non sequential turbo questions
#28
Tony Stewart Killer.
iTrader: (12)
ohh man sequential is WAY better than non seq in my opinion. I had a perfect boost pattern 10-8-10 and then went to non seq added a midpipe and fuel pump and upped the boost to 12psi and the car did feel faster but it was more like a racecar and I had to floor it for 5 seconds before I was really going anywhere. For street driving sequential is really really fun but I tend to think that non seq is faster in the 1/4 mile and more helpful at roadraces/autocrosses. Now I have a t66 single and that turbo although it hits full boost ~500 rpms later than non sequential FEELS way less laggy than the twins and is very smooth.
I don't want to argue with you guys but those who agree with me have good taste Stay sequential as long as you can
I don't want to argue with you guys but those who agree with me have good taste Stay sequential as long as you can
#29
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by clayne
But more seriously, what are you referring to with the PFC reverting to non-seq style mode?
Something is not right here. If you get on the highway let's say in 2nd, punch it, feel the primary then secondary after, with full pull to redline, then shift to 3rd (obviously above 3.5krpm in the next gear) you're saying you expect to feel a difference in pull or that you actually feel less pull (not attributed to difference in gearing)?
From the shifting point into 3rd of course it will be non-seq as the entire concept of sequential is out of the picture at that point.
But more seriously, what are you referring to with the PFC reverting to non-seq style mode?
Something is not right here. If you get on the highway let's say in 2nd, punch it, feel the primary then secondary after, with full pull to redline, then shift to 3rd (obviously above 3.5krpm in the next gear) you're saying you expect to feel a difference in pull or that you actually feel less pull (not attributed to difference in gearing)?
From the shifting point into 3rd of course it will be non-seq as the entire concept of sequential is out of the picture at that point.
It seems like the PFC either likes gentle driving or full-out, not somewhere in the middle.
#30
Tony Stewart Killer.
iTrader: (12)
oh and why don't people do the turbo simplification?
that clears up your engine bay and makes the setup very relaiable and simple. Only thing that can fail then is a solenoid or valve but that should be easy to figure out if it ever happens since you can check all of the hoses easily (i believe 26 total) and then you know to start looking at the solenoids that control the pattern of boost that is going wrong on your car.
people dont know about it I dont think
non seq is advertized on here
that clears up your engine bay and makes the setup very relaiable and simple. Only thing that can fail then is a solenoid or valve but that should be easy to figure out if it ever happens since you can check all of the hoses easily (i believe 26 total) and then you know to start looking at the solenoids that control the pattern of boost that is going wrong on your car.
people dont know about it I dont think
non seq is advertized on here
#32
Originally posted by SurgeMonster
oh and why don't people do the turbo simplification?
that clears up your engine bay and makes the setup very relaiable and simple. Only thing that can fail then is a solenoid or valve but that should be easy to figure out if it ever happens since you can check all of the hoses easily (i believe 26 total) and then you know to start looking at the solenoids that control the pattern of boost that is going wrong on your car.
people dont know about it I dont think
non seq is advertized on here
oh and why don't people do the turbo simplification?
that clears up your engine bay and makes the setup very relaiable and simple. Only thing that can fail then is a solenoid or valve but that should be easy to figure out if it ever happens since you can check all of the hoses easily (i believe 26 total) and then you know to start looking at the solenoids that control the pattern of boost that is going wrong on your car.
people dont know about it I dont think
non seq is advertized on here
#33
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
Originally posted by FD3RotorTurbo
how do you know the vacuum diagram for the simplification? and why do it?
how do you know the vacuum diagram for the simplification? and why do it?
The simplification removes the emissions part of the car which removes a lot of the vacuum line hassles but retains the sequential turbo operation.
If you don't have emissions testing in your area and you are using a midpipe, it's an option for you. If you have to pass emissions, it's not an option.
#34
Originally posted by Mahjik
http://www.rx7turboturbo.com/robrobi...lification.htm
The simplification removes the emissions part of the car which removes a lot of the vacuum line hassles but retains the sequential turbo operation.
If you don't have emissions testing in your area and you are using a midpipe, it's an option for you. If you have to pass emissions, it's not an option.
http://www.rx7turboturbo.com/robrobi...lification.htm
The simplification removes the emissions part of the car which removes a lot of the vacuum line hassles but retains the sequential turbo operation.
If you don't have emissions testing in your area and you are using a midpipe, it's an option for you. If you have to pass emissions, it's not an option.
#36
The Power of 1.3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by FD3RotorTurbo
i know that this is probally a stupid question, but when you do the simplification you stay seq right? and i am stright piped 3"s and i have a friend that does emissions for me, so does that mean that i should do it?
i know that this is probally a stupid question, but when you do the simplification you stay seq right? and i am stright piped 3"s and i have a friend that does emissions for me, so does that mean that i should do it?
#39
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
Originally posted by FD3RotorTurbo
so when you do this, do you take out the "rats nets" of vacuum lines?
so when you do this, do you take out the "rats nets" of vacuum lines?
http://www.rx7turboturbo.com/robrobi...lification.htm
#40
PV = nRT
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Zealand (was California)
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mahjik
Basically, sure, you can get used to everything (i.e. needing to downshift more when running non-seq). However, the sequential system allows you to not NEED to shift just to get power.
