TCD RHD / Top Mount Eye Candy
Wow. You sure that Mazda wasn't modified? That just doesn't sound right for a factory installed turbo system. There is no "green, yellow, red" zone for the TCD at all. Plant your foot and leave it there for all it cares. You might want to watch the water or oil temp gauges if you leave your foot there for a long time, but if you do you'll have other concerns anyway.
Example.
I was playing with a brand new e90 once on the freeway. Came around a nice bend, wound up in front of him, and traffic magically opened and disappeared on a flat straight that's around 1 mile long. I downshifted to third at about 60 mph and planted my right foot. Ran through third very fast. Forth didn't last much longer, so I shifted fifth. About half to 2/3rds of the way down this stretch of highway I look in my rear view to see him solidly probably 1/10th to 1/4 mile back. I know he wasn't lagging cause we'd been teasing each other in traffic up until that point. I looked down at the speedo at that point to see an indicated 140+mph
and climbing and decided it was time to let out and slow the hell down.
The wastegate opens at a given boost pressure. It's not like letting the air out or taking your foot off the gas. Again, I have no idea what that Mazda system was doing, but it really sounds like it wasn't working properly. My boost comes up to just under 10psi and stays there until I shift. It never falls off and certainly never "cuts out". There's nothing to watch (unless you want to, I like watching my boost gauge needle move), just drive like you normally do. Only difference is there's a boatload more thrust propelling you forward.
The pffft sound you hear is the blowoff valve. The TCD kit doesn't use one, it uses a bypass valve which is pretty much silent unless you REALLY listen for it.
I'm sorry to hear you've had such bad experiences with turbo vehicles, but I can tell you that a properly turbo'd e28 will not behave anything like what you describe.
You should come to the states for a visit and drive one. You'll like it.
Example.
I was playing with a brand new e90 once on the freeway. Came around a nice bend, wound up in front of him, and traffic magically opened and disappeared on a flat straight that's around 1 mile long. I downshifted to third at about 60 mph and planted my right foot. Ran through third very fast. Forth didn't last much longer, so I shifted fifth. About half to 2/3rds of the way down this stretch of highway I look in my rear view to see him solidly probably 1/10th to 1/4 mile back. I know he wasn't lagging cause we'd been teasing each other in traffic up until that point. I looked down at the speedo at that point to see an indicated 140+mph
and climbing and decided it was time to let out and slow the hell down.The wastegate opens at a given boost pressure. It's not like letting the air out or taking your foot off the gas. Again, I have no idea what that Mazda system was doing, but it really sounds like it wasn't working properly. My boost comes up to just under 10psi and stays there until I shift. It never falls off and certainly never "cuts out". There's nothing to watch (unless you want to, I like watching my boost gauge needle move), just drive like you normally do. Only difference is there's a boatload more thrust propelling you forward.
The pffft sound you hear is the blowoff valve. The TCD kit doesn't use one, it uses a bypass valve which is pretty much silent unless you REALLY listen for it.
I'm sorry to hear you've had such bad experiences with turbo vehicles, but I can tell you that a properly turbo'd e28 will not behave anything like what you describe.
You should come to the states for a visit and drive one. You'll like it.
The only problem I am having with my s2 kit is, when the boost comes on around 3000 rpm, the tires tend to spin and keep spinning until I shift. Of course it is cold a hell right now and I have high performance summer tires. Then there is the increase to 12 psi (high boost) and 10 psi on low boost. I will just turn off the EBC and run 7.5 psi for now. Tire spin is fun but it does get kinda old after a while 
Yea, that Mazda was really screwed up. Even when the waste gate actuates, it should hold that set amount of boost. Not fall on its face.
Yea, that Mazda was really screwed up. Even when the waste gate actuates, it should hold that set amount of boost. Not fall on its face.
DRP535,
Those turbo cars you drove are not working correctly from your description of there operation. Its that simple. Your string of bad luck in not driving a properly put together turbo package has given you the wrong impression.
If the system wont hold a constant max boost, then its not operating correctly. The car needs to be setup with the wastegate controls to hold a constant boost the system was setup for. If not, its not working porperly and needs to be tuned correctly or faulty parts R&R'd. You should not be driving by gauge as you called. It should just work, and you plant your foot and have the car scoot.
RussC
Those turbo cars you drove are not working correctly from your description of there operation. Its that simple. Your string of bad luck in not driving a properly put together turbo package has given you the wrong impression.
If the system wont hold a constant max boost, then its not operating correctly. The car needs to be setup with the wastegate controls to hold a constant boost the system was setup for. If not, its not working porperly and needs to be tuned correctly or faulty parts R&R'd. You should not be driving by gauge as you called. It should just work, and you plant your foot and have the car scoot.
RussC
Huh,T_C_D wrote:
A turbo will increase gas mileage at cruise but your gas mileage will suffer at WOT.
Todd
You sure about that. That is not what I know. Whats your thinking/evidence for that?
With the exhaust and intake restrictions, you can't get the same milage as a NA car. There are patents for wastegates to open off boost to decrease exhaust restirctions much like modern blowers have bypass valves on the intake so air is not restricted by having to pass through the blower fins.
