DIY turbo kit
07-05-2006, 08:27 PM
#101
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bacalhau16
G. Ride, its called an APS single turbo kit. It is placed rather low on the chassis and is so low in regard to the oil pan, that it actually requires an additional pump to help oil flow.
Yeah man, I knew that already. The price tag on that kit is not worth it. If you work it out, they are making some good money on those kits.
Problem is.... Theres no way in hell APS is going to release shots of their manifolds. The only way Ill get those is if someone has a kit still in the box and is willing to take shots... I get their design and I completely know where they are coming from. Its smart!
07-05-2006, 08:42 PM
#102
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: dartmouth
Posts: 3,148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If by shots, you mean pictures, then there are plenty of those. Go to APS' website and there are a ton of pictures of their manifolds and piping. Duplicating a turbo kit that is already in production, is something that we discussed already, and I feel that this is the easiest way to do it. Others have come up with some really good ideas of their own also though!
07-05-2006, 09:16 PM
#103
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bacalhau16
If by shots, you mean pictures, then there are plenty of those. Go to APS' website and there are a ton of pictures of their manifolds and piping. Duplicating a turbo kit that is already in production, is something that we discussed already, and I feel that this is the easiest way to do it. Others have come up with some really good ideas of their own also though!
07-05-2006, 09:34 PM
#105
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bacalhau16
Well that would be really awesome. It would also just be a lot easier for you to send us the link if possible. Good luck with it.
http://g35driver.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106349
07-06-2006, 03:40 AM
#107
Originally Posted by bacalhau16
Meatbag, your name fits you well. We are having a very good discussion about building your own turbo kit. We all understand that this is a difficult thing to do, and not something that you want to learn on how to weld. Are you serious? You want to LEARN how to weld, while making the manifolds on your car. You tell me to go out in the world and do it. Apparently you havent read the thread, and realized that i have already made a few turbo kits, and am able to admit, that this project is not as easy as my 98 240sx. So please, if you have nothing further positive to contribute to my thread, leave!
Turbo Tim, i would be interested in those if they were for a reasonable price. My reasonable may be different then yours though, so fill us in on what your asking for a set, or just pm me. Whatever works for you. I believe Miaplaya, sent me a link to those in this thread also.
Just out of curiosity, how much time would you say you have invested into fabricating those? They do look really well made, and very efficient.
Quamen, its very honarable that you had one kit fail, but arnt going to give up and do another. Good luck, i like where your going with your kit and hopefully everything works out.
Turbo Tim, i would be interested in those if they were for a reasonable price. My reasonable may be different then yours though, so fill us in on what your asking for a set, or just pm me. Whatever works for you. I believe Miaplaya, sent me a link to those in this thread also.
Just out of curiosity, how much time would you say you have invested into fabricating those? They do look really well made, and very efficient.
Quamen, its very honarable that you had one kit fail, but arnt going to give up and do another. Good luck, i like where your going with your kit and hopefully everything works out.
07-06-2006, 06:07 AM
#108
I actually have spent this morning contacting different people to make the headers so it is going to be started soon. The main problem with the last turbo kit is that the company did not listen to what I WANTED and did a hack job. In the end it was also an issue between the owner and me (girls! lol).
Anyways, this time around, everything will be watched over exclusivly by me and it will take much longer but the final outcome will be amazing.
Tim, how much would a set of flanges cost me if I could even get them from you?
Anyways, this time around, everything will be watched over exclusivly by me and it will take much longer but the final outcome will be amazing.
Tim, how much would a set of flanges cost me if I could even get them from you?
07-06-2006, 07:52 AM
#109
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Quamen
I actually have spent this morning contacting different people to make the headers so it is going to be started soon. The main problem with the last turbo kit is that the company did not listen to what I WANTED and did a hack job. In the end it was also an issue between the owner and me (girls! lol).
Anyways, this time around, everything will be watched over exclusivly by me and it will take much longer but the final outcome will be amazing.
Tim, how much would a set of flanges cost me if I could even get them from you?
Anyways, this time around, everything will be watched over exclusivly by me and it will take much longer but the final outcome will be amazing.
Tim, how much would a set of flanges cost me if I could even get them from you?
No offense, but that looks flanges looked a little out of par. Did they update/upgrade them?
07-06-2006, 08:18 AM
#111
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by meatbag
Hit up google and you can find alot of places where you can get custom flanges. Here is one http://www.secondariesinc.com/
07-06-2006, 08:23 AM
#112
Originally Posted by G.Ride
Thats awesome but we have to have some guide to send them for them to make us flanges for our blocks..
Tim has updated his flanges though i think. The set of exhaust manifold i have from him look way better.
07-06-2006, 08:36 AM
#113
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: western PA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by meatbag
Find someone that has a set of headers for the vq35 or a stock set and just trace a pattern and take some basic measurements. Or if you can just send it to them as im sure they will have micrometers, etc to get very exact measurements.
