who has lifted a 5.3 head?
#11
yes, its all kinda adding up to looking like a very good build. the ideas are all in my head as to why but i don't know the terms to put them out there. lol Another plus is going to only a 3.8" bore that leaves me a whole lot of meat on the cyl walls too.
right now i am still researching parts, i'm going with twins this time around off stock manifolds. i made a thread to help decide what turbo's but nobody replied.
i was going to do a duramax swap but i wound up deploying to a place where i make no money so thats not going to work out.
right now i am still researching parts, i'm going with twins this time around off stock manifolds. i made a thread to help decide what turbo's but nobody replied.
i was going to do a duramax swap but i wound up deploying to a place where i make no money so thats not going to work out.
#20
Slowest turbo build ever!
iTrader: (2)
I dont remember where I got my formula but I use
(max RPMxCI)/3456 = engine CFM
then get airflow(lb/min) with overall PSI
((14.7+desired psi) x CFM x 29)/(10.73x560) = LB/MIN
and then I always did whatever number I got i took 20% out assuming the engine by itself is only 80% VE.
For Pressure ratio I use
(14.7+desired PSI)/14.7 = PR
But Im not sure what the difference in plotting maps for single vs twins would be.
And here is how my map came out when I did it for my truck at 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16psi.
(max RPMxCI)/3456 = engine CFM
then get airflow(lb/min) with overall PSI
((14.7+desired psi) x CFM x 29)/(10.73x560) = LB/MIN
and then I always did whatever number I got i took 20% out assuming the engine by itself is only 80% VE.
For Pressure ratio I use
(14.7+desired PSI)/14.7 = PR
But Im not sure what the difference in plotting maps for single vs twins would be.
And here is how my map came out when I did it for my truck at 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16psi.