Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

cos think bout it, the PSI will only increase as the air is compressed further, when the air leaves the turbo into the the intercooler and on the way to the intake plenum it stays at the same compression level it already is, just theres more of it trying to get in, the air from another turbo cant compress the air from the first turbo if its at the same PSI. If however one turbo was running 10 psi and one was running 20psi i think, not sure though, you would end up with a total of 15Psi in the motor ??

edit: just thinking as well pressure is relative, 15 psi in a 10lt container is a lot less air than 15 psi in a 20 lt container. so the turbo isn't sending out a static '12 psi' its pushing air until the pipes its filling reach 12psi, both turbos know when that pressure is reached and stop, i guess 2 turbos work half as hard as 1 on its own ?

to answer the first question that doesnt mean theyre both pushing six, cos theyre both a part in the same system, the psi in that system is always the same for both turbos.

the way your thinking about it basically is that both turbo's are sealed off, reach 12 psi in a certain volume. and then both release they're pressurised air into a container the same size as each of the individual originals, but even then it wouldnt create 24 psi cos unless u have 24psi behind it it wont squeeze in

So it doesnt put more air in just puts the same air in faster?

technically i think so, if there both putting out the same amount of air as one, into the same size pipes as 1, at the same rate, it should spool up the same amount of air as 1 turbo in half the time, but theres probably some efficiency loss to the effect of maybe taking 60% of the time of 1 turbo instead of 50%, i dont really know lol, too late to wrap my head around this

plenum...

and yes 2 turbos @ 12psi push twice the volume of air as 1 turbo pushin 12psi. u dont add extra psi just because of another turbo. u could have 5 turbos running 12psi... still gonna be 12psi but with a shit load of air

The turbos still work just as hard as a single turbo because its still spinning @ whatever rpm it needs to make 12psi.

pretty simple stuff really :P

why?

why does two turbos @ 12psi = more power than 1 turbo at 12psi?

pressure != volume

why is map sensor flawed

pressure != volume

why is afm better?

pressure != volume

why does a GT30 make heaps more power at 12psi than a standard turbo?

pressure != volume

bwhahahahaha

why?

why does two turbos @ 12psi = more power than 1 turbo at 12psi?

pressure != volume

why is map sensor flawed

pressure != volume

why is afm better?

pressure != volume

why does a GT30 make heaps more power at 12psi than a standard turbo?

pressure != volume

bwhahahahaha

lol nice work :P

So 2 turbo putting out 12psi are pushing twice the amount of air into the engine than one!

No!

Two turbos pushing the required engine air volume at 12 psi will be the same as a single pushing the same required engine air volume at 12 psi - Temperature being equal and assuming the turbochargers have the capacity to deliver the load.

(P1*V1)T1 = (P2*V2)/T2

P = Pressure

V = Volume

T = Temperature

Edited by WRRR
If an RB26 is running 12psi, is it both turbo running this boost or both running 6psi to make 12psi???
So how does it work then? How can two turbos that make the same boost but don't increase the total boost volume and still make more power??

Good questions!

I too have been wondering about this.

Interesting answers too.

Im no expert on the matter, but from my way of thinking, the PSI is built up by forcing more air into the cylinder as a turbo works more like a 'pump' than a compressor.

The more air (ie volume of air) you bump into the cylinder the more pressure builds up. When this pressure builds up to 12 psi the wastegate opens.

Therefore does that mean that 12 psi from 2 turbos just means that each is generating 6psi. The benefit therefore is quicker build up of boost at lower revs and less strain on each turbo charger.

I thought that PSI is a result of a higher volume of air forced into each cylinder.

Like I said, no expert on the matter.

I just want to understand how it works :cheers:

Edited by noakespg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Even with the piston at TDC there was room for it to drop, but I don't think it can drop fully into the cylinder, the problem you have is that you need something pushing against the valve to hold it up so you have enough room to put the new stem seal on and the spring etc.  I used compressed air only because putting rope in the cylinder seemed a bit risky to me, I know people have done it countless times before like this. Overall it's a pain in the ass job. Honestly you'd probably be better off taking the head off because the risk of dropping something in the engine and the finicky-ness of it all is very stressful. If you are going to attempt it though i 10000% recommend a 36050 valve spring/keeper tool. I had both the traditional lever type and after doing 1 cylinder it was absolute pain to get those valve keepers in place, even with 2 people. That 36050 is amazing, you do have to push hard to get them in place but it works perfectly almost every time. Back to my actual issue I think my engine is just tired and old and the rings have gone bad. The comp numbers (cold, no oil) were: Cyl 1 -129psi Cyl 2 - 133psi Cyl 3 - 138psi Cyl 4 - 137psi Cyl 5 - 157psi Cyl 6 - 142psi   Cylinder 5 and 6 having the most carbon on them.
    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
×
×
  • Create New...