New Front Mount Turbo kit - Nelson Performance -built by Trick Performance
Oct 19, 2006 | 08:29 PM
#41
Originally Posted by parish8
with the cmotorsports kit wich was very similur to this one i made 640rwhp with a single t76. this was with a small air to water intercooler.
later i upgraded to a header where the dirvers side didn't plumb thru the pasenger header. it went right to the turbo. with that upgrade and a step up to a 3.5" dp i still dynoed 640rwhp. to me this says i was just out of turbo before.
what i am saying is i see no reason why this kit wont support 700+rwhp with a gts76 and from what i understand any turbo up to a gts76 will bolt right up but might have a slightly larger compresor outlet.
i think anyturbo header will need some matainance over time. the harder you push it and the hotter it gets the sooner it will need a little TLC. the longer primarys look a little funny on that header but i can see how it might help prevent the header from cracking.
there are always people that jump in and complain how the headers or pipes could be done more efficently. looking at my current set up i would have to say i have some of the worst designed headers ever and my wg locations are horriable but guess what. it works prety good. it would be better to spend your time figuring out how you are going to get 700ft/lbs to the ground.
every set up will be a little diferent but from my experience with the non intercooler whipple and several diferent turbo set ups i would say without an intercooler this would be safe to around 6psi. add meth or an intercooler and probably be safe up to about 10psi. add both and push it to ~14psi.
with the little 62 turbo it should spool real fast and probably max out around 500rwhp if turned up. i dont think the stock injectors will even carry things to 6psi but the stock fuel pump will hold to over 400rwhp.
it would be great to see more guys around here with front mount turbo kits on their trucks.
later i upgraded to a header where the dirvers side didn't plumb thru the pasenger header. it went right to the turbo. with that upgrade and a step up to a 3.5" dp i still dynoed 640rwhp. to me this says i was just out of turbo before.
what i am saying is i see no reason why this kit wont support 700+rwhp with a gts76 and from what i understand any turbo up to a gts76 will bolt right up but might have a slightly larger compresor outlet.
i think anyturbo header will need some matainance over time. the harder you push it and the hotter it gets the sooner it will need a little TLC. the longer primarys look a little funny on that header but i can see how it might help prevent the header from cracking.
there are always people that jump in and complain how the headers or pipes could be done more efficently. looking at my current set up i would have to say i have some of the worst designed headers ever and my wg locations are horriable but guess what. it works prety good. it would be better to spend your time figuring out how you are going to get 700ft/lbs to the ground.
every set up will be a little diferent but from my experience with the non intercooler whipple and several diferent turbo set ups i would say without an intercooler this would be safe to around 6psi. add meth or an intercooler and probably be safe up to about 10psi. add both and push it to ~14psi.
with the little 62 turbo it should spool real fast and probably max out around 500rwhp if turned up. i dont think the stock injectors will even carry things to 6psi but the stock fuel pump will hold to over 400rwhp.
it would be great to see more guys around here with front mount turbo kits on their trucks.
Crack the throttle and boosting pretty quick.
Thanks for chiming in about the manifolds.
Oct 19, 2006 | 08:35 PM
#42
Originally Posted by lafnlt1
so how long do you think it will take for the pass, side manifold to break apart under the weight and stress of the turbo and down pipe weight? stainless steel will break and crack.
The weight of the turbo is really held up by the manifold and the downpipe.
If the manifold would crack, it is covered under the 1yr. warranty.
Oct 19, 2006 | 08:46 PM
#43
I put down 539rwhp 578rwtq on a cam'd 6.0, 9:1 comp, 317 heads with mild port work, 10 psi gts76, no meth, with FMIC and only on 7 cyls. I gaulded a piston and got lots of blowby on the dyno due to a bad injector leaning it out. I continued to tune unsure what the blowby was from and put out my max power on 7 cyls come to find out later. It was with a system almost identical to yours (see link in my sig) with a log manifold.
What i'm getting at here, log manifolds may not flow as well as merged headers but they are cheap, and for 99.9% of people that drive something on the street.....they perform more than well enough.
What i'm getting at here, log manifolds may not flow as well as merged headers but they are cheap, and for 99.9% of people that drive something on the street.....they perform more than well enough.
Oct 19, 2006 | 10:49 PM
#45
Originally Posted by TurboGibbs
Another thing, people are worried about them cracking so how about offering an option out of mild steel that is ceramic coated inside and out?
Oct 20, 2006 | 12:46 AM
#46
No doubt log manifolds work. They have for years (production and aftermarket) and we've all seen several cases where they exceed expectations (TTi, CMotorsports, Parish's one off, Bank's kit etc). Are they the most ideal and perfect design? No, but as with any decision in building a street/strip vehicle its about compramises. If you're building an all out race effort truck, then a log might not be for you. I mean were not all building Champ cars here.
From a manufacturing standpoint, a log is probably best to deal with. It's easily produced with consistency (jigging, fixtures etc) and from service/diagnosis/warranty standpoint its the easiest to deal with (less welds). If it does crack, it's easier to find and repair.
I'm not bashing them, but Livernois made a kit that had a nice tubular manifold and look where that got them.
I wouldn't limit yourself to saying that this is a starter kit either, because I'm sure it will easily support 500rwhp with the turbo provided. For most, 500rwhp is not a starting point.
I'm curious of the reasoning behind the wastegate location. Why only vent the crossover tube? Why not put it at the end of the log? Was it a packaging reason?
