• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

B234F TwinTurbo Concept

MadDog_945

Våga Vägra 8V
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Location
Lower Saxony
Heyho fellow TBrickers

I have two more or less mint condition 13c laying around.. did one of you ever consider to make a TwinTurbo concept out of it? I can remember a green 242 which had this.. but i cant find it anymore..
 
<a title="Twin Turbo Thread" href="http://forums.tbforums.com/showthread.php?t=163269">Twin Turbo Thread</a>

Only one I've seen moving under it's own power is a factory twin turbo 2jz swap :-P
 
The twin turbo thing typically seems to go down the road of... why?

To be clear. I am 100% on board with doing ridiculous things and could answer the why with "because" but I digress.

I would say that people would shy away from the TT setups simply because they're "excessively complex" but more importantly they're less optimal than simply running a modern single turbo setup.

Still. Who cares? I say do it! But it'll probably cost you more than just buying a legit single turbo.
 
There are some compelling arguments for twin turbos on a 4-cylinder when you compare the setup to running a single twin-scroll turbo. It should theoretically let you tune the turbine housing A/R precisely on each of the smaller mono-scroll turbines. If done right it could offer better power and response vs. a single twin-scroll turbo with a single compressor that performed comparably to 2x the smaller units. Mass and complexity are always going to count against twin turbos, but it's not a ridiculous idea.
 
There are some compelling arguments for twin turbos on a 4-cylinder when you compare the setup to running a single twin-scroll turbo. It should theoretically let you tune the turbine housing A/R precisely on each of the smaller mono-scroll turbines. If done right it could offer better power and response vs. a single twin-scroll turbo with a single compressor that performed comparably to 2x the smaller units. Mass and complexity are always going to count against twin turbos, but it's not a ridiculous idea.

the juice isn't worth the squeeze
 
The only real advantage is this would turn more heads at a car show. There isn't any practical reason why you need two equally sized units functioning in parallel to perform the desired work, if anything you're probably sacrificing the gains by adding weight and complexity. There also isn't any reason to run compound turboys for any boost setting under 35psi.
 
To be more serious on this.. i could think of 2 13c are way too big for a responsive 400hp config? Should have quite much lag until 2900-3100rpm?
 
Could always
4turbos-1.jpg
 
There are some compelling arguments for twin turbos on a 4-cylinder when you compare the setup to running a single twin-scroll turbo. It should theoretically let you tune the turbine housing A/R precisely on each of the smaller mono-scroll turbines. If done right it could offer better power and response vs. a single twin-scroll turbo with a single compressor that performed comparably to 2x the smaller units. Mass and complexity are always going to count against twin turbos, but it's not a ridiculous idea and just because even the few OEM twin turbo set ups on cars never work correctly that shouldn't deter anybody because those OEM applications didn't have the benefit of all the knowledge of the whole Intra-webz...

4 would still be better...Go big or go home.
 
People are throwing in "sequential" and series/compound turbo systems into this discussion...yeah, that's not what the OP is asking about.

Probably worth clarifying some terminology.

  • Twin: two identical turbos in parallel
  • Series: two differently-sized turbos, one feeding the other. The larger turbo is the LP (low pressure) and feeds the smaller turbo (HP) on the compressor side. On the exhaust side, the small turbine feeds the larger one. Sometimes called "compound" setup, but that's actually something else (see below).
  • Sequential: can be parallel or series. Indicates that there is staged control of airflow, i.e. one turbo handles all of the flow at low engine speeds and the other is brought in to help at higher speeds...in sequence. Implies a change over time.
  • Turbocompounding: geared connection between turbine and engine crankshaft. Converts exhaust energy back into mechanical shaft power to the crankshaft of the engine. Like an inverse supercharger.
 
^
Krister is just bench racing again...

But he was talking about using a couple of spare mint condition 13c turbochargers to accomplish two things:
A: 400 hp
B: a responsive 400 hp

As I see it, either we change turbos to make A and B happen, or we keep the turbos and change the configuration. But if he's going to go through the hassle, 13c turbochargers aren't sexy, so why bother?

@Duder
Thoughts?

@Krister
Thoughts?

@JohnV
4 would still be better...Go big or go home.
Du verr?cktes Huhn!
 
Last edited:
Yeah.. it is benchracing.. it would be more for the looks but also it is a cool challenge fo myself to get that kinda setup going ;) And i have these 13c here... so everything which goes in different directions is nono cause i dont buy other turbos just because.

In the end it would be best if i spent some money for a BorgWarner EFR ;)

BTT! That setup in that picture.. wtf is wrong with that wastegate config? At first it points backward from the flow, and second: it is hyperliquid cause the hotsides got their own wastegates and they should be capable of handling the half amount of exhaustgases??
 
Back
Top