Moorron
|
 posted on 19/12/06 at 01:17 PM |
|
|
Anyone here with an R1 turbo??
Any members on here got a turbos BEC? doesnt really matter what BEC, but i need a few pics taking of one.
or failing that any experts on turbo charging BEC's?
i need these things sorting but know nothing about them.
1: where does the oil lines plumb into for the turbo? i take it they use the engine oil so where in the 'circuit' does it plumb.
2: same with the water feed for the turbo (i take it they dont use old 'air' cooled turbos). The water feed for a turbo is alot smaller
than the pipe work for the engine so what how does it plumb in.
3: How do u seal the carbs, is it just a case of making an air tight seal (or box) encasing the carbs and thats it?
4: is fueling just controlled with a pressure valve (like on renault 5 turbos) that control the pressure of the fuel in regards to the air pressure
feeding it.
5: on the R1 kits u find on the net, do they do anything to the timing or compression ratio and if so, how do they do it?
Cheers
Sorry about my spelling, im an engineer and only work in numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
garage19
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 02:12 PM |
|
|
Any members on here got a turbos BEC? doesnt really matter what BEC, but i need a few pics taking of one.
IN MY ARCHIVE.
or failing that any experts on turbo charging BEC's?
i need these things sorting but know nothing about them.
1: where does the oil lines plumb into for the turbo? i take it they use the engine oil so where in the 'circuit' does it plumb.
FROM THE OIL PRESSURE SWITCH. REMOVE THE SWITCH AND INSERT A T ADAPTOR.
2: same with the water feed for the turbo (i take it they dont use old 'air' cooled turbos). The water feed for a turbo is alot smaller
than the pipe work for the engine so what how does it plumb in.
TAKE IT FROM THE COOOLANT SYSTEM WHERE YOU CAN. OR DONT RUN ANY AT ALL. JOURNAL BEARING TURBOS DO NOT REQUIRE THE WATER CONNECTING. IT IS HOWEVER
ALWSYS REQUIRED ON BALL BEARING TURBOS.
3: How do u seal the carbs, is it just a case of making an air tight seal (or box) encasing the carbs and thats it?
NO NEED TO PUT THE CARBS IN A BOX. JUST PRESSURISE THE FLOAT BOWLS WITH A FEED FROM THE PLENUM CHAMBER TO EQUALISE THE PRESSURES.
4: is fueling just controlled with a pressure valve (like on renault 5 turbos) that control the pressure of the fuel in regards to the air pressure
feeding it.
USE A MALLAPASE FUEL PRESSURE REG. THE ONE USED ON METRO TURBOS AND ESPIRIT TURBOS.
5: on the R1 kits u find on the net, do they do anything to the timing or compression ratio and if so, how do they do it?
USE TWO HEAD GASKETS. LOOK AT RETARDING IGNITION BY SLOTTING IGN PICK UP. REMEMBER HIGH PEAK CYLINDER PRESSURES CAUSE DET WHICH KILLS ENGINES.
HOWEVER, BEACUSE OF THEIR SMALL BORES AND GREAT HEAD/CHAMBER DESIGN BIKE ENGINES ARE QUITE DET RESISTANT COMPARED TO CAR ENGINES.
tHE BEST THING TO DO IS BUY AN INJECTION EQUIPED ENGINE AND USE A POWER COMANDER 3 TO CONTROL FUEL AND SPARKS OR IF YOU HAVE THE CASH SOMETHING LIKE
MOTEC!
PS. SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS. USED TO SHOW your text, MY TEXT!
Cheers
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 02:15 PM |
|
|
compression needs lowering usually with doubled gaskets or a special one
take a look how an old metro turbo used to work that would be a good start
BUT if you did the weight saving things to your car
probably about 40kg worth with those big wheels and seats etc
AND
got rid of the cbr engine which is about 20kg heavier than all modern superbikes
and stick a newer 1 litre screamer in
even an early 99 r1 engine you could see 165bhp with dynojet kit etc
the difference will be like an r1 turbo is fitted
your mates renault 5 turbo would be up for sale when you blow him off in first gear
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
garage19
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 02:27 PM |
|
|
Come on...
dropping 60kg isn't gonna feel anything like fitting a turbo lump.
As well as a lot more extra power you also get huge amounts more torque which most bike engines are lacking. (especially high lighted in BECs).
The extra torque will make you car easier to drive and faster down the lanes in the real world.
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 02:47 PM |
|
|
sadly I also know what Im talking about
and my point is if he changed his engine which compared to any 1 litre race bike after 1998
is...
