Slant Six Forum :: Stall vs. Boost

Greg, I have used a 2 step with and without a trans break. I never really saw any advantage or performance improvement on my junk.

I do like the sound of the car on the 2 step though.

Quote:

What do you think of a 75-shot of Nitrous for one second, just as the brake is released???

Bill, in Conway, Arkansas

I think if you don't have the suspension, set up right, you'll blow the tires off the car. The turbo should spool in less then a second, without nitrous, and the nitrous builds a ton of torque. My 170 stock short block, makes 358 lb/ft at 2900 rpm, on the bottle.

Bill I never realized how close our two valiants are in setup
What are the specs on your turbo? That's the missing element if it's not sized correctly your going to have a hard time build 25 pounds of boost through the slants power range.

Keep at Bill you and Freddie inspire me
Aaron

Here what I came up with this is from the 2007 catalog
Non ball bearing T series T-66 P trim Tang -68

http://turboneticsinc.com/forum/turbone ... rgers.html

Bill what size is the exhaust housing it should have a AR RATIO stamped into the flanges somewhere maybe on the inside or the outside of the intake of the exhaust housing
But that sounds pretty close to the one I had planned on using
I hope this can help I'm going to bookmark that catalog it so hard to find any information on turbos via the Internet I've spent hours looking up different models and never had much luck
I glad you and Freddie are making some head way it would be a treat if the both of us have a chance to get the valiants down to the track this year
Aaron

Greg,

I'm afraid the two-step will inhibit the turbo's effort to spool-up, because that spool-up time is based on the delivery of heat to the turbo, and if several cylinders are not firing, there's not going to be as much heat in the exhaust-impeller area, is there?

Won't that slow the spool-up process?

I can't see how it would do anything else, since it's cutting the spark to random cylinders to keep the rpm down.

Having said that, I will say that I think it's a great idea for normally-aspirated cars!

What do you think?

Bill in Conway, Arkansas

I like a 2 step and a trans brake but most tracks will move you into the electronics class than you have to race the delay box guys.

Bill I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake, I have no proof but I am going to use my trans brake and 2 step with the turbo.
Will

You said, "I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake,"

That may be true, but if I can hold the car on the line at 3,800-RPM with a 2-step, I can also hold it on the line at 3,800-RPM by foot-braking it. The brakes don't know the difference; 3,800 flywheel RPM is 3,800-RPM, regardless if there's a 2-step involved.

I probably need to 2-step it down to the 2,500-RPM stall; and I am afraid that doing that will NOT spool the turbo sufficiently.

Let me know how your experiment turns out. I may be dead wrong...

Bill in Conway, Arkansas

Author:	Fopar [ Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:09 pm ]
Post subject:
Rick I second your thoughts (KISS) keep it simple stupid. This has worked for me for years (i am going to be 73 in Oct) My cars are both daily drivers Richard

Author:	slantzilla [ Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Greg, I have used a 2 step with and without a trans break. I never really saw any advantage or performance improvement on my junk. I do like the sound of the car on the 2 step though.

Author:	billdedman [ Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:26 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Greg, I have used a 2 step with and without a trans break. I never really saw any advantage or performance improvement on my junk. I do like the sound of the car on the 2 step though. What do you think a 2-step will do to my efforts to get the turbo completely spooled before the launch takes place? I don't think the idea of running a bunch of raw (un-ignited) fuel through the exhaust impeller is going to do anything good for spooling time, or am I wrong? I'm flying blind; never owned a 2-step, a turbo, or a slant six before.... HELP!!! Bill, in Central Arkansas

Author:	billdedman [ Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:43 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: What do you think of a 75-shot of Nitrous for one second, just as the brake is released??? Bill, in Conway, Arkansas I think if you don't have the suspension, set up right, you'll blow the tires off the car. The turbo should spool in less then a second, without nitrous, and the nitrous builds a ton of torque. My 170 stock short block, makes 358 lb/ft at 2900 rpm, on the bottle. Charrlie, I am sure you're right. This is a 225 and will be running 25 pounds of boost, eventually (we HOPE.) Here's what we have: Body... '64 Valiant 4-door sedan; racing seats in front, no seats in back Roll bar; Subframe connectors Cal-Tracs 8.75" B-body rear housing (MAJOR wheel spacing-offset) 90-10 front shocks 50-50 rear shocks with extended (longer) rods 9" bias ply Hoosier slicks 3.55:1 limited slip (Auburn) Lightweight, fiberglass hood BIG battery in right-rear of trunk (no battery up front.) 2.74:1 first geared 904 3,500-rpm-stall converter (Hughes) Spearco front-mounted Intercooler said to be good for 600 hp (????) Aftermarket front suspension (tubular) and disc brakes All stock glass Butchered front bumper with center-section removed for Intercooler Line Lock Holley 750 double-pumper modified for blow-thru 18 degrees of advance using a locked plate; no vacuum cannister MSD 6-AL digital Snowperformance Boost Cooler Lightweight front tires and wheels Aluminum radiator and electric fan Homemade headers; 6-into-one (turbo flange) 3" downpipe Do you think I can hook this thing up??? Might ditch the front bumper, entirely... Any advice will be really appreciated! Bill in Conway, Arkansas