Tim has updated his flanges though i think. The set of exhaust manifold i have from him look way better.
Tim has updated his flanges though i think. The set of exhaust manifold i have from him look way better.
07-06-2006, 09:18 AM
#114
If I wanted to I would be able to CNC them myself but that is quite a bit of work when there is quite a few companies out there I could more than likely get a set of flanges from.
Other than that, since we are on the topic of headers. I do have a few questions regarding making them since I want to make sure that everything is done right this gets done.
Does it make a huge difference if you form the tubing that connects to the flanges so that it is oval shaped similar to the opening that way you do not get turbulance after the flange? Or would this be an insignificant gain by doing so in comparison to cost vs. gains/performance? What I mean by this is would you consider the negative effects of the turbulance created by just welding a round tube to a flange with an oval opening such as ours comparable to say the somewhat ineffecient piping design of the TN ST?
It seems that on some headers the tube fits into the flange opening and is welded on the back side that mates to the head. While on others it seems to be welded to the outside of the flange. Is one better than the other?
I have been told that it is a good idea to have the flanges resurfaced after welding in case there was warpage. Is this a good idea?
Since no two cylinders fire at the same time in our car you would think that the piping diameter would never have to be larger than one of the runners individually since there should (theoretically) be no accumulation of gases from multiple cylinders at once. However this does not mean that flow couldn't be increased by a larger diameter runner (as compared to stock). What would be considered a good diameter piping to make a log style header out of?
Other than that, since we are on the topic of headers. I do have a few questions regarding making them since I want to make sure that everything is done right this gets done.
Does it make a huge difference if you form the tubing that connects to the flanges so that it is oval shaped similar to the opening that way you do not get turbulance after the flange? Or would this be an insignificant gain by doing so in comparison to cost vs. gains/performance? What I mean by this is would you consider the negative effects of the turbulance created by just welding a round tube to a flange with an oval opening such as ours comparable to say the somewhat ineffecient piping design of the TN ST?
It seems that on some headers the tube fits into the flange opening and is welded on the back side that mates to the head. While on others it seems to be welded to the outside of the flange. Is one better than the other?
I have been told that it is a good idea to have the flanges resurfaced after welding in case there was warpage. Is this a good idea?
Since no two cylinders fire at the same time in our car you would think that the piping diameter would never have to be larger than one of the runners individually since there should (theoretically) be no accumulation of gases from multiple cylinders at once. However this does not mean that flow couldn't be increased by a larger diameter runner (as compared to stock). What would be considered a good diameter piping to make a log style header out of?
07-06-2006, 10:31 AM
#117
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Quamen
If I wanted to I would be able to CNC them myself but that is quite a bit of work when there is quite a few companies out there I could more than likely get a set of flanges from.
Other than that, since we are on the topic of headers. I do have a few questions regarding making them since I want to make sure that everything is done right this gets done.
Does it make a huge difference if you form the tubing that connects to the flanges so that it is oval shaped similar to the opening that way you do not get turbulance after the flange? Or would this be an insignificant gain by doing so in comparison to cost vs. gains/performance? What I mean by this is would you consider the negative effects of the turbulance created by just welding a round tube to a flange with an oval opening such as ours comparable to say the somewhat ineffecient piping design of the TN ST?
It seems that on some headers the tube fits into the flange opening and is welded on the back side that mates to the head. While on others it seems to be welded to the outside of the flange. Is one better than the other?
I have been told that it is a good idea to have the flanges resurfaced after welding in case there was warpage. Is this a good idea?
Since no two cylinders fire at the same time in our car you would think that the piping diameter would never have to be larger than one of the runners individually since there should (theoretically) be no accumulation of gases from multiple cylinders at once. However this does not mean that flow couldn't be increased by a larger diameter runner (as compared to stock). What would be considered a good diameter piping to make a log style header out of?
Other than that, since we are on the topic of headers. I do have a few questions regarding making them since I want to make sure that everything is done right this gets done.
Does it make a huge difference if you form the tubing that connects to the flanges so that it is oval shaped similar to the opening that way you do not get turbulance after the flange? Or would this be an insignificant gain by doing so in comparison to cost vs. gains/performance? What I mean by this is would you consider the negative effects of the turbulance created by just welding a round tube to a flange with an oval opening such as ours comparable to say the somewhat ineffecient piping design of the TN ST?
It seems that on some headers the tube fits into the flange opening and is welded on the back side that mates to the head. While on others it seems to be welded to the outside of the flange. Is one better than the other?
I have been told that it is a good idea to have the flanges resurfaced after welding in case there was warpage. Is this a good idea?
Since no two cylinders fire at the same time in our car you would think that the piping diameter would never have to be larger than one of the runners individually since there should (theoretically) be no accumulation of gases from multiple cylinders at once. However this does not mean that flow couldn't be increased by a larger diameter runner (as compared to stock). What would be considered a good diameter piping to make a log style header out of?
