turbo question
03-18-2009, 11:38 AM
#1
kneeedragger
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: arizona
Posts: 78
turbo question
Alright guys i have searched the threads and seen alot of talk of turbos and I am sure everyone has seen the one on you tube so here goes... does anybody know where i can purchase a turbo kit from. any help would be great
03-18-2009, 11:42 AM
#2
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,631
If you plan on fitting it to a VTR you had better figure out a way to keep the crank from letting go first as even naturally aspired engines run into crank breakage problems when output gets near and over 130 hp....
03-18-2009, 12:00 PM
#3
kneeedragger
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: arizona
Posts: 78
how much hp does your bike have mlkstr? I have read all the threads and I know everone is concerned with the crank but I was wandering if anyone knew of a kit or who turboed the one on the youtube video.
03-18-2009, 12:51 PM
#5
Senior Member
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 880
Actually the crank breaks from over rev, but it can handle some more torque. I'm planing to build one but I'm not too loud about it, the R/D is long done, I'm getting a miller TIG this week. I'll talk more when I get the budget to make it going.
I was to use Microsquirt as an EFI controller and I'll blow my engine first lol
I was to use Microsquirt as an EFI controller and I'll blow my engine first lol
03-18-2009, 03:03 PM
#7
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Actually the VTR seems like an ideal candidate for a supercharger instead of a turbo... Less punch, but a linear surge of insane power... Less chance of blowing up the crank as the initial hit on the engine is smaller... Also a lot more controllable, unless you have the turbo set rather low...
I have ridden a RSV Mille with a turbocharger... It was mindblowing... A new CBR feels powerful and revs too the moon... A 145 hp Twin force fed to 220+ hp is a whole other beast... I could cruise in 5'th or 6'th gear at around 200kmh and then twist it and it would loft the front wheel and take of like a bat out of hell...
No if's and butt's about it... It would loft the front in any gear and any speed as long as you where less than half way up the the revband when you whacked the throttle...
I left a R1 way behind on a longish straight and I was sure he let of the throttle, he dropped of very fast and started disappearing in my mirrors... and after the ride he told me that he had the throttle nailed, banging through gears trying to keep up with me... He wasn't even close... And at the time I was more pre-occupied with keeping my weight forward to keep the front reasonably close to the ground as it was wheeling at every gear change...
I have ridden a RSV Mille with a turbocharger... It was mindblowing... A new CBR feels powerful and revs too the moon... A 145 hp Twin force fed to 220+ hp is a whole other beast... I could cruise in 5'th or 6'th gear at around 200kmh and then twist it and it would loft the front wheel and take of like a bat out of hell...
No if's and butt's about it... It would loft the front in any gear and any speed as long as you where less than half way up the the revband when you whacked the throttle...
I left a R1 way behind on a longish straight and I was sure he let of the throttle, he dropped of very fast and started disappearing in my mirrors... and after the ride he told me that he had the throttle nailed, banging through gears trying to keep up with me... He wasn't even close... And at the time I was more pre-occupied with keeping my weight forward to keep the front reasonably close to the ground as it was wheeling at every gear change...
03-18-2009, 04:10 PM
#9
2nd mouse gets the cheese
SuperBike
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 1,697
I like the idea of a supercharger instead of a turbo, but where would it go? The amount of fab work to spin it off the crank would be immense. The delivery would be better though and as long as it was a mild amount of boost you probably wouldn't blow stuff up.
03-18-2009, 05:03 PM
#10
Senior Member
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 880
Mine is a track only beast, but may see the road again
03-18-2009, 06:09 PM
#11
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,132
But from what I recall, he replaced the airbox with a supercharger from a Mini Cooper S and ran a belt down to a custom drive off the crank.
03-18-2009, 07:30 PM
#12
Honducati
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 809
Check out the supercharger kit that this guy developed for the VFR: www.aaperf.com
03-18-2009, 09:09 PM
#13
Pew Pew...lasers
Superstock
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alexandria, Va.
Posts: 311
Check out the supercharger kit that this guy developed for the VFR: www.aaperf.com
03-19-2009, 05:37 AM
#14
Remember stock is BAD!
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 760
Actually the VTR seems like an ideal candidate for a supercharger instead of a turbo... Less punch, but a linear surge of insane power... Less chance of blowing up the crank as the initial hit on the engine is smaller... Also a lot more controllable, unless you have the turbo set rather low...
