4000, when i talked to them they said it would be $2800 for the system plus what ever amount for the piping to be run to the intake. I am not getting, but wanted to find out more about it so I called them.
[/div]
Well, maybe they've changed their pricing schedule or maybe they're quoting a no-frills package, but here is where I got my $4000 figure:
Popular Hot Rodding, November 2004 issue
Article name: "Boost Incognito", page 38
Last paragraph of the article, verbatim, on page 43:
"What do we think? We think it's time to check out the dyno numbers. We baselined the stock '02 at L.A. Performance Division for a grand total of 313 rear-wheel horsepower. After installing the system and going back onto the same dyno, we produced 463 horsepower and 511 pound fee of torque the very next day. What does this mean to you readers? Lots of bi, smoky burnouts for about $4000!"
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]"Why do you think the smaller turbo could only build 5-7 LBs of boost? A larger turbo doesnt make MORE boost."
[/div]
Well, first off--it appears that this system was designed for the 5-7lbs of boost pressure quoted (that's what the magazine article seems to point out), so with that in mind, let's take a look at the dynamics of it.
Every turbocharger has a maximum airflow, just as pretty much everything else has a maximum.
The turbocharger in this particular system is specifically sized so as to provide the specified amount of boost with little or no lag; as a result, it's maximum airflow is going to naturally be somewhat limited.
When you reach the maximum amount of airflow that that turbo can produce, you reach the maximum boost it can produce as well.
However, a larger turbo will have a higher maximum airflow than that smaller one, and so it will definitely make more boost pressure in the same system (i.e.: more airflow pushed into the same size opening as the original turbo); however, the side effect of that larger turbo is that it will also require more flow to spin it up to the speed at which it will make boost, and that is what will cause the turbo lag.
There are several ways to work around that, such as multiple turbochargers, different stages of when they start providing boost, etc., but then you're talking about a lot more money.
I'm not saying it's a BAD system, because it obviously works, but it's limited in it's potential, and according to the article, it costs $4000.
With this in mind, to me it just doesn't make it cost-effective, because if it's going to cost that much, it's not really worth it when you can do it the traditional (right) way and have so much more potential for just a few hundred dollars more. Last time I checked, I think the base systems for custom turbo kits were around $5000.
ryanharrington
Registered
RE: Squires Turbo
holy old thread i know, but god damn i just had to say, DID THAT GUY SAY AIR EXPANDS AS IT COOLS????
holy old thread i know, but god damn i just had to say, DID THAT GUY SAY AIR EXPANDS AS IT COOLS????
D
Dominus
Guest
RE: Squires Turbo
People, there's only one reason why this crappy concept works at all: Loss of efficiency
Your average turbo Camaro uses a turbo with a .96 AR turbine housing, but it is only .81 on an STS so it can spool properly.
Result? You make less power at the same boost pressure as that .96.
People, there's only one reason why this crappy concept works at all: Loss of efficiency
Your average turbo Camaro uses a turbo with a .96 AR turbine housing, but it is only .81 on an STS so it can spool properly.
Result? You make less power at the same boost pressure as that .96.