Basically, sure, you can get used to everything (i.e. needing to downshift more when running non-seq). However, the sequential system allows you to not NEED to shift just to get power.
But when it comes down to it, is it really necessary to constantly have instant turbo spool just to handle standard highway manuevering?
I don't even think the weight of my argument is seq vs non-seq. It's more about using the advantages of a manual transmission as it was designed to be used. There's really no reason to be lugging the car at 3000 rpm and relying on turbos.
Last edited by clayne; 12-05-03 at 03:14 PM.
#41
Senior Member
i dont wanna get in the way of your guys' debate, but just to put down another point for non-seq....
i have plenty of passing power in 5th at 60-80mph, and im not even "full" non-seq...im poor-mans. maybe its just me, but i dont know when my car is EVER below 2500...and even in non-seq mode i have enough "feelable" boost by 2800-3000 to satisfy me.
i have plenty of passing power in 5th at 60-80mph, and im not even "full" non-seq...im poor-mans. maybe its just me, but i dont know when my car is EVER below 2500...and even in non-seq mode i have enough "feelable" boost by 2800-3000 to satisfy me.
#42
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
Originally posted by clayne
Where do you think the exhaust load is going while you're spooling up in 5th while not downshifting? Spooling the turbos of course - that is to be expected. But, only so much torque you can actually be utilized in 4th or 5th gear, so where is the rest of it going? Out the wastegate. This is actually wasting power.
Where do you think the exhaust load is going while you're spooling up in 5th while not downshifting? Spooling the turbos of course - that is to be expected. But, only so much torque you can actually be utilized in 4th or 5th gear, so where is the rest of it going? Out the wastegate. This is actually wasting power.
Originally posted by racerfoo
i dont wanna get in the way of your guys' debate, but just to put down another point for non-seq....
i have plenty of passing power in 5th at 60-80mph, and im not even "full" non-seq...im poor-mans. maybe its just me, but i dont know when my car is EVER below 2500...and even in non-seq mode i have enough "feelable" boost by 2800-3000 to satisfy me.
i dont wanna get in the way of your guys' debate, but just to put down another point for non-seq....
i have plenty of passing power in 5th at 60-80mph, and im not even "full" non-seq...im poor-mans. maybe its just me, but i dont know when my car is EVER below 2500...and even in non-seq mode i have enough "feelable" boost by 2800-3000 to satisfy me.
#43
i love boost
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: St. Albert Alberta
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about full non-seq verses poor mans non-seq? Is there any difference in power between the 2? I was considering going non-seq for the spring and wanted to do the poor mans version to see if I like it or if I wanted to work my bugs out and stay sequential... some heavy opinions either way ... I do lots of street driving but I will want to drag it and try autocross as well.
#45
PV = nRT
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Zealand (was California)
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mahjik
IMO, waiting for two turbos to come online at the same time when you don't have to is wasting power. It's all in what you want for the car. As I said earlier, it's personal preference as to what each person likes.
IMO, waiting for two turbos to come online at the same time when you don't have to is wasting power. It's all in what you want for the car. As I said earlier, it's personal preference as to what each person likes.
Downshift!
Also, while you're waiting for two turbos to come online, the boost is building in parallel, not serial like the seq setup. Linear acceleration.
Why don't we just boil it down to reality:
Pro-seq people want the hard punch of the first turbo immediately because it gives them the "my car is fast" warm fuzzies - where as non-seq users would like a more predictable and linear power-band (which is what the goal is anyways!) in addition to less crap and antiquated "sophistication" under the hood. When I'm putting around town, I don't just point and shoot and nail the accelerator. I downshift when I need to get around something and take advantage of the car's gearing first, turbos second.
On a track, no contest, non-seq wins.
Last edited by clayne; 12-05-03 at 09:28 PM.
#47
The Power of 1.3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by RX7 RAGE
Can I go full non sequential by pulling the turbos out etc. BUT leave my rats nest intact for now?
Can I go full non sequential by pulling the turbos out etc. BUT leave my rats nest intact for now?
Originally posted by Mahjik
Once again, opinion, but everyone is entitled to their own.
Once again, opinion, but everyone is entitled to their own.
To each his (or her ) own
#48
WTB** Very Low Miles 94-95
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tejas
Posts: 3,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
go get em mahjik..rynberg....lol
911 ..I sure wish Id have gone over to worcester before i left boston. i dont think you would have ever said anything about your non seq love again.
j
911 ..I sure wish Id have gone over to worcester before i left boston. i dont think you would have ever said anything about your non seq love again.
j
#49
HamfistRacing.com
iTrader: (5)
Originally Posted by clayne
When I'm putting around town, I don't just point and shoot and nail the accelerator. I downshift when I need to get around something and take advantage of the car's gearing first, turbos second.
On a track, no contest, non-seq wins.
On a track, no contest, non-seq wins.
Doesnt anyone have dyno results for a comparsion of NON seq to seq (everything else remaining constant, and preferrably stock)?
#50
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by s1mpsons
Doesnt anyone have dyno results for a comparsion of NON seq to seq (everything else remaining constant, and preferrably stock)?
The torque and hp curves will be exactly the same above 4500 rpm. From 4000-4500 rpm, the non-sequential will be a little stronger. From 2000-4000 rpm, the sequential car will beat the ever-living **** out of the non-seq car. Does that sum it up well enough?