03-19-2009, 06:23 AM
#15
Senior Member
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 880
One of the reasons I go turbo, is that cranks and rods are the limiting factor, powering a supercharger from them will yield less power before breakage than an exhaust powered impeller since it will substract power from them.
Beside the fab work goes up like crazy and having a strap running along my leg is not for me.
Could be powered from a cam bore hole, but I doubt that the timing chain is strong enough to handle this much torque.
Turbo's are a lot cheaper than SC's.
But' I agree that the power delivery of a SC would be better suited for a bike, way easier to drive that getting rear ended by boost.
That said, a small turbocharger will spool very quickly and by 4000 rpm and kick in a more controllable zone than a 6000 rpm hit.
Main features are,
Oil supply trough the oil pressure sensor and return trough oil cap, water/alcohol injection as charge cooling, MAP based or Hybrid Alpha-N fueling, gas return, in tank fuel pump, pressure regulator, fuel rail (possibly 4 injectors), aluminium airbox, welded up carbs as throttle bodies, Microsquirt EFI controller, Blow off valve, GT22 turbocharger, SS headers with a T3 flange under the seat, undertail exhaust,
nothing simple in there, but I just love building monsters and beat them to death afterward.
For now I'm trying to convert mt old AC buzzbox in a TIG welder, so I'm going to Montreal to buy a few components
Beside the fab work goes up like crazy and having a strap running along my leg is not for me.
Could be powered from a cam bore hole, but I doubt that the timing chain is strong enough to handle this much torque.
Turbo's are a lot cheaper than SC's.
But' I agree that the power delivery of a SC would be better suited for a bike, way easier to drive that getting rear ended by boost.
That said, a small turbocharger will spool very quickly and by 4000 rpm and kick in a more controllable zone than a 6000 rpm hit.
Main features are,
Oil supply trough the oil pressure sensor and return trough oil cap, water/alcohol injection as charge cooling, MAP based or Hybrid Alpha-N fueling, gas return, in tank fuel pump, pressure regulator, fuel rail (possibly 4 injectors), aluminium airbox, welded up carbs as throttle bodies, Microsquirt EFI controller, Blow off valve, GT22 turbocharger, SS headers with a T3 flange under the seat, undertail exhaust,
nothing simple in there, but I just love building monsters and beat them to death afterward.
For now I'm trying to convert mt old AC buzzbox in a TIG welder, so I'm going to Montreal to buy a few components
03-19-2009, 07:33 AM
#16
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
One of the reasons I go turbo, is that cranks and rods are the limiting factor, powering a supercharger from them will yield less power before breakage than an exhaust powered impeller since it will substract power from them.
Beside the fab work goes up like crazy and having a strap running along my leg is not for me.
Could be powered from a cam bore hole, but I doubt that the timing chain is strong enough to handle this much torque.
Turbo's are a lot cheaper than SC's.
But' I agree that the power delivery of a SC would be better suited for a bike, way easier to drive that getting rear ended by boost.
That said, a small turbocharger will spool very quickly and by 4000 rpm and kick in a more controllable zone than a 6000 rpm hit.
Beside the fab work goes up like crazy and having a strap running along my leg is not for me.
Could be powered from a cam bore hole, but I doubt that the timing chain is strong enough to handle this much torque.
Turbo's are a lot cheaper than SC's.
But' I agree that the power delivery of a SC would be better suited for a bike, way easier to drive that getting rear ended by boost.
That said, a small turbocharger will spool very quickly and by 4000 rpm and kick in a more controllable zone than a 6000 rpm hit.
Nope, turbo's are not cheaper... The components cost about the same, but the bare essentials to (semi)successfully run a turbo is less... The reason I say semi, is that it's when you do the bare essentials that you usually end up bombing an engine...
Yes, a supercharger subtracts some power, but a turbo does to, not as directly apparent though... The supercharger robs power by needing a direct power feed to operate... A turbo is instead a heavier hitter and for the engine to withstand that it's tuned a whole lot different, and it affects A/F ratio below and above the turbo's operating range... Basicly you are with a carb'ed engine out of tune as soon as the turbo hit is over... A injected engine can compensate with mapping...
Another difference is that yes you can run a small turbo and have it spool to mid range, then the fun will be over once you hit top end... Good for hooliganism but not much more...
Or a big one that gives you a big nasty top end hit that's fun when you ask for it but detrimental to the engine and could end up with the rear wheel trying to overtake the front...A SC is linear, it adds a soft small hit once it starts spooling in lower mid range, a nice fat controllable hit in higher mid range, and packs a good size punch once you get close to top end... And if you still feel that you need it it can be just as nasty as a turbo if you run it to redline... But at that point you've had plenty of warning and are still asking for it...