Author:	Turbo Toad [ Sat Jun 16, 2012 12:23 am ]
Post subject:
Bill I never realized how close our two valiants are in setup What are the specs on your turbo? That's the missing element if it's not sized correctly your going to have a hard time build 25 pounds of boost through the slants power range I'm hoping I can build about atleast ten pounds of boost at 3000 rpm's which is what my stall is rated at. That's what my target is at the tree but that's all speculation now but that what I'm planning! I'm sure your aware of the nightmares of tuning a high boosted blow through setup hopefully if all goes as planned which it normally doesn't in my case my crutch assisted carb won't be so bad when the time comes I may be ready to give you some good ideas Keep at Bill you and Freddie inspire me Aaron

Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/

Stall vs. Boost https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=49085	Page 2 of 5

Author:	slantzilla [ Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:03 am ]
Post subject:
Bill, a 2 step and a brake will work perfectly for what you are trying to do. A 2 step may even work w/o a brake for you. Maybe you can PM Flyin' Ryan and see what he does. I saw his car last year, and don't think he had a brake.

Author:	billdedman [ Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Bill I never realized how close our two valiants are in setup What are the specs on your turbo? That's the missing element if it's not sized correctly your going to have a hard time build 25 pounds of boost through the slants power range. Keep at Bill you and Freddie inspire me Aaron Thanks Aaron; in the past few days we got the fuel system completeds and dial-in (5.5 pounds pressure.) Today, we got the relay for the fuel pump mounted and wired, and installed the rocker-switch panel in the dash for all the electics. Lots of details still to contend with, but we're finally making some progress we can see. Baby steps... LOL! The turbo we have is new, still in the box (has been mounted, but not yet run.) All the plumbing for it (except for the 02 bung) finished and is ready to bolt in (cold side, included,). Here is the only specs I can find on the box. Maybe you, or someone else, will know what they mean. Here's what the sticker on the box says: Turbonetics T-24281 P/N 10984 C/D 46900 S/N T24281 M/O M290520 Not sure about the "M"... it was smudged... Can you learn anything about what I have here, from these numbers? I tried to measure the exhaust impeller opening diameter and came up with 66mm, but I can't guarantee the accuracy of that. It's down in a bell0mouthed hole and I didn't have any long,skinny, calipers for measuring it accurately. The guy who gave it to us said it was a "66." Whatever that means. He has an identical one on his GN Buick and it runs in the high tens at 3,600- pounds. The guy at the G-Pop shop looked at it and said that he thought that it should work well in this application. That's all I know; what people tell me. What do you think??? Working hard at getting the wiring/switches finished, now. Have a good weekend! Bill

Author:	Turbo Toad [ Sat Jun 16, 2012 8:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Here what I came up with this is from the 2007 catalog Non ball bearing T series T-66 P trim Tang -68 http://turboneticsinc.com/forum/turbone ... rgers.html Bill what size is the exhaust housing it should have a AR RATIO stamped into the flanges somewhere maybe on the inside or the outside of the intake of the exhaust housing But that sounds pretty close to the one I had planned on using I hope this can help I'm going to bookmark that catalog it so hard to find any information on turbos via the Internet I've spent hours looking up different models and never had much luck I glad you and Freddie are making some head way it would be a treat if the both of us have a chance to get the valiants down to the track this year Aaron

Author:	billdedman [ Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Here what I came up with this is from the 2007 catalog Non ball bearing T series T-66 P trim Tang -68 http://turboneticsinc.com/forum/turbone ... rgers.html Bill what size is the exhaust housing it should have a AR RATIO stamped into the flanges somewhere maybe on the inside or the outside of the intake of the exhaust housing But that sounds pretty close to the one I had planned on using I hope this can help I'm going to bookmark that catalog it so hard to find any information on turbos via the Internet I've spent hours looking up different models and never had much luck I glad you and Freddie are making some head way it would be a treat if the both of us have a chance to get the valiants down to the track this year Aaron Aaron, That could happpen!!! We still have a lot of work to do (install shoulder harness, run a BUNCH of wiring, plumb the Moroso Accu-Sump, the Snowperformance Boost Cooler, wire up and position the tach/shift-light, plumb several gauges, adjust the pre-load on the Cal-Tracs, adjust the pinion angle, install the driveshaft loop, and wire the MSD 6-AL. LOL! Oh and, install the line-loc and finish up the cold-side plumbing... and run the turbo oil-supply and drainback lines... This would appear to be our turbo: 10984-BB Turbo, Ball Brg., T-Series, T-66-,P-Trim, Tang.68 That's from that link you sent me in the previous post. I have NO IDEA what any of that means... The turbo is down at Freddie's shop; I'll look it over for that A/R info the next time I'm there (probably Tuesday.) Thanks for your help!!! Bill

