Supra Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Has anyone tried or considered a setup similar to this,would it be possible,Practical?or simply for aesthetics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,291 Posts
suprafly79 said:
looks looks a skyline motor!! could be wrong though.
That's what I was thinking...could have sworn it was an RB26. Notice how it appears "tilted," and also the exhaust and intake sides are the opposite of a 2JZ, which is what is pictured here.

Oh and to answer your original question triniman, I don't think I've ever seen an NA with a twin setup. However lots of TT guys have aftermarket twins, soo...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,197 Posts
Dave and I talked about putting one into production if there was demand for it.

But I doubt there is.

Regards,
Kevin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Its an Rb 26 dett,I posted the pics as an example,to illustrate the setup.Hypothetically speaking would'nt it be a good idea to run two smaller faster spooling turbos like the pe te44,set up to run sequentially with an AEM ems.For eg,turbo 1,peaking at 3500-4000rpm then turbo 2 kicks off from there till redline.I think The turbo lag would definately be minimised if not eliminated,Compared to a big single like a T88.But to the guy's that know better,would a setup like(Twin PE te44's ) yield as much overall HP as a t-76 or t88,without the lag?
 

·
King of the NA-T's
Joined
·
4,044 Posts
Making the turbo's sequential to work like you are talking about is extremely difficult and expensive. All aftermarket twin turbo kits are not sequential, both turbo's spool at the same time, so there isn't really the gain in spool that you refer to. A twin turbo setup is mainly just for looks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,291 Posts
As Dave said, the way you want to do it isn't worth the time and effort. Not to mention you can have single turbos spool just as early in the RPM range as what you were describing (3500). Also, if one turbo is only for use for 500 RPM's until the second one kicks in, is it really worth the effort on the setup?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,236 Posts
I made addapters to the stock gte manifold and put 2 turbonetics super-60's on I had laying around. Total cost minus the turbos was like $250 and It took all weekend to do it.

Lawrence
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,291 Posts
93 twintrbo said:
I made addapters to the stock gte manifold and put 2 turbonetics super-60's on I had laying around. Total cost minus the turbos was like $250 and It took all weekend to do it.

Lawrence
So how do you like it? How's it working for you? And what is the rest of your setup like?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
93 twintrbo said:
I made addapters to the stock gte manifold and put 2 turbonetics super-60's on I had laying around. Total cost minus the turbos was like $250 and It took all weekend to do it.

Lawrence
Cool,whats your fuelling and engine management setup like,any pics?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
You have to admit a setup like whats on the RB26 above would look just mad on the GE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,236 Posts
Well if I could get a decent center section from turbonetics it would be very nice. Its a GTE car and the stock twins were on their way out so I had a set of super 60 laying around (off my mk2) and thaught what the heck. Fabricating the piping was no big feat since Ive done if a few times. Both turbos flow 70ppm. so it should be good for 600-650whp. Full boost @4200rpm @ 14psi. I took it to the dyno and blew my #1 turbo (thats why I need a center section) but before I blew it the turbos made 396whp and 400ft @4700rpm. at 5k the turbo gave up and the graph took a nosedive. It is definately allot stronger than it was at BPU. I am happy with the power, just need to turn it up to 17-18psi. The fuel system is stock.

Lawrence
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top