So yeah, on paper the added power is less with an SC before you blow the engine... but the difference is that most of the power you add can be used, and used well... A large portion of the turbo's added power is unusable, and a good portion of it is also robbing you of engine lifetime...
The SC'd mille I rode felt rather sedate and peaceful... Not scary... Until you yanked the throttle hard and it bared the fangs...
I'd rather take a 130-140hp SC VTR than a 150-160hp turbo'ed VTR that's on the edge both in rideability and longevity... But...
I'm still going to watch with great delight and cheer you on...
The world needs a few more crazy people...
Makes me feel right at home...
03-19-2009, 07:46 AM
#17
Honducati
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 809
I have a 6th gen as well, and I'm really tempted...
03-19-2009, 08:57 AM
#18
Super Byrd
Superstock
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cumming, Ga
Posts: 356
Im pretty sure most of ya'll have seen this, but just in case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-ppGiwc0wQ
it gets good about at a 1:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-ppGiwc0wQ
it gets good about at a 1:40
Last edited by Byrdman; 03-19-2009 at 08:59 AM.
03-19-2009, 09:29 AM
#19
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,132
Im pretty sure most of ya'll have seen this, but just in case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-ppGiwc0wQ
it gets good about at a 1:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-ppGiwc0wQ
it gets good about at a 1:40
Still a fun vid, but they obviously have the speedo hooked up wrong.
03-20-2009, 05:42 AM
#21
Senior Member
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 880
Well I agree with some of what you are saying... but not all...
Nope, turbo's are not cheaper... The components cost about the same, but the bare essentials to (semi)successfully run a turbo is less... The reason I say semi, is that it's when you do the bare essentials that you usually end up bombing an engine...
Yes, a supercharger subtracts some power, but a turbo does to, not as directly apparent though... The supercharger robs power by needing a direct power feed to operate... A turbo is instead a heavier hitter and for the engine to withstand that it's tuned a whole lot different, and it affects A/F ratio below and above the turbo's operating range... Basicly you are with a carb'ed engine out of tune as soon as the turbo hit is over... A injected engine can compensate with mapping...
Another difference is that yes you can run a small turbo and have it spool to mid range, then the fun will be over once you hit top end... Good for hooliganism but not much more... Or a big one that gives you a big nasty top end hit that's fun when you ask for it but detrimental to the engine and could end up with the rear wheel trying to overtake the front...
A SC is linear, it adds a soft small hit once it starts spooling in lower mid range, a nice fat controllable hit in higher mid range, and packs a good size punch once you get close to top end... And if you still feel that you need it it can be just as nasty as a turbo if you run it to redline... But at that point you've had plenty of warning and are still asking for it...
So yeah, on paper the added power is less with an SC before you blow the engine... but the difference is that most of the power you add can be used, and used well... A large portion of the turbo's added power is unusable, and a good portion of it is also robbing you of engine lifetime...
The SC'd mille I rode felt rather sedate and peaceful... Not scary... Until you yanked the throttle hard and it bared the fangs...
I'd rather take a 130-140hp SC VTR than a 150-160hp turbo'ed VTR that's on the edge both in rideability and longevity... But...
I'm still going to watch with great delight and cheer you on...
The world needs a few more crazy people... Makes me feel right at home...
Nope, turbo's are not cheaper... The components cost about the same, but the bare essentials to (semi)successfully run a turbo is less... The reason I say semi, is that it's when you do the bare essentials that you usually end up bombing an engine...
Yes, a supercharger subtracts some power, but a turbo does to, not as directly apparent though... The supercharger robs power by needing a direct power feed to operate... A turbo is instead a heavier hitter and for the engine to withstand that it's tuned a whole lot different, and it affects A/F ratio below and above the turbo's operating range... Basicly you are with a carb'ed engine out of tune as soon as the turbo hit is over... A injected engine can compensate with mapping...
Another difference is that yes you can run a small turbo and have it spool to mid range, then the fun will be over once you hit top end... Good for hooliganism but not much more...
Or a big one that gives you a big nasty top end hit that's fun when you ask for it but detrimental to the engine and could end up with the rear wheel trying to overtake the front...A SC is linear, it adds a soft small hit once it starts spooling in lower mid range, a nice fat controllable hit in higher mid range, and packs a good size punch once you get close to top end... And if you still feel that you need it it can be just as nasty as a turbo if you run it to redline... But at that point you've had plenty of warning and are still asking for it...
