Close

Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Turbo for each individual cylinder - Why don't more people do this?

              
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,487
    Rep Points
    26,159.2
    Mentioned
    1729 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    262


    Reputation: Yes | No

    Turbo for each individual cylinder - Why don't more people do this?

    I've wondered about this and this is the first time I've seen it done. Imagine tiny turbos right up to the motor like this. Is it just too complex? Why don't more people do this?

    Click here to enlarge
    Like BoostAddict on FaceBook, get +20 rep and tacos*: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...-FaceBook-page


    * Tacos sold separately

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    442.9
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Pretty cool idea. Probably not done as I'm sure it's expensive (4, 6 or 8 turbos to be bought). Space would likely be an issue, and I'm sure it will get pretty hot. Properly sizing the turbo would probably take a good bit of trial and error, too.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,487
    Rep Points
    26,159.2
    Mentioned
    1729 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    262



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by GetSomeE92 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Pretty cool idea. Probably not done as I'm sure it's expensive (4, 6 or 8 turbos to be bought). Space would likely be an issue, and I'm sure it will get pretty hot. Properly sizing the turbo would probably take a good bit of trial and error, too.
    It just looks so cool.
    Like BoostAddict on FaceBook, get +20 rep and tacos*: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...-FaceBook-page


    * Tacos sold separately

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    442.9
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It just looks so cool.
    It does look pretty bad ass. I bet it sounds like a freaking jet, too.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    205
    Rep Points
    675.4
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,487
    Rep Points
    26,159.2
    Mentioned
    1729 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    262



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Snertz Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That looks insane.
    Like BoostAddict on FaceBook, get +20 rep and tacos*: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...-FaceBook-page


    * Tacos sold separately

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    983
    Rep Points
    697.3
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Cool idea

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,414
    Rep Points
    2,105.4
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Uh, regulating an even pressure in each cylinder and individual cylinder fuel control/injection could be one reason why this isn't main stream. I don't see how this could really be a huge benefit.
    Click here to enlarge
    Join the largest N5X Enthusiasts Group! 800+ Members Strong!
    http://www.facebook.com/groups/112468002137607/

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,487
    Rep Points
    26,159.2
    Mentioned
    1729 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    262



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by klipseracer Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Uh, regulating an even pressure in each cylinder and individual cylinder fuel control/injection could be one reason why this isn't main stream. I don't see how this could really be a huge benefit.
    It's a benefit to looking like a badass.
    Like BoostAddict on FaceBook, get +20 rep and tacos*: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...-FaceBook-page


    * Tacos sold separately

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Encino,CA
    Posts
    7,238
    Rep Points
    4,343.2
    Mentioned
    129 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    44


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's a benefit to looking like a badass.
    lol
    Click here to enlarge

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    NJ/Philly
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    122.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I think heat and space will be an issue. I also think tuning would be a pain.

    I would how lag would be on a setup like that? I know smaller turbos reduce turbo lag, so maybe using a small turbo on each cylinder would nearly eliminate lag.
    Click here to enlarge

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,302
    Rep Points
    1,869.2
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19


    Reputation: Yes | No
    There would absolutely no lag. Since each cylinder is going to hit it's exhaust stroke at different times, each turbo will spool almost sequentially. I could see this I4 producing insane amounts of power and immediate TQ/response. I would have to imagine this does exist on some type of racecar.
    09 e92 335i, 440HP/500TQ: SOLD
    03 EVO 8, 600HP/500TQ: SOLD
    13 Nissan Maxima: Slow
    99 Eclipse GSX: Waiting for the track to open



    Click here to enlarge



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,414
    Rep Points
    2,105.4
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I'm sure this has its benefits... But I couldn't see it being used in any kind of daily driver or anything that requires long term reliability. Variances between turbos would also be an element that would cause headaches.
    Click here to enlarge
    Join the largest N5X Enthusiasts Group! 800+ Members Strong!
    http://www.facebook.com/groups/112468002137607/

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,609
    Rep Points
    3,230.6
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    33


    Reputation: Yes | No
    There is going to be a problem with doing this. The turbines will not see a collective train of gas pulses.