1 lots heavier
2. down on power
and did just a few more weight saving things
he would have a great increase in performance
also my car would pull in any gear better than most road cars
so all the torque discussion is bollox within reason
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
dilley
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 03:32 PM |
|
|
I can speak from experiance, so if you need any info ask away....
as for 165bhp n/a bike engine feeling like a turbo'd r1- have you been in a turbo'd bec??
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 03:45 PM |
|
|
For Fox sake what I said was with a pinch of salt
Im saying compared to what hes got at the moment losing a bit of the weight and fitting an r1 engine to start with would be a great upgrade
at least he can do all that himself apart from mounts etc
also as far as I know he still has a full NOS set up in the back which isnt used
In reality how many is there on here with Turbo BECs one or two
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
dilley
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 04:02 PM |
|
|
Upgrading to an r1 would be a much cheaper way to go, if your going to turbo properly it will cost you double what you think. It all comes down to how
much power you want.
in my opinion there is no locost way to turbo a bike engine.
[Edited on 19/12/06 by dilley]
|
|
|
Marcus
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 04:19 PM |
|
|
Don't underrate the weight loss thing, 60kg is prob. 10% of the cars weight - would make an appreciable difference to performance.
Marcus
Because kits are for girls!!
|
|
|
3GEComponents
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 04:51 PM |
|
|
Do all the weight saving stuff........then turbocharge it!
|
|
|
oliwb
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 06:21 PM |
|
|
You have to remember that turbo charging it might give a better peak torque reading but it could absolutely ruin the driveability of the car.
I'm thinking along the lines of the old BMW 2002 turbos which used to be suicidaly underpowered until the turbo kicked in then stupidly
fast.....great if you want a nice get away from the lights nut not great if you plan on going round bends at any sort of speed approaching
fast....Oli.
Apart from that should be an awesome little street sleeper!
If your not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room!
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 07:05 PM |
|
|
I've got an '03 R1 motor and spoke to Holeshot regarding the turbo. I think I spoke to Chris (?) and I would suggest a call to them.
Considering an upgrade, get a ride in someones R1 motor and see if it's enough, if not then maybe consider installing a busa motor first.
Holeshot seem to prefer turbos on this motor than all the others (and they don't dry sump them, only a swinging pick up).
I'm not going to say an R1 is enough because you do get used to it, it's just the corners that f*ck me up ! You may be a very experienced
/ fast driver, you decide.
I've spoken to a few people and turboing isn't a cheap option, unless you source / make the bits yourself. The exchange rate is good,
maybe get a turbo from the states ?
Good luck.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
garage19
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 07:17 PM |
|
|
quote:
in my opinion there is no locost way to turbo a bike engine.
The setup shown in the photos in my archive cost me £250. I can break down the costs if you like.
I did do all the fabrication myself but that is well within the means of the average locost builder on this site.
Power was up from 114bhp to 190bhp on my old 893 fireblade lump. I am now on my third turbo bike build and have also helped setup a friends fzr 1000
turbo that made 210 bhp.
|
|
|
garage19
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 07:20 PM |
|
|
ps. there is plenty of info about turbocharging bike engines on the net if you look for it.
pps. if someone wants to give me a grand i will quite happily turbo their blade engine for them.
|
|
|
garage19
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 07:25 PM |
|
|
http://www.turbo-bike.net/
homemade turbo r1 with most the info you will need.
|
|
|
jambojeef
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 07:31 PM |
|
|
Yep it can be done locost.
I fabbed up most of the bits myself after Doug's encouragement.
You can do it - its not beyond any of the guys on here at all.
Geoff
|
|
|
Moorron
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 10:00 PM |
|
|
oops started another fight with one of my topics.
Fabricating the bits is no problems and will cost next to nothing, its the things i cant see from any pics that i need to know. Like in my original
post where does the turbo get its oil and water from, and how do u go about it, ie if i need to use the water system of the bike engine, going from
35mm bore hose to 8mm hose for the turbo will just damage the water pump? or overheat the engine. Same for oil, alltho this is easier as it looks the
same bore size as the original bike engined oil cooler.
looks like a thicker gasket it needed from the links given, or a base gasket under the block. Adjustable cam pulleys are need too from what i can
gather as increasing the gasket thickness results in adjusting the timing.
i think what i am going to do is try fabricating the bits up first as this will take a few months using my spare engine as a template. Then when all
is done stick it on the engine in the car after changing the above mentioned parts.
The metro turbo system is like the one i know very well the Renault 5 one, so i might just nab some bits i got lying around to sort the fueling out.
