Originally Posted by jhowell

if people so worried bout lag y not run a small 50 hp shot of nitrous im just wondering

Originally Posted by jhowell

yea gotcha it seems like gettin to 3500 rpm isnt hard wut do rx7s idle at? 2k?

Originally Posted by jhowell

yea gotcha it seems like gettin to 3500 rpm isnt hard wut do rx7s idle at? 2k?

Originally Posted by gmonsen

As far as adding power, I have no idea why a non-sequential system with the same turbos should make any more horsepower than a sequential system, all other things being equal. There are sequentials and non-sequentials making 400 whp and I have never seen any evidence that one can make more power than the other. There is a big difference in how the make the power, because the non-sequential setup will have more of a slingshot effect than a sequential setup. Some people like this feeling and its great fun in moderation.


Gordon

Originally Posted by gmonsen

David... I now understand that there's a few more hp because of the flapper. However, if you completely changed how the sequential system was controlled, couldn't you eliminate the flapper valve and make the two equal? If not, then there's that 10-15 whp potential advantage for the non-sequential. Even given that that is the case, that still doesn't amount to much. Not sure the earlier power hit of the sequentials wouldn't mean that the two would have the same quarter mile times?

Gordon

Originally Posted by dgeesaman

I suppose you could change it. The Supra has a sequential control system also and it's slightly simpler than the FDs.

Unfortunately it's hard to make any kind of switch/valve/door that doesn't add measureable drag to the flow. Plus, on the exhaust side the doors have to withstand immense heat, which helps explain why they are simple hunks of metal.

What would be interesting is to maintain separate exhaust streams and use the newer adjustable vane turbo design to prespool and/or control the flow. I think it's safe to say that the vaned control design has lower losses than the doors used in the FD's manifold. That could significantly simplify the system, plus allow some nice trickery to keep throttle response sharp. Programming the controllers for it would be an interesting project, to say the least...

Originally Posted by janrx7

My car only dynoed 365whp @ 17psi with non seq turbos. Duty cycle was about 80%, Afr was 11.2 and finished at 10.6. on a dynojet dyno. I was expecting 390whp but turbos are smoking more then a pair of teenagers after sex.


I will replaced the turbos next month and tried to retune to 390Whp. keep you posted.

Originally Posted by staticguitar313

In the middle of non-sequential right now, I have a big streetported motor, DP, RB catback, PFC w/Datalogit, IC, and AVC-R, the stock twins have NEVER acted right and I'm tired of chasing gremlins and having the car down. Going non-seq for me is just a temporary thing until I can piece together my single turbo/v-mount setup. I'm going to be doing major porting to the wastegate and the turbo manifold. I'm expecting very little lag. Of course some lag is acceptable trade-off for NEVER DEALING WITH THIS **** AGAIN.

The vaned turbo idea is quite neat too

Originally Posted by janrx7

yes true. But to plan 17psi all day. I plan to run 11-12psi on the street and 17psi for some track use.

Originally Posted by gracer7-rx7

Why would you shoot a 50 shot of nitrous when all you want to do is accelerate into an opening in traffic in the next lane?

You need to think about it not in max power potential but from the perspective of overall drive-ability. From that perspective, it is very nice to have power and torque throughout the rev range. Having 10 PSI at 2500 RPM w/ sequential twins makes for a car that is easy to drive around town and in various real life scenarios. that is one of the reasons people do an LS1 swap - power, torque and overall drive-ability.

If your the kinda guy that lives his life a quarter mile at a time and never sees RPM below 3500, you may be satisfied by something like non-seq. I say that somewhat jokingly as there are plenty of people who only use the FD as a toy car and drive it mostly in off hours or live in a place where there is lots of wide open roads where constantly being up over 3500 PRM is easily accomplished. Some of us that live in more congested areas appreciate low end power and torque and overall drive-ability.

If you have a good setup, you can theoretically make more power Non-Sequential and you'll make it higher in the RPM range compared to Sequential. If you have a good setup, you can make pretty much the same power Sequentially and have more power lower in the rev range.

Sometimes that half second it takes to downshift a few gears and build boost to make the hole in the next lane is too long.

Originally Posted by JDMinard

Its not everyone thats has a monster port idling at 2k, lol

Anyway, does anybody want to go full non-seq in a near future in this forum?
So dyno it before/after!!!!!!!!
I want some real proof, ill stick with seq till someone show me a 10hp+ of diff. ( yeah right)

Edit: seriously even with a 3-5hp gain, dont waste your time and money, go single if you really want power

Originally Posted by PwnedurFace

sequential=fun to drive

Originally Posted by EjCabrera

i have bnr s3 's that i bought non sequential and put on. the power was insane but like realistically i could never make full boost on a normal road or i would already be speeding. on the freeway the power was there but still had the lag. i used to have a evo ix and the spool was way quicker similar to when my stock turbos actually worked. anyways i already converted my turbos back to sequential by bnr and im just waiting for 1 rack solenoid to come in the mail so i can get it hooked up and tuned. i can post up both the dyno's for comparisons soon.

Originally Posted by G's 3rd Gen

Anyone who gets aggravated about how much better and more fun (da da da da da) a sequential is to drive over a properly done non set-up needs to come ride w/ me. I have owned and experienced both at all levels of modifications in the past 12 years. Non- done right seems the way to go for pros than cons. If you think non-sequential is laggy it's not set-up right. G