Dragon

She's running pretty well.. you can download this 80mg vid of the last race we had on Okinawa... lot's of racing and good music and well worth the wait on the DL time..

http://69.56.142.114/~videof6/zeroyo...yHopp-Divx.avi

HDP

iTrader: (2)

I've got tools, automotive and mechanical knowledge, fabrication skills... what do you need?

Dragon

From the experiance of just doing all this myself my guess would be $$$$$$...

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

See Chris knows what I'm talking about, even though it's cheaper doing as much as you can yourself it still money

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

Chris, great video man, what size A/R housing are you using cause your car seems to spool quick as hell, have you gotten a front end alignment yet? I ask'd to see if the bumpsteer kit got rid of the rest of your bumpsteer

HDP

iTrader: (2)

How come I can't get the video to work?

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

I had the same problem, I had to download DivX player to view it

RotorMotor

iTrader: (5)

so with a realignment there will be NO bumpsteer whatsoever?? i just want to make sure exactly what im buying before deciding between this or pettits.

also about engine height, can anyone comment on this kit VS pettits? are they about the same, or is pettits lower/higher? thanks, heath

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

Heath, the realignment that I was speaking of is just in Chris's (Dragon) case, he built his own subframe and he lower'd his more than my subframe and what he was saying is that because his subframe is lower he has to adjust the bumpsteer out more to correct for the difference in height and I told him that a alignment should help decrease any bumpsteer that he still has. While my bumpsteer kit is universal and will work with any subframe to a point, depending on how low or high your subframe is built, now if you were to purchase my subframe with the bumpsteer kit there is no need for an alignment because they were made for each other.

Dragon

actually I had lots of boost lag running a a/r 1.3 ex housing with the stock port in that race.. I now have a a/r .96 on there and I get full boost at about 4300 rpm vs 5500 before... Then you hit a wall at about 7k where the engine chokes on the stock ex port.. I'm working on building my other 20B at the moment and will probably have it in the car some time in Jan if all goes well... Still haven't gotten the alignment...

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

DAMN!!! I didn't know you were using a 1.3 A/R, why don't you try a 1.15 like me, once you port your motor that .96 will begin to choke on your top in. Think about it, and one more thing..................GET AN ALIGNMENT!

CCarlisi

Dragon, time to update your avitar pic

Dragon

the 1.3 will go on with the side port.. The .96 works great with the stock port... I've also never seen a 1.15 Q-trim housing before... hrm..

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Any dyno figures yet?

bladz311

iTrader: (1)

I'll take one!

Evil Aviator

I don't think that Turbonetics offers a 1.15 undived housing. The only 1.15 I have seen is divided, which may not be the best thing for a 3-rotor.

felix_is_alive

please do fill me in , why would a divided housing be bad for a 3-rotor .......i want to change my housing so i want to know

Evil Aviator

Engines with only a few cylinders or rotors (2-rotor, 4-cylinder, etc.) do not have a lot of exhaust pulses per revolution. This creates an overall weak force on the turbine wheel. A divided turbo housing, when used with a divided manifold, allows the exhaust from each rotor (or from 2 cylinders of a 4-cylinder engine) to flow in each of the divided portions. Since the divisions are about half of the total cross-sectional area of the manifold and housing, the velocity of each exhaust pulse is increased as it travels through the smaller chambers. Also, the exhaust pulses do not interfere with each other, which keeps them stronger. All this aids in spooling up the turbine better.

An engine with more exhaust pulses per revolution, such as a V-8, V-12, etc., does not need a divided manifold. It is usually better to use an undivided manifold in this case because the division reduces the overall cross-sectional area, which the people on this forum would probably call a "restriction". Notice how the undivided housing has more cross-sectional area than the divided housing:
http://www.axis-engineering.com/Turb...o_drawings.htm

The main problem I see with a 3-rotor using a divided manifold and housing, is that the manifold is divided into two. How in the heck do you route 3 rotor exhausts evenly through 2 chambers? Since this is not possible, the usual option is to use the divided housing on an undivided manifold. While I don't see any major problems with this, the division does create somewhat of a restriction. I am not sure if this is a significant problem, but I would rather use an undivided housing were I given a choice.

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

I didn't think it matter'd on the exhaust housing as long as the manifold was undivided, because by the time the exhaust gases pass the manifold the pulses no longer matter'd

$150FC

well the exhaust pulses are still going to smack the division in the exhaust housing, which is going to mess with the flow.

anybody know if it makes a measurable difference?

c00lduke

if your going to do it at least "knief edge" it or whatever that term is, then i might not be as bad

94RHDFD

iTrader: (3)

They do not offer a undivided 1.15 but I had mine knife-edged

SPEED_NYC

iTrader: (3)

cahn you fix the pics of the mounted engine and bumpsetter correction kit please, i may be interested

thanx

bladz311

iTrader: (1)

I got mine installed yesterday, and it looks great!!! Everything fit right in perfect. I didn't get a chance to try the engine in yet, because I'm still waiting on my intake manifold.
Thanks again,
Jesse

amp

iTrader: (50)

gatherin your the supplier for hinson 20b3rdgen...