The arguement i seem to have started about weight, cost and power is like this....
To fit an R1 which is 20kg lighter and maybe 20 bhp more powerfull is going to cost me at leat 1K and alot of welding work INSIDE the car which means
a total front car strip, taking me ages. Then theres the exhaust to sort, prop (maybe) and bits here and there, so im looking at alot of work and over
1K.
To turbo my CBR100F is going to cost me about £600 if i dont need cam sprockets. Maybe just as much time but atleast it can b done OFF the car and not
urgent so i can still use the car.
Weight is also my second target, as said it doesnt just effect speed, but cornering too. But i will only go so far with it as at some point i have to
loose the looks i like for weight saving.
So turbo crb1000f it is, but i cant finish it without knowing the bits mentioned at the start of this boring and long post! lol
[Edited on 19/12/06 by Moorron]
[Edited on 19/12/06 by Moorron]
Sorry about my spelling, im an engineer and only work in numbers.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 10:57 PM |
|
|
Just a bit about cooling systems to get you thinking - they aren't one single series path from beginning to end. Your turbo feed will be a
parallel run to the main flow. You'll tee off somewhere near the water pump (at high pressure), go to the turbo, then return at a low pressure
point. It doesn't matter that the turbo feed uses a small bore.
The same principle applies to the oil system. That's the theory - but i'm sure Jeef or someone will tell you exactly where to plumb stuff
in for that particular engine making use of what's already there.
Liam
|
|
|
dilley
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 11:38 PM |
|
|
pps. if someone wants to give me a grand i will quite happily turbo their blade engine for them.
I take it that will be with no internal modification on a stock engine, these engines are highly stressed as it is, this may be fine but I cannot see
how long an engine in stock form would last, are you saying that internal modifications are not neccesary?? not starting an argument Im just
interested in what routes people have taken and what the outcome has been,
Andrew.
|
|
|
dilley
|
| posted on 19/12/06 at 11:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by oliwb
You have to remember that turbo charging it might give a better peak torque reading but it could absolutely ruin the driveability of the car.
I'm thinking along the lines of the old BMW 2002 turbos which used to be suicidaly underpowered until the turbo kicked in then stupidly
fast.....great if you want a nice get away from the lights nut not great if you plan on going round bends at any sort of speed approaching
fast....Oli.
Apart from that should be an awesome little street sleeper!
I have to diagree, with the right boost controll device and setup its no more harder to drive than a n/a bec, obviously you have to adapt your driving
slightly, mine has no lag over 3500rpm and it is alot more responsive.
|
|
|
jambojeef
|
| posted on 20/12/06 at 12:18 AM |
|
|
Yeah, all thoughts I have had myself re; driveability.
I think most people tend to think in terms of "turbo lag" and "spool up times" when thinking about turboing an engine.
This is entirely relevant on Escort RS turbos and other 2 valve / cylinder car engines which may have a VE of around 65 - 70% and a compression ratio
of around 8:1, but if you consider that a bike engine is filling its cylinders more efficiently from the outset - even before any boost is generated -
the sort of boost that Doug and Me will generate should produce the kind of power curve that shows up as more of an "on cam" feeling from
the driving seat rather than the "on / off" power that the Audi Quattros and RS turbos of the 80 and 90s were known for.
You are lucky with the CBR 1000F engine in that it lends itself to turboing quite well in a few ways.
The first is that there are already drillings in the front of the block for the oil cooler take off and return which will lend themselves very nicely
for turbo oil supply and return in terms of position since the turbo will be right in front of the engine (when thought of on the bike).
The only real problem I have encountered is that the oil return drilling on the CBR engine is too high for my install to get a good return route for
the oil from the turbo so you'll either need a clever return system using a biasing reed valve in your oil suction pipe in the sump or a
scavenge pump (like me).
The CBR engine is also quote a good choice for turboing since it runs a relatively low compression ratio and mild valve overlap compared to R1 engines
and modern 'Blades and the such like.
It also has a bigger clutch basket and allegedly stronger bottom end so may be better suited to the extra power generated.
There is also the advatage that at £150 a shot for a complete CBR 1000F engine - you have a margin for error should you make any mistakes - but if you
just take it easy and run through somes calcs and speak to the very helpful Giles at Turbo Technics you'll make it work.
I guess the proof of the pudding in my case will be this Spring when I get to smear it round the roads of the North East - time will tell if Im right
about its driveability but if nothing else its something to do and its interestng to learn things about forced induction along the way so I say go for
it!
Geoff
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