    Pulses that overlap are bad, not enough pulses is also, well kinda bad. The turbos are small so they will spool up fast, but think about it, a 4 stroke engine will only produce one exhaust pulse for every two engine rotations. If one turbo gets that one pulse, then it will in theory spool up twice as slow as the same turbo that gets two pulses in two rotations assuming the rotational inertia of the turbochargers are the same. I have seen people do this before with success, but there is a law of diminishing returns, I think in this case.


    Obviously a big V8 with Y connectors everywhere and having all 8 cylinders dump into one turbo is a cluster$#@! fluid dynamically and results in lots of exhaust backpressure. So, a good way to describe it is, there is a minimum number of cylinder pulses required to get the most effective spool up time, the more cylinders you add the more careful you have to be with separating the exhaust pulses and having them join up without overlap (think equal length primaries and split housing exhaust scrolls)...
    Some people live long, meaningful lives.

    Other people eat shit and die.

    I'm not racist, I hate everybody equally; especially fat people.


    Click here to enlarge

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    TLH/SoFla/NorCal
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    1,195.1
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is going to be a problem with doing this. The turbines will not see a collective train of gas pulses.

    Pulses that overlap are bad, not enough pulses is also, well kinda bad. The turbos are small so they will spool up fast, but think about it, a 4 stroke engine will only produce one exhaust pulse for every two engine rotations. If one turbo gets that one pulse, then it will in theory spool up twice as slow as the same turbo that gets two pulses in two rotations assuming the rotational inertia of the turbochargers are the same. I have seen people do this before with success, but there is a law of diminishing returns, I think in this case.


    Obviously a big V8 with Y connectors everywhere and having all 8 cylinders dump into one turbo is a cluster$#@! fluid dynamically and results in lots of exhaust backpressure. So, a good way to describe it is, there is a minimum number of cylinder pulses required to get the most effective spool up time, the more cylinders you add the more careful you have to be with separating the exhaust pulses and having them join up without overlap (think equal length primaries and split housing exhaust scrolls)...
    But it looks amazing Click here to enlarge

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    314
    Rep Points
    112.4
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    That sure does look cool. I've always been curious if somebody had done such a thing.

    As DBFIU covered, it's probably beyond the point of diminishing returns and even going into reduced returns. Then there is all the additional cost, complexity/reliability, heat, tuning problems, etc.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,487
    Rep Points
    26,159.2
    Mentioned
    1729 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    262



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is going to be a problem with doing this. The turbines will not see a collective train of gas pulses.

    Pulses that overlap are bad, not enough pulses is also, well kinda bad. The turbos are small so they will spool up fast, but think about it, a 4 stroke engine will only produce one exhaust pulse for every two engine rotations. If one turbo gets that one pulse, then it will in theory spool up twice as slow as the same turbo that gets two pulses in two rotations assuming the rotational inertia of the turbochargers are the same. I have seen people do this before with success, but there is a law of diminishing returns, I think in this case.


    Obviously a big V8 with Y connectors everywhere and having all 8 cylinders dump into one turbo is a cluster$#@! fluid dynamically and results in lots of exhaust backpressure. So, a good way to describe it is, there is a minimum number of cylinder pulses required to get the most effective spool up time, the more cylinders you add the more careful you have to be with separating the exhaust pulses and having them join up without overlap (think equal length primaries and split housing exhaust scrolls)...
    Now this is a sound explanation that makes total sense. This is why the BMW S63 turbo setup is much more efficient than the N63 thanks to dual exhaust pulses. I didn't think about it.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    5,045
    Rep Points
    3,883.2
    Mentioned
    269 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    39


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Snertz Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Blowing down through a carburetor, talk about old school technology and a waste of time.. Haha. Looks cool, but you could get better spool and more power with properly sized twins and fuel injection.
    Vargas Turbocharger Technologies
    N55 World Record: 560WTQ, 11.4 ET / 123MPH
    N54 Stock Frame (100% E85) World Record: 645WHP / 654WTQ
    N54 (ACN 91 octane only) World Record, Stock Motor: 585WHP / 537WTQ
    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlarge Click here to enlarge Website - Email


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •