Triple turbo 3 rotor?
 

I tried searching... but didnt even know where to start.... lol
Does anyone have info on this car??

http://kierf.net/images/3rotor_3turbo.jpg

http://huntngtest_mo21.tripod.com/modify/st-18.html

whoa.. does the hood even close ?

I think.... yeup.. my mind was just blown., hope I dont have a lotta money in the rebuld....

It's really a pointless set-up but, if you have small turbos available and have the time to DIY the manifolds, then you can have something that's unique like this one. ;)

Yeah, I mean its cool for how unique it is, but the combined weight of the exhaust manifold, all the turbos and downpipes must just be stupid

Yep, but if sized correctly, I belive that it will have a pretty good torque range. Broad mid range.

What makes you think it is pointless? So is a 2 turbo 2 rotor pointless too?

It is pointless, considering that you can size one single turbo to provide the same airflow and compression of two smaller turbos. There's no difference if you size them correctly, other than the weight and complexity, both of which will be lower with a single turbo setup.

man where is ReTed when you need him! that's like his favorite car.

i think the shop that built it is axia tuning or something, its from the 90's and look, stock ignitors, stock ignitors = stock ecu!

I have a dream to own a mini car.

Racing beats salt flats car used a 20b tri-turbo setup in it when it set the land speed record. Though, technology has come a long way since...


-J

So you are saying 1 80mm turbo moves the same volume as 2 62mm turbo? Would you agree more volume =more hp?

Oh boy:blush:
Last time I checked, volume is dictated by engine. Cooling fan also moves a lot of volumetric air:lol:

Its same as ridiculous discussions about boost and saying that given boost on stock twins is different to same boost on larger single. It doesn´t. Boost is consequence of flow, so as long as temperatures are in check - and after intercooling they can be very same, and boost is same, then flow is same. In reality it isn´t, but answer doesn´t lies in compressor but in turbine and VE% of whole combination.

In regards of discussion about single vs. twin vs. triple etc... Single turbo supporting given flow at given pressure ratio with reasonable efficiency will be most efficient and practical approach. Why? Larger frame turbochargers are inherently more efficient than smaller units. Aerodynamic reasons, percentage of clearances, air gaps heat loss etc...

Not at all. It's mass flow rate that equates to power, because at 14.7 psi, you're running DOUBLE the air at the SAME volume. Ever seen a compressor map?

The only way that boost on stock twins and boost on a larger single would be the "same" at the same psi is if they both have the same efficiency at that boost and airflow. Looking at just the compressor maps of aftermarket turbos, you can clearly see that different compressors will flow different amounts of air or be more or less efficient at a given pressure ratio. They'll also do this at various different shaft speeds.

That doesn't even begin to take into account the turbine blade and housing design, which will again affect what the efficiency of the turbo will be, as will the piping downstream of the turbo.

Now answer one question: how many of you internet scientist warrior on this forum make over 900hp? It is easy to pretend how smart you on the internet? In afew week we are having Gabby fly over here to tune my cousin twinturbo 2 rotor.

Don´t worry, I´m fully aware of this. And I hope you read whole my post. Honestly I assumed condition when neither turbo is in choke and both are operating inside of map. Different efficiency numbers will change mass flow, but not that much as some people think. Much more impact is on other side - less efficient compressor needs higher shaft torque - higher turbine expansion ratio and vica versa. And this is main reason why big turbo with big hotside, but even hybrid with stock hotside will operate with higher VE% of whole system and this is where majority of increased power at given boost lies.

As above, I hope we are on the same boat:lol:

All bullshit aside, the real benefit I can see to this kind of setup is isolating the exhaust pulses to minimize interference between them before the turbine. This can show gains in spool on a fully divided manifold/turbo on a 2-rotor, as Mazda did going from the S4 to S5 design turbos, so I don't see why it wouldn't be significant with a third exhaust pulse. Being as though there aren't any mass produced triple-inlet manifolds, this would be the only logical way to isolate the pulses. That's my logic anyways... Where's Arghx with his SAE papers...

A single sized to make the same identical power of 3 small turbo's at the same boost level would have more lag and wouldn't spool as early.. That is the reason for doing it. It's complicated, adds weight, but there is a reason for it.

thewird

don't forget that it looks cool, nobody's seen the car run in a decade, or even at all, but we're still talking about it.

I've got to be honest here - there is a bit too much bench racing.


On race set ups twins work better (in this respect) because you are in the power band much faster and there is less lag with two smaller twins flowing the same amount of air as opposed to one big one. As far as turbos go, you want airflow instead of boost. Pressure is resistance to flow nothing more. You can put down major power with either twins or a single it just depends on what you are trying to build and how much horsepower you want to make.

In regards to the weight - i highly doubt its enough to affect on the car.
Chances are, the sub-optimal tune will hurt the car's power output more so than some extra piping. The exhaust manifolds are overly simple on these too. no collector needed.


If you disagree with me - bring something other than your Smokey Yunick ideas and let's hash it out.

It is the Axia show car from the 1990s.

It is, but the design of the turbo can also affect the VE of the system a little bit. However, you are basically correct, and the person you were correcting is well-known for his lack of education in physics. Don't even bother trying to explain it to him.

Well, Arghx SAE paper regarding this tells, that fully divided manifold and turbine housing is benefical at low speeds and transient response. On the other hand, turbine at full load and high RPMs works better with steady flow of collected setup on single entry turbine.

Yes, I´m aware of change in VE%. Variation can be pretty wild on high overlap setups, but it very same applies to stock engine. Turbine inlet pressures are something rare in rotary comunity:) Unfortunatelly, most people don´t bother to think from where comes that huge increase in power with single setups at same boost as stock or generaly smaller units. Some people say efficiency, some are sure about volume:lol:

Would you share your thoughts on this topic?

Let's keep the topic on track - the OP wanted a little more info on the car not the communities thoughts on twin .vs single turbo setups.

What are the chances at getting the Hyper Rev article copied to the internet?