I was under the imprssion bolting a turbo on will decrease overall milage by ~5-%, even at cruise?
RussC
Doubling the power allows a user to run less diff ratio.russc wrote:Huh,T_C_D wrote:
A turbo will increase gas mileage at cruise but your gas mileage will suffer at WOT.
Todd
You sure about that. That is not what I know. Whats your thinking/evidence for that?
With the exhaust and intake restrictions, you can't get the same milage as a NA car. There are patents for wastegates to open off boost to decrease exhaust restirctions much like modern blowers have bypass valves on the intake so air is not restricted by having to pass through the blower fins.
I was under the imprssion bolting a turbo on will decrease overall milage by ~5-%, even at cruise?
RussC
Todd
Yeah I half suspected this would be the case. Otherwise no-one would want to own a turbo-car I'm sure and clearly that isn't happening. I would love to have a go in a properly sorted one (of any make) just to see what they're like. Unfortunately the population down here means we don't have a TCD-like option at least as far as I'm aware of. Supercharging is more popular down here and if FI is desired, it's more likely to be from a twin screw supercharger instead. All the boy-racer types with E46+ etc at the AutoSalons are having TSSC fitted, not turbos. We have a wealth of companies offering very compact and light supercharger setups, so this seems to be preferred at the moment over the relatively complicated plumbing requirements of turbocharging and heat shielding issues.russc wrote:DRP535,
Those turbo cars you drove are not working correctly from your description of there operation. Its that simple. Your string of bad luck in not driving a properly put together turbo package has given you the wrong impression.
Certainly I would prefer a turbo setup simply because there is precedent for a turbo from BMW themselves with the M106.
The mechanical engineering theory goes that increasing volumetric efficiency will increase fuel milage. Increasing volumetric efficiency is what supercharging is all about, so in a purely laboratory testing sense that's what should happen. The same was true of my engine after I fitted the Fritz headers. Fuel consumption plummeted initially - while I was still driving it like I did with the old manifolds. Very quickly however, you realise how different the motor feels and how much easier it revs etc. and it's human nature to take advantage of that. You can't help yourself. Well, I can't help myself! I can very easily get the fuel consumption back to where it was before now without being an idiot just by my changed driving style to take advantage of the smoother engine.russc wrote:Huh,T_C_D wrote:
A turbo will increase gas mileage at cruise but your gas mileage will suffer at WOT.
Todd
You sure about that. That is not what I know. Whats your thinking/evidence for that?
I was under the imprssion bolting a turbo on will decrease overall milage by ~5-%, even at cruise?
RussC
It requires more self control than I'm capable of delivering to drive the car so that it will consistently produce the fuel consumption benefits that are possible.
CheaterT_C_D wrote:Doubling the power allows a user to run less diff ratio.russc wrote:Huh,T_C_D wrote:
A turbo will increase gas mileage at cruise but your gas mileage will suffer at WOT.
Todd
You sure about that. That is not what I know. Whats your thinking/evidence for that?
With the exhaust and intake restrictions, you can't get the same milage as a NA car. There are patents for wastegates to open off boost to decrease exhaust restirctions much like modern blowers have bypass valves on the intake so air is not restricted by having to pass through the blower fins.
I was under the imprssion bolting a turbo on will decrease overall milage by ~5-%, even at cruise?
RussC
Todd
Um, you can do that with a NA car also. So it's kind of a wash. And, its only true to a point. As numerically lowering the ratio will increase drive load from the diff.
Gosh, has anyone don't a gearing change here with their turbo? Most don't want to give up acceleration you loose by the gearing change.
RussC
Maybe Todd should have said doubling the torque allows you to run a taller diff. He's right of course. Acceleration rate can be maintained if you have the torque available to pull the extra ratio load, which I understand the turbo provides. At the other end, in cruise mode, lower revs is gonna burn less fuel.
Yes, you can do the same with a NA car, but you're gonna sacrifice performance to get it. Without the significant gain in torque, running a taller diff is gonna get you slower acceleration.
Yes, you can do the same with a NA car, but you're gonna sacrifice performance to get it. Without the significant gain in torque, running a taller diff is gonna get you slower acceleration.
I would absolutely be looking to change the diff for a turbo in my car. Based on what Duke says about his car lighting up the tyres in every gear and with my car fitted with the short dogleg gearbox and the short diff I can imagine going through a set of rear tyres every 3 months, and as Duke says, that would get old very quickly! As it is right now you almost can't physically stir the gear lever quickly enough at WOT. With a turbo I'm guessing the first 3 gears would become almost completely obsolete.russc wrote:Gosh, has anyone don't a gearing change here with their turbo? Most don't want to give up acceleration you loose by the gearing change.
RussC
The close ratio cars had the 3.07 and 2.93 diffs in them. That way they would be more drive-able with the trany. Or you sacrafice your milage and stay with the stock ratio.DRP535 wrote:I would absolutely be looking to change the diff for a turbo in my car. Based on what Duke says about his car lighting up the tyres in every gear and with my car fitted with the short dogleg gearbox and the short diff I can imagine going through a set of rear tyres every 3 months, and as Duke says, that would get old very quickly! As it is right now you almost can't physically stir the gear lever quickly enough at WOT. With a turbo I'm guessing the first 3 gears would become almost completely obsolete.russc wrote:Gosh, has anyone don't a gearing change here with their turbo? Most don't want to give up acceleration you loose by the gearing change.