So yeah, on paper the added power is less with an SC before you blow the engine... but the difference is that most of the power you add can be used, and used well... A large portion of the turbo's added power is unusable, and a good portion of it is also robbing you of engine lifetime...
The SC'd mille I rode felt rather sedate and peaceful... Not scary... Until you yanked the throttle hard and it bared the fangs...
I'd rather take a 130-140hp SC VTR than a 150-160hp turbo'ed VTR that's on the edge both in rideability and longevity... But...
I'm still going to watch with great delight and cheer you on...
The world needs a few more crazy people...
Makes me feel right at home...
I have a Corvette engine coming in a CJ-7 for an overhaul, the guy is a V8 pulsing exhaust lover, I can't think of putting anything else than a supercharger on his Jeep, either twin screw or centrifugal.
Same goes for a V-twin, the exhaust is just lovely and it's the greatest loss in the turbo process IMO.
I would not try to turbo a carbed vehicle, with just one exception, I made a sketch of a twin carb induction setup for a CRF450, since not much power was available to go EFI.
On a VTR the conversion to EFI is not much of a big deal.
There are many ways to control the power delivery of a turbo, electronic boot controller is the best one, it can smooth the power surge and flatten that boost curve even better than a cenri SC.
The absolute best would be a twin screw SC, but these units are bulky.
I don't think that there is a perfect setup, like all mechanical, it's a world of compromises, but being the engine nut that I am, I'm more than willing to experiment
Oh and just got this
03-20-2009, 10:23 AM
#23
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Trust me... I have seen that bike in person... and more importantly, It blew past me on one wheel while I was flat out in fifth... Those might not be 100% dead on, but they are within the 10% as most speedo's are...
Yes... MC express is a Swedish company... ) And yes they are nuts...
Yes... MC express is a Swedish company... ) And yes they are nuts...
03-20-2009, 10:27 AM
#24
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
SC and turbos have been debated for a long time by both team
I have a Corvette engine coming in a CJ-7 for an overhaul, the guy is a V8 pulsing exhaust lover, I can't think of putting anything else than a supercharger on his Jeep, either twin screw or centrifugal.
Same goes for a V-twin, the exhaust is just lovely and it's the greatest loss in the turbo process IMO.
I would not try to turbo a carbed vehicle, with just one exception, I made a sketch of a twin carb induction setup for a CRF450, since not much power was available to go EFI.
On a VTR the conversion to EFI is not much of a big deal.
There are many ways to control the power delivery of a turbo, electronic boot controller is the best one, it can smooth the power surge and flatten that boost curve even better than a cenri SC.
The absolute best would be a twin screw SC, but these units are bulky.
I don't think that there is a perfect setup, like all mechanical, it's a world of compromises, but being the engine nut that I am, I'm more than willing to experiment
Oh and just got this
I have a Corvette engine coming in a CJ-7 for an overhaul, the guy is a V8 pulsing exhaust lover, I can't think of putting anything else than a supercharger on his Jeep, either twin screw or centrifugal.
Same goes for a V-twin, the exhaust is just lovely and it's the greatest loss in the turbo process IMO.
I would not try to turbo a carbed vehicle, with just one exception, I made a sketch of a twin carb induction setup for a CRF450, since not much power was available to go EFI.
On a VTR the conversion to EFI is not much of a big deal.
There are many ways to control the power delivery of a turbo, electronic boot controller is the best one, it can smooth the power surge and flatten that boost curve even better than a cenri SC.
The absolute best would be a twin screw SC, but these units are bulky.
I don't think that there is a perfect setup, like all mechanical, it's a world of compromises, but being the engine nut that I am, I'm more than willing to experiment
Oh and just got this
argue away... I'll take one of each thank you very much...On a bike though I prefer a SC...
sorry... It's just the way I'm wired... And I have tried the nuttiest... A 600 hp something busa that tried to overtake itself while on one wheel... that was fun... Interesting... but fun...
03-20-2009, 11:08 AM
#25
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,132
Trust me... I have seen that bike in person... and more importantly, It blew past me on one wheel while I was flat out in fifth... Those might not be 100% dead on, but they are within the 10% as most speedo's are...
Yes... MC express is a Swedish company... ) And yes they are nuts...
Yes... MC express is a Swedish company... ) And yes they are nuts...