From a manufacturing standpoint, a log is probably best to deal with. It's easily produced with consistency (jigging, fixtures etc) and from service/diagnosis/warranty standpoint its the easiest to deal with (less welds). If it does crack, it's easier to find and repair.
I'm not bashing them, but Livernois made a kit that had a nice tubular manifold and look where that got them.
I wouldn't limit yourself to saying that this is a starter kit either, because I'm sure it will easily support 500rwhp with the turbo provided. For most, 500rwhp is not a starting point.
I'm curious of the reasoning behind the wastegate location. Why only vent the crossover tube? Why not put it at the end of the log? Was it a packaging reason?
Oct 20, 2006 | 07:10 AM
#47
Originally Posted by vanillagorilla
No doubt log manifolds work. They have for years (production and aftermarket) and we've all seen several cases where they exceed expectations (TTi, CMotorsports, Parish's one off, Bank's kit etc). Are they the most ideal and perfect design? No, but as with any decision in building a street/strip vehicle its about compramises. If you're building an all out race effort truck, then a log might not be for you. I mean were not all building Champ cars here.
From a manufacturing standpoint, a log is probably best to deal with. It's easily produced with consistency (jigging, fixtures etc) and from service/diagnosis/warranty standpoint its the easiest to deal with (less welds). If it does crack, it's easier to find and repair.
I'm not bashing them, but Livernois made a kit that had a nice tubular manifold and look where that got them.
I wouldn't limit yourself to saying that this is a starter kit either, because I'm sure it will easily support 500rwhp with the turbo provided. For most, 500rwhp is not a starting point.
I'm curious of the reasoning behind the wastegate location. Why only vent the crossover tube? Why not put it at the end of the log? Was it a packaging reason?
From a manufacturing standpoint, a log is probably best to deal with. It's easily produced with consistency (jigging, fixtures etc) and from service/diagnosis/warranty standpoint its the easiest to deal with (less welds). If it does crack, it's easier to find and repair.
I'm not bashing them, but Livernois made a kit that had a nice tubular manifold and look where that got them.
I wouldn't limit yourself to saying that this is a starter kit either, because I'm sure it will easily support 500rwhp with the turbo provided. For most, 500rwhp is not a starting point.
I'm curious of the reasoning behind the wastegate location. Why only vent the crossover tube? Why not put it at the end of the log? Was it a packaging reason?
. It gives a person a well build starter piece that they can leave alone or expands to other items. As in larger turbo, a2a intercoolers, a2w intercoolers, twins, etc. The 500hp level would be at the end of the turbos air flow I feel. And need alot of tuning, meth, ic etc to make that happen.The layout is just the start, that lends itself to those add ons. I felt the price point warrantied the term INTRO kit.
The waste gates location has many resons.
Being down low you are are controlling the heat that the gate gives off just from absorbation.
IF you want a loud gate you just filp it, and have it vent to the atomsphere. You just plug the downpipe connection. This also helps for turning if you need to confirm the gate is opening.
Running a longer down pipe connection point, gives that piece of tubing (downpipe) more room to move. If the gate is in the log and the down pipe that is a very RIGID mount.
All the hot parts are allow to move around from the heat they are creating. WE all know when something gets hot it expands, that is what I mean by moving.
Right now you have roughly 3 ft of down pipe and easily 3 ft of log between the gate and turbo mounts. Now if we move the gate to the top closer to the turbo that spec could be cut down to just 6 inches on both legs. The pipe will have a much harder time moving and flexing with that short spec.
Also having the gate down low helped in adding that 2nd flex joint. That little joint allows the down pipe to move, but still helps support the exhaust you are connecting to the down pipe.
Feel free to ask away about the kit, or its parts.
Oct 20, 2006 | 07:50 AM
#49
turbo
You make people feel warm and fussy about this kit especially when you give such detailed explanation on how and what it does and the mechanics behind it.
I have a question?? I just purchased another Silverado it is an 06 LT with the 5.3. My questions is I just purchased and installed LT headers on it. Is there no way you can use them with the TURBO? I see in the instructions it states that the one side keeps the header and the other uses the manifold? Can you not use the header for both or make it so that you can?
Hope I made sense here?
I have a question?? I just purchased another Silverado it is an 06 LT with the 5.3. My questions is I just purchased and installed LT headers on it. Is there no way you can use them with the TURBO? I see in the instructions it states that the one side keeps the header and the other uses the manifold? Can you not use the header for both or make it so that you can?
Hope I made sense here?
Oct 20, 2006 | 09:32 AM
#50
Staging Lane
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: Nova Scotia, Canada
Turbo advice
The TrickPerformance kit does not mention larger injectors.
If a 100% stock 5.3 is used, are the stock injectors adequate? Fuel pump?
What is a realistic life span of the tubing?
I live in Canada, east coast. The winters can go back and forth between freezing and thawing with large amounts of salt added to the roads.
Around here there is a market for used oil pans if you get my meaning.
What would be better, the .065 SS or a little thicker mild steel with ceramic coating?
raisin
If a 100% stock 5.3 is used, are the stock injectors adequate? Fuel pump?
What is a realistic life span of the tubing?
I live in Canada, east coast. The winters can go back and forth between freezing and thawing with large amounts of salt added to the roads.
Around here there is a market for used oil pans if you get my meaning.
What would be better, the .065 SS or a little thicker mild steel with ceramic coating?
raisin