RussC
RussC
Wow,Sweeney wrote:I had been running a 3.07lsd and Todd had a 2.93lsd (I believe).
My new car will have a 3.25lsd ... to start anyway. My twin turbo would average around 23-24 mpg in mixed driving and recorded over 27 mpg down and back to 5erFest in Boone.
My car was always on the low end of the milage scale, even before the turbo install. I would avg ~20mpg w/o the turbo, after the install it went down to 16mpg. The current M30b35 is avg'ing 18.2mpg. With the b35, on the highway driving Ive done, its only ~21mpg, then the city takes it down to 18mpg.
Althoug, as my LM-1 is indicating, the 179 M1.3 ECU is running the car on the rich side, ~13.9:1 AFR under cruise. This was confirmed in my smog check, as the CO was on the high side. While it was within limits, it was double the avg at 15mph, almost quadruple the avg at 25mph test. The o2 gauge indicates the ECU is dithering fuel, so its not horrible. I have a new Mustang O2 in the system. I don't believe there should be a large difference from the Mustang sensor to the $150 BMW part???????
Dinan mounts it in the exhaust manifold. Im wondering if thats a problem, as the sensor will run much hotter being in the manifold, and the sensor temp will effect its output a bit. This is a issue i can't seem to resolve. Again, I can't tune the system, blah, I need a standalone.....oh wait, Im getting one on the 22nd.
RussC
-
Aaron from Aus
- Posts: 559
- Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Im very interested...but..not sure if that will be easier/better than the BAE Log manifold?
It would have been nicer if the Mount was right in the middle? would being in the middle made more power? Is the reason why it isnt? Too hard to change the pattern/Mold?
Just trying to make a decsion if i should keep on the BAE path get one of them.
Proabably be easier being forward like that.
It would have been nicer if the Mount was right in the middle? would being in the middle made more power? Is the reason why it isnt? Too hard to change the pattern/Mold?
Just trying to make a decsion if i should keep on the BAE path get one of them.
Proabably be easier being forward like that.
i think thats right, seems like the turbo should be less gooder, because its an exhaust restriction, but in reality it seems to be a really small difference. headers do make a difference, ive always gotten better mileage with headers. also the catylitic converters seem to make a difference, worse mileage but better smellsDRP535 wrote:The mechanical engineering theory goes that increasing volumetric efficiency will increase fuel milage. Increasing volumetric efficiency is what supercharging is all about, so in a purely laboratory testing sense that's what should happen. The same was true of my engine after I fitted the Fritz headers. Fuel consumption plummeted initially - while I was still driving it like I did with the old manifolds. Very quickly however, you realise how different the motor feels and how much easier it revs etc. and it's human nature to take advantage of that. You can't help yourself. Well, I can't help myself! I can very easily get the fuel consumption back to where it was before now without being an idiot just by my changed driving style to take advantage of the smoother engine.russc wrote:Huh,T_C_D wrote:
A turbo will increase gas mileage at cruise but your gas mileage will suffer at WOT.
Todd
You sure about that. That is not what I know. Whats your thinking/evidence for that?
I was under the imprssion bolting a turbo on will decrease overall milage by ~5-%, even at cruise?
RussC
It requires more self control than I'm capable of delivering to drive the car so that it will consistently produce the fuel consumption benefits that are possible.
heres some nearly pointless examples, to illustrate my point.
1. 1993 rx7, stock computer, 1st cat replaced with 3" pipe, 24mpg freeway. car is turboed, cruising @80mph 3100rpms.
2. 1985 rx7 stock computer, headers, no cat. same mpg and RPM, 26mpg. same car usually got 22-24 around town.
3. 1988 rx7 turbo, stock computer, no cat, 18-20mpg
4. 1983 rx7, stock carbed 12a, 18-20mpg
so at least with the rotary a turbo isnt a big mpg decidor
mike
-
Flip_Side_the_Pint
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Oct 11, 2006 6:14 AM
- Location: norcal
TCD,
I'm seriously considering your S1 kit for my automatic 1987 535iS (which needs a whole new exhaust system, which if I decide to choose the S1 route I'll just hold off on redoing the exhaust.)
My question is this;
could you make a S1 kit with this newfangled top mount manifold? If so could you PM the price of said substitute request. Thanks and I maybe calling you on this in a month or so.
thanks,
Jess
I'm seriously considering your S1 kit for my automatic 1987 535iS (which needs a whole new exhaust system, which if I decide to choose the S1 route I'll just hold off on redoing the exhaust.)
My question is this;
could you make a S1 kit with this newfangled top mount manifold? If so could you PM the price of said substitute request. Thanks and I maybe calling you on this in a month or so.
thanks,
Jess
).-
Kyle in NO
- Posts: 17638
- Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
- Location: Nasty Orleans------> Batten-Rooehjch------>More Souther LA