Become a ltxtech.com member, Click here to register!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    Lurker


    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Name
    Guillaume
    Vehicle
    95 Caprice & 89 RX7
    Location
    Montreal, Qc
    Posts
    334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swiggart View Post
    Hey man, see you have an rx7 similar to mine. Just curious what your car is running for times and traps.
    It's really not that fast right now, mainly due to the exhaust that's choking the motor... it has a nice NA stroker but the headers are 1.5" primaries into dual 2.25" exhaust then into a single 3" pipe to the back.
    It ran 12.0 @ 117 mph in the summer heat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Swiggart View Post
    Also, I get pressure from the block and then send it back to the pan, would I be able to run it to the valve cover or would that cause problems?
    A turbo drains by gravity, so the drain line has to go towards the ground without going up.
    If you want to drain into the valve cover you'll need a scavenge pump. They are popular in applications where the turbos are mounted low.
    1989 Mazda RX7 Turbo II, 357ci LT1, AI TFS CNC heads, Garrett GTX4708R, Ford 8.8" SAS, TH400. (Current project)
    1995 Chevy Caprice, Twin turbo 357ci LT1, 9.96 @ 141.2 mph (sold)

  2. #22
    InActive Member


    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Vehicle
    1991 RX7
    Location
    Wichita KS
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GuillaumeC View Post
    It's really not that fast right now, mainly due to the exhaust that's choking the motor... it has a nice NA stroker but the headers are 1.5" primaries into dual 2.25" exhaust then into a single 3" pipe to the back.
    It ran 12.0 @ 117 mph in the summer heat.



    A turbo drains by gravity, so the drain line has to go towards the ground without going up.
    If you want to drain into the valve cover you'll need a scavenge pump. They are popular in applications where the turbos are mounted low.
    Okay, so I use the pressure from the block to the turbo, then I need the drain to be lower than the turbo if I dont want a scavenge pump. I will get a nice list of parts I need and post it up here and see what i am missing. Thanks alot everyone. I will be needing more help probably sooner than later but all of your opinions are appreciated!

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Swiggart For This Post:


  4. #23
    InActive Member


    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Vehicle
    1991 RX7
    Location
    Wichita KS
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GuillaumeC View Post
    It's really not that fast right now, mainly due to the exhaust that's choking the motor... it has a nice NA stroker but the headers are 1.5" primaries into dual 2.25" exhaust then into a single 3" pipe to the back.
    It ran 12.0 @ 117 mph in the summer heat.



    A turbo drains by gravity, so the drain line has to go towards the ground without going up.
    If you want to drain into the valve cover you'll need a scavenge pump. They are popular in applications where the turbos are mounted low.
    Quote Originally Posted by shownomercy View Post
    A T6 turbo and a light weight car seems like a horrible idea to me for a car that wants to be a decent daily driver.

    I have the same turbo as fastbird, and its great, snappy response around the town and it does pretty well for a "tiny T4 flange" unit.
    Is a 10.0 compression motor too much? I want to go with a t76 .96 ar turbo, intercooler, and have the engine how it is other than change to a turbo cam. How much boost could I run on 93 octane fuel, with the setup above? The engine only has a few hundred miles, but my auto teacher with a few turbo sbc'sis wanting will help build it so I want to do the turbo setup now. I think the 10.0 compression with a turbo cam and 93 octane should be sufficient to run boost, but how much?

  5. #24

    Default

    Where are you getting 93 around here? 10.0 isnt bad as long as the tuning is good. Few hundred miles on a stock rebuild? If its stock crank, rods, pistons id only do 6-7. Could you do more, yes... but even at 6-7 it could last 10,000 miles, or 100...

    Making you silky smooth...

  6. #25
    InActive Member


    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Vehicle
    1991 RX7
    Location
    Wichita KS
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GuillaumeC View Post
    It's really not that fast right now, mainly due to the exhaust that's choking the motor... it has a nice NA stroker but the headers are 1.5" primaries into dual 2.25" exhaust then into a single 3" pipe to the back.
    It ran 12.0 @ 117 mph in the summer heat.



    A turbo drains by gravity, so the drain line has to go towards the ground without going up.
    If you want to drain into the valve cover you'll need a scavenge pump. They are popular in applications where the turbos are mounted low.
    Quote Originally Posted by ZOHAN View Post
    Where are you getting 93 around here? 10.0 isnt bad as long as the tuning is good. Few hundred miles on a stock rebuild? If its stock crank, rods, pistons id only do 6-7. Could you do more, yes... but even at 6-7 it could last 10,000 miles, or 100...

    Making you silky smooth...
    There is no 93 that I know of, but I have found by doing some researching that you can mix toluene in with 91 and get 93 with a 15-20% of toluene. It has forged crank, x rods, and high quality cast pistons (better than average). I plan to get a base tune through mail and then dyno tune at a shop my girlfriends dad is friends with. This is a long term build but it should be up and going be for summers over.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Swiggart For This Post:


  8. #26
    Lurker


    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Name
    Guillaume
    Vehicle
    95 Caprice & 89 RX7
    Location
    Montreal, Qc
    Posts
    334

    Default

    With a good tune it should be OK as long as you dont go crazy with the boost and timing advance.
    Forget the gasoline additive, get water/meth injection instead.
    1989 Mazda RX7 Turbo II, 357ci LT1, AI TFS CNC heads, Garrett GTX4708R, Ford 8.8" SAS, TH400. (Current project)
    1995 Chevy Caprice, Twin turbo 357ci LT1, 9.96 @ 141.2 mph (sold)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •