TORSPD: NEVR

Injector Dynamics 1000cc injectors, AEM filter.

475whp and 549wtq @ 14.7psi in 4th Gear

 

First off, TORSPD thank you very much for putting up such detailed information regarding your build.

I just finished reading this thread and all i can say is wow. The build is amazing and i have subscribed to this thread.

I am new to the Taco world. Why did you choose the turbo route over the supercharger? I currently drive an EVO X that was recently dyno'd at 370hp/380torque with a custom tune. It is running AMS intake and Akrapovic exhaust without a cat. The stock injctors and pump are running at 90% capacity. What i still dont understand is how difficult it is to get more power out of the Toyota 4L in the Tacoma? Its seems like a platform that should make more power.

 

Welcome to the site angdefeo. Also, thank you.

As for the TRD s/c, the reason (were i to do this all over again) is simple. The power per psi on a turbo setup, say at ~8 psi, averages 400 whp and 440 wtq. On the TRD, that same ~8psi will get you between 315 and 330. Depending on the supporting mods. To get close to the cost of a good turbo kit, you will need to spend nearly the same amount of money, but you would still be less while also closely maxing out the s/c in its base form.

Turbo is just far more adaptable to the user's wants as well as upgradable.

The 4.0 makes power very easily with a turbo. The s/c just isn't nearly as efficient. Put rods and pistons, head studs and head gaskets, and you are good for 600 whp, and long as all of your other supporting mods are ready for that. Already been done by another. I just had prior problems that were holding me back. I still wanted to make the no nonsense proof though.

On my last dyno, before I upgraded the fuel pump to the Aeromotive Stealth 340lph, my 1000cc Injector Dynamics injectors were at 55% duty cycle. Lol. Plenty left in those.

However, since I plan on running E85 with a flex fuel sensor, and E85 requires ~30% more fuel, I am upgrading to the 2000cc injectors. Come retune time.

 

Is the S/C really that inefficient compared to a turbo? Correct me if I am wrong, but I would think as far as power goes psi is psi. So the factor in the difference isn't how much psi is made, but how much power it takes to make that psi right?

For example, say the N/A 4.0 makes 200 hp, adding 8 psi to it it can generate 500hp, but the S/C only makes 300hp and the turbo only makes 400hp. So essentially it costs 200hp for the S/C to make 8 psi and it costs the turbo 100hp to make 8 psi. Is this roughly correct or is there just way more to this?

 

The way a supercharger works is directly related to how much power it can make vs a turbo. The supercharger spins by way of the energy created by the crank shaft. A turbo harnesses "wasted" energy from the exhaust expelled from the heads. By not having to be driven by the engine and also utilizing the volume of heat and air from the exhaust a turbo is more efficient than a supercharger netting more power in a psi vs psi comparison, however that is not a good way of measuring power. Psi's can change from exhaust setups, atmosphere conditions, etc, too many variables. A better way of measuring power is the amount of air moved by volume. The TRD unit for the 1gr is even more inefficient as it tends to suffer from heat soaking as a result of its roots style design and small coolant capacity.

 

I guess I haven't really thought of it as wasted energy. I viewed it as being driven out when the piston compresses the cylinder again with the exhaust valve open (4th part of stroke) and that piston is being driven by another piston combusting so it is energy from the engine in the first place.

The only way I can think of it being wasted energy is if the cylinder is still under pressure after combustion so that when the exhaust valve opens air starts rushing out on it's own before the cylinder starts to compress it. (Granted that energy came from the gas but in an N/A motor that would be unused energy sent out the exhaust anyway) I would think that would be minimal though, especially once that turbo starts trying to hit higher psi's it will start getting harder to spin and I would think that it would start to back up the exhaust making the engine have to work harder to clear the exhaust out of the cylinder after combustion.

Clearly turbo's are more efficient, because they make more power at the same psi, but I wouldn't think it would be that big of a difference.