Don't get me wrong, I am sure it is a wicked fast bike, but the speedo just doesn't seem to jive with what the video shows. Though I guess I could be totally misinterpreting what I am seeing.
03-20-2009, 01:10 PM
#26
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Ok... I'm not arguing here.... just clarifying... The blue car is a Audi RS2... A proper fast car on it's own... Not a metro... That car is more than capable of doing ~200kph (actually listed as 262kph on audi's spec...)
As for the lines... Since it's a wide one lane road with solid side lines they are 3 m of line 9 m of gap... (or 10 feet and 30 feet, for you metric challenged...) Dunno how the lines look in the states...
Actually a better way of judging speed is to look at the poles along the road... They are on a straight road of this type 50 m apart... And by a rule of thumb from drivers ed (it's maths actually m/s to kph is a factor of 3.6)... 50m apart means if you pass them at once a second = 180 kph... Looking at the video and the time it's fairly close to one pole/second... sometimes faster sometimes a bit slower... and the speedo goes from 180 something to 200 something... So not too far off... possibly some 5-10% or 5kph or so...
As for the lines... Since it's a wide one lane road with solid side lines they are 3 m of line 9 m of gap... (or 10 feet and 30 feet, for you metric challenged...) Dunno how the lines look in the states...
Actually a better way of judging speed is to look at the poles along the road... They are on a straight road of this type 50 m apart... And by a rule of thumb from drivers ed (it's maths actually m/s to kph is a factor of 3.6)... 50m apart means if you pass them at once a second = 180 kph... Looking at the video and the time it's fairly close to one pole/second... sometimes faster sometimes a bit slower... and the speedo goes from 180 something to 200 something... So not too far off... possibly some 5-10% or 5kph or so...
Last edited by Tweety; 03-20-2009 at 01:12 PM.
03-20-2009, 01:27 PM
#27
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,132
Ah gotcha.. I guess our one lane roads around here are not that wide, and that was throwing it all off in my head.
Anywho back to the original issue.. Small turbo, megasquirt EFI and lots of custom piping and you can do it.. It may be cheaper to buy a new bike with more HP that has a existing kit available and turbo that..
Anywho back to the original issue.. Small turbo, megasquirt EFI and lots of custom piping and you can do it.. It may be cheaper to buy a new bike with more HP that has a existing kit available and turbo that..
03-20-2009, 01:32 PM
#28
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Ah gotcha.. I guess our one lane roads around here are not that wide, and that was throwing it all off in my head.
Anywho back to the original issue.. Small turbo, megasquirt EFI and lots of custom piping and you can do it.. It may be cheaper to buy a new bike with more HP that has a existing kit available and turbo that..
Anywho back to the original issue.. Small turbo, megasquirt EFI and lots of custom piping and you can do it.. It may be cheaper to buy a new bike with more HP that has a existing kit available and turbo that..
Just stupid, expensive and fun...And just to prove my point I'm kind of halfway decided on buying a RSV Mille... And if I do, It will go straight into the garage for a teardown and a SC install... Might take it for a spin around town first, might not...
(I should never have test ridden that bike...
)
Last edited by Tweety; 03-20-2009 at 01:35 PM.
03-20-2009, 02:11 PM
#29
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 229
You're not being stupid, Tweety. Stupid would be knowing your never going to do it, but daydreaming about junk like the Coates spherical valve heads, an RC51 motor and a SH with better suspension & breaks. http://www.coatesengine.com/index.html
Thats stupid. And expensive. Could be fun though.
Quick, somebody give me that number for the supercharger!
Thats stupid. And expensive. Could be fun though.
Quick, somebody give me that number for the supercharger!
03-20-2009, 03:35 PM
#30
Senior Member
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 880
I don't do cheap... or easy... Just stupid, expensive and fun...
And just to prove my point I'm kind of halfway decided on buying a RSV Mille... And if I do, It will go straight into the garage for a teardown and a SC install... Might take it for a spin around town first, might not... (I should never have test ridden that bike...)
Just stupid, expensive and fun...And just to prove my point I'm kind of halfway decided on buying a RSV Mille... And if I do, It will go straight into the garage for a teardown and a SC install... Might take it for a spin around town first, might not...
(I should never have test ridden that bike...)We can agree that forced induction is fun tough
A RSV SC project sounds like fun, would be interested in the build story.
I'm going back to practice my welds
Last edited by gboezio; 03-20-2009 at 03:40 PM.