Author:	Greg Ondayko [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 6:25 am ]
Post subject:
I liked the Idea of the two step for ruster because When I attempt to Stall the converter up to 3500 it pushes into the beams a bit at times after being fully staged and when the tree in coming down.... This could all come back to driver technique and seat time... but I feel at this point in the game it's worth a try for me. Greg

Author:	billdedman [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Greg, I'm afraid the two-step will inhibit the turbo's effort to spool-up, because that spool-up time is based on the delivery of heat to the turbo, and if several cylinders are not firing, there's not going to be as much heat in the exhaust-impeller area, is there? Won't that slow the spool-up process? I can't see how it would do anything else, since it's cutting the spark to random cylinders to keep the rpm down. What do you think? Bill in Conway, Arkansas

Author:	billdedman [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Greg, I'm afraid the two-step will inhibit the turbo's effort to spool-up, because that spool-up time is based on the delivery of heat to the turbo, and if several cylinders are not firing, there's not going to be as much heat in the exhaust-impeller area, is there? Won't that slow the spool-up process? I can't see how it would do anything else, since it's cutting the spark to random cylinders to keep the rpm down. Having said that, I will say that I think it's a great idea for normally-aspirated cars! What do you think? Bill in Conway, Arkansas

Author:	Will [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:25 pm ]
Post subject:
I like a 2 step and a trans brake but most tracks will move you into the electronics class than you have to race the delay box guys. Bill I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake, I have no proof but I am going to use my trans brake and 2 step with the turbo. Will

Author:	billdedman [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:18 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: I like a 2 step and a trans brake but most tracks will move you into the electronics class than you have to race the delay box guys. Bill I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake, I have no proof but I am going to use my trans brake and 2 step with the turbo. Will Will, Here's the way I see it: What it takes to spool a turbo is air moving through it. I think we agree on that. Hot air expands. Cool air doesn't. That, also, is pretty much a given. Now, when you employ a 2-step, what does it do to limit your starting line RPM? It cuts the spark to various, random cylinders, enough to keep the engine from making enough power to go beyond the selected RPM you have entered into the 2-step box. The air coming out of those cylinders has not (and will not) experience ignition and will not expand. In fact. the atomized, but unburned fuel will probably take heat OUT of the mixture due to evaportative cooling. That, we don't need.... Depending on how much you have entered into the box, the 2-step will cut a little or a lot of ignition. My fear is that if I enter, say, 2,500 RPM into the 2-step electronics to keep that stall at, my starting-line, maximum RPM, and my normal stall speed would be 3,500 RPM (if my brakes would hold,) that there will be so much un-ignitied fuel and un-expanded air going through the exhaust turbine at a 2-stepped 2,500-RPM, that it will impair spool-time in a big way. You said, "I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake," That may be true, but if I can hold the car on the line at 3,800-RPM with a 2-step, I can also hold it on the line at 3,800-RPM by foot-braking it. The brakes don't know the difference; 3,800 flywheel RPM is 3,800-RPM, regardless if there's a 2-step involved. I probably need to 2-step it down to the 2,500-RPM stall; and I am afraid that doing that will NOT spool the turbo sufficiently. Let me know how your experiment turns out. I may be dead wrong... Bill in Conway, Arkansas

Page 2 of 5	All times are UTC-08:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	slantzilla [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:32 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: You said, "I think 3800 rpm on a 2 step and trans brake would move just as much air as 2500 rpm on a foot brake," That may be true, but if I can hold the car on the line at 3,800-RPM with a 2-step, I can also hold it on the line at 3,800-RPM by foot-braking it. The brakes don't know the difference; 3,800 flywheel RPM is 3,800-RPM, regardless if there's a 2-step involved. I probably need to 2-step it down to the 2,500-RPM stall; and I am afraid that doing that will NOT spool the turbo sufficiently. Let me know how your experiment turns out. I may be dead wrong... Bill in Conway, Arkansas I can tell you from personal experience that a 2 stepp will hold a higher stall on the starting line than foot braking alone. I kind of mis spoke when I told Greg a 2 step never made any difference. It will allow a higher stall than foot brake alone, but my reaction times never changed much. I can pretty much guarantee that foot braking will not hold against much boost. I had a buddy doing the Grand National thing years ago who was trying to foot brake it. Once everyone else figured out what he was trying to do they would always get in and stage and hang his ass out. Either he would get red lit, or would launch off boost and get outrun. He finally went to a brake and did a lot better.