 

You hit the nail on the head.. at BDC on the exhaust stroke, the burned exhaust gases are stil under substantial pressure and are still ~1500 F . The turbine does not work on just pressure difference, it also works on temperature difference as the two are very closely related. The gases going through the turbine are cooling off and expanding.. The shape of this passage is described mathematically by the A/R rating on the turbine housing. The total energy of the exhaust gas is its presure and its high temperature. Going across he turbine it loses both pressure and thermal energy by doing work on the spinning turbine.
So the energy to spin the turbo is free, but it comes at a cost of the restriction of the turbne being placed in the exhaust stream. This higher backpressure causes the cylinders to not empty *quite* as much as wen no turbo is there. BUT since the whole turbo system put so much into the cylinder in the first place, it does not matter that much cmpared to the gans from having so much more unburned air and fuel to start from.

The supercharger system has no exhaust restriction, but it has a cost of the direct work from he crank pulley being transfered to it to do the compression. This direct cost is 20-50+ hp on street cars.. Tthe SC is basically a 50 hp air pump. The total power produced by a SC motor is prety close to the total produced by the turbo motor, it just uses a lot of that power produced to spin the SC. If you figured out exactly how much power was spinning the SC, and added that to the SC output and then compared it to the turbo output, the reason it would still be a little bit lower is the efficiency differences. The lower efficiency pump basically heats the air more to get it to the same pressure. Density is the total amount of air and is a nearly linar relationship between temperature and pressure... this means 7 psi on a 50% pump is not the same as 7 psi on a high efficiency pump because the low %eff pump has a much hotter output than the more %eff pump. Hotter air is less dense, and cannot handle as much ignition advance, so that combination means the lower %eff pump ( which is usually a SC, but modern centrifugal SC's are better than older turbos) fills the cylinder with a lower total amount of air to burn. This is why EMS systems work on mass, not pressure. A MAF measures mass directly, a MAP measures pressure along with a temp sensor and calculats mass on the fly. when you datalog you see grams / second, or lb/ hr for air flow.

 

Here is a beginning reference to see the differences between efficiencies between the two setups. Toon used to have a TRD s/c. At 8 psi with the URD 2.85 pulley, DTLT headers, TRD gen 1 intake, custom 3" catback and URD y-pipe, on the trd reflash, his best numbers were 315whp and and 325 wtq. http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/performance-tuning/156782-trd-s-c-dyno-results.html

On his turbo setup, still using the same DTLT's and the TRD reflash, a Garrett GT3582R with TiAL stainless turbine housing @ 1.09 A/R, on 6 psi of boost, he made 344whp and 377 wtq He will be tuning for 8psi this weekend. Then we will have a better comparison between similar psi levels, and volume outputs because this is the same truck.

As he increases the boost on the turbo, he will be in a more efficient area of that turbo, so the output at 8 psi will not likely be a proprtional increase. But better than. Testing will tell.

Also, keep in mind this. Amount of hp per psi boost. The more efficient the system, the higher the HP per psi. Clearly already his setup, you can see that there is a higher HP/psi on the turbo than the s/c.

Edited with link of Toon comment.

 

interesting...

 

Didn't recognize you Jerez. New avatar got me.

 

Couple other things. Since I mentioned that I will be upgrading my injectors, here is a link to them. Also, with the help of Toon, we were able to get Dezod to be possibly the first vendor to carry PNP harnesses for the Injector Dynamics brand Injectors. Benefits everyone, by keeping things simple.

http://www.dezod.com/pd-injector-dynamics-fuel-injectors.cfm

I also recently learned that I am running a Mishimoto or equivalent intercooler. Not good enough. So did some research, and came up with the next intercooler setup I will run. Will post links to that as well.

 

gotta respect my authorita lol

 

This is the intercooler, but only going to actually purchase the core.

http://www.dezod.com/pd-garrett-complete.cfm

Then I will have these end tanks added to it.

http://www.treadstoneperformance.co...prodname=Treadstone+E1235+Intercooler+Endtank

Those end tanks have a diverter in them, to make sure that all of the air flows through the core, and doesn't create and eddie current in the bottom of the core.

 

I'm soooo lost.

 

x2, the man knows his stuff.

 

i hated my TuRD s/c!
its crap for 4k. lol

i make way more power with my front mount setup.
i should be making close to 400rwhp and 420+tq@ 8psi.
instead of 315rwhp and 325tq @ 8psi off the TuRD s/c.

 

This sumarizes it perfectly.

It was good meeting up with you again Large. Truck is looking bad ass, I must say. Also, thank you again for buying my driveshaft.

 

Angdefeo, how many psi are you running on your EVO?

 

Much better, Thank you!

 

My pleasure sir. Lol