When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Typically 1.50" Sch. 40 pipe is considered minimum ID for shared turbo/wastegate flow. It will come down to which one is more restricted; wastegate or turbo feed
Just checked the 11/2" sample i have here and it's sch10s he uses ...... so looking at the chart the 11/4" will be 36.7mm ID = 1058mm2
For what I want to do with the car , response is more important than peak whp . I do want to get a great number at peak as well ............but I have to admit it's more for proving the concept than anything else.
Yeah ............. don't see it working any better/worse than a wastegate but interested to hear why Ekim suggested it .
As far as i understand it, it's just for spool - butterfly directs all the flow to one scroll when spooling and then both scrolls when spooled - i've seen better designs were the valve works as a wall/hole between the runners
I think it may be overcomplicating it - if for some bizzare reason you have issues with spool, you can look into it
Yeah ............. don't see it working any better/worse than a wastegate but interested to hear why Ekim suggested it .
Sorry for the horribly unclear post...
The thought in my mind is more like a combination of a exhaust cut-out and a "quick spool valve".
My thought would be have a your mid iron runner blocked with a "butter-fly" valve and actuated by an WG actuator. The valve mechanism is all metal and mechanical, so the issue of heat or over heating a WG diaphragm shouldn't be an issue. Also, in my mind, it could have better flow characteristics than a WG.
One thing I don't know is how well it would seal. If the "butter-fly" is like stainless, it might expand just a enough to prevent a leak causing exhaust to escape = loss of energy from main ports.
Hope you can imagine what I am mean. Not very good at explain things sometimes. Also this contraption would be built into the runner and run/exhaust into the main exhaust system... just put that in there just in case someone thinks I'm just saying to put a cut-out and exhaust to atmosphere...
The thought in my mind is more like a combination of a exhaust cut-out and a "quick spool valve".
My thought would be have a your mid iron runner blocked with a "butter-fly" valve and actuated by an WG actuator. The valve mechanism is all metal and mechanical, so the issue of heat or over heating a WG diaphragm shouldn't be an issue. Also, in my mind, it could have better flow characteristics than a WG.
One thing I don't know is how well it would seal. If the "butter-fly" is like stainless, it might expand just a enough to prevent a leak causing exhaust to escape = loss of energy from main ports.
Gotya ... yeah the sealing might be an issue .
Biggest issue so far though is space ... shoehorning everything in is a nightmare .
Looks like this would hold better to the heat,locate easier, and seal.
MS Paint ftw!!
an "inline setup".
also if place further down the runner on the down-pipe side, you have more room and shouldn't change the F&R port flow. Flow is still going to follow the least path of resistance.... my 3.5 cents.
Really looking forward to what you come up with and your data.
06-19-2015, 05:33 PM
. 