07-06-2006, 12:17 PM
#118
MIA,
I didn't mean that as a negative thing. By no means am I bashing the TN kit. In fact if I were to buy a kit I would buy the TN kit without second thought. I never thought that I was smarter either. I know that TN put a ton of research into their kit and it shows through how it performs to say the least.
I don't want to start a fight about the design of turbonetic's ST. Simply based on the the principles of turbocharger operation there are things about the TN kit that would not be considered the best. You want the shortest route for exhaust to flow from the head to the hot side of the turbo and the shorter the piping the better. Plain and simple. That does not mean that a kit cant have longer piping and still kick a$$ (which TN does). My point was that TN, when designing their kit, made sacrifices in the design of their kit at certain points inorder to meet their goals. They wanted a kit that allowed the person to have all the options that come with the car (A/C and PS), used stock headers and was affordable. Under no circumstances could they have made the most effecient ST with those goals. They had to give up a few things in order to do it. They did a darn good job in the end so please don't take offense to what I said. I was simply stating that there are certian things I am considering that would not be optimal for performance yet will not noticably take away from the performance of the kit and therefore should not be a hinderance.
Do you understand what I am saying now? I didn't mean to come off that way in the post before as I didn't even think twice that some TN owners might take offense to it.
Sorry.
I didn't mean that as a negative thing. By no means am I bashing the TN kit. In fact if I were to buy a kit I would buy the TN kit without second thought. I never thought that I was smarter either. I know that TN put a ton of research into their kit and it shows through how it performs to say the least.
I don't want to start a fight about the design of turbonetic's ST. Simply based on the the principles of turbocharger operation there are things about the TN kit that would not be considered the best. You want the shortest route for exhaust to flow from the head to the hot side of the turbo and the shorter the piping the better. Plain and simple. That does not mean that a kit cant have longer piping and still kick a$$ (which TN does). My point was that TN, when designing their kit, made sacrifices in the design of their kit at certain points inorder to meet their goals. They wanted a kit that allowed the person to have all the options that come with the car (A/C and PS), used stock headers and was affordable. Under no circumstances could they have made the most effecient ST with those goals. They had to give up a few things in order to do it. They did a darn good job in the end so please don't take offense to what I said. I was simply stating that there are certian things I am considering that would not be optimal for performance yet will not noticably take away from the performance of the kit and therefore should not be a hinderance.
Do you understand what I am saying now? I didn't mean to come off that way in the post before as I didn't even think twice that some TN owners might take offense to it.
Sorry.
07-06-2006, 12:20 PM
#119
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Escondido
Posts: 11,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Quamen
MIA,
I didn't mean that as a negative thing. By no means am I bashing the TN kit. In fact if I were to buy a kit I would buy the TN kit without second thought. I never thought that I was smarter either. I know that TN put a ton of research into their kit and it shows through how it performs to say the least.
I don't want to start a fight about the design of turbonetic's ST. Simply based on the the principles of turbocharger operation there are things about the TN kit that would not be considered the best. You want the shortest route for exhaust to flow from the head to the hot side of the turbo and the shorter the piping the better. Plain and simple. That does not mean that a kit cant have longer piping and still kick a$$ (which TN does). My point was that TN, when designing their kit, made sacrifices in the design of their kit at certain points inorder to meet their goals. They wanted a kit that allowed the person to have all the options that come with the car (A/C and PS), used stock headers and was affordable. Under no circumstances could they have made the most effecient ST with those goals. They had to give up a few things in order to do it. They did a darn good job in the end so please don't take offense to what I said. I was simply stating that there are certian things I am considering that would not be optimal for performance yet will not noticably take away from the performance of the kit and therefore should not be a hinderance.
Do you understand what I am saying now? I didn't mean to come off that way in the post before as I didn't even think twice that some TN owners might take offense to it.
Sorry.
I didn't mean that as a negative thing. By no means am I bashing the TN kit. In fact if I were to buy a kit I would buy the TN kit without second thought. I never thought that I was smarter either. I know that TN put a ton of research into their kit and it shows through how it performs to say the least.
I don't want to start a fight about the design of turbonetic's ST. Simply based on the the principles of turbocharger operation there are things about the TN kit that would not be considered the best. You want the shortest route for exhaust to flow from the head to the hot side of the turbo and the shorter the piping the better. Plain and simple. That does not mean that a kit cant have longer piping and still kick a$$ (which TN does). My point was that TN, when designing their kit, made sacrifices in the design of their kit at certain points inorder to meet their goals. They wanted a kit that allowed the person to have all the options that come with the car (A/C and PS), used stock headers and was affordable. Under no circumstances could they have made the most effecient ST with those goals. They had to give up a few things in order to do it. They did a darn good job in the end so please don't take offense to what I said. I was simply stating that there are certian things I am considering that would not be optimal for performance yet will not noticably take away from the performance of the kit and therefore should not be a hinderance.
Do you understand what I am saying now? I didn't mean to come off that way in the post before as I didn't even think twice that some TN owners might take offense to it.
Sorry.