|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100
Addicted CEG\'er
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100 |
Yeah.. exaggeration.. like wanting a "mere" 250WHEEL hp from a 170CRANK hp ATX tour.. WITHOUT a quality turbo, AND cheap!
Ray
'99 CSVT - Silver #222/276
In a constant state of blow-off euphoria.
Originally posted by Kremitthefrog:
I like to wear dresses and use binoculars to watch grandmas across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117 |
ok i made the turbo kit for my lightning, so why couldnt i fab up a kit for a contour??? does this car use some kind of magical technology that makes my abilities just vanish when it comes to constructing something???
i really did pay a buck for the car, it was essentially a gift from an aunt since i helped take care of her before she went into an assisted living complex.
i realize that it would take a few hours on a dyno to get the tune all lined out and running properly. also, i know that i would also have to upgrade the fuel pump and run larger injectors, probably gen2 lightning 42lb'ers. i realize the crap auto trans would probably die after a while, so obviously a rebuild would be in order sometime in the future.
now trust me im not trying to be a know all here, because i know very little about these wrong wheel drive cars. ive also dabbled in the turbo 4cyl fords. if a t3 turbo like i was referring to earlier made 150hp non intercooled on a 2.3 that normally aspirated made about 85-90 hp at the wheels, why wouldnt something vaguely similar happen on a contour that is probaby making 130hp or so at the wheels. this isnt going to be some 300 hp drag strip terror like others on this board, just something thats a little quicker.
like i said i am not claiming to be some know it all but some of the crap some of you guys are saying just doesnt seem to make much sense to me.
'96 Contour GL ATX 2.5 v6 -- Daily Driver
'93 SVT Lightning -- The Toy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
You obviously are not mapping out your ideas.
Do some math and figure out what pressure ratio would be required on the tiny T3 to generate any worthwhile power gains. (stock is ~18psi on the 200 crank HP 2.3L IIRC  ) Then consider all the heat introduced from running that high of a pressure ratio. Then consider the stock compression is 9.7 to 1.
You want to size the turbo so you can run a lower pressure ratio while still being in the peak efficiency range so the heat introduced is the lowest possible. Then you'll still want an intercooler or a band aid approach like water/meth injection. (yes it works but it's definitely not ideal by itself!)
Then figure to spend just as much on the POS slushbox.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
Trying to make an ATX Contour fast is like trying to polish a turd, no matter how shiny you get it - it'll still be a turd. The CD4E is nothing like the Auto in your lightning. It's heavy, weak, too big for it's own good and won't take much of a beating without spending SERIOUS money on it - which in the end will still be slower than a MTX AND from what I gather you want to go budget.
You're basically starting off on the toally wrong foot by trying to hot up "Nanna's Car". 
If it were an MTX - it'd be a whole different story - but yes you NEED to go do some clcs on turbo sizing as you're clueless.
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117 |
Originally posted by Stazi:
Trying to make an ATX Contour fast is like trying to polish a turd, no matter how shiny you get it - it'll still be a turd. The CD4E is nothing like the Auto in your lightning. It's heavy, weak, too big for it's own good and won't take much of a beating without spending SERIOUS money on it - which in the end will still be slower than a MTX AND from what I gather you want to go budget.
i know but i felt it was my obligation to at least try to polish it up a little bit. i will probably just stick with the suspension mods and maybe exhaust and leave it at that. hopefully messing with the suspension and the exhaust will make it a little bit more enjoyable to drive around. if not i could always get the v6 5 speed sho that ive been wanting for a few years now and give this to the girlfriend to drive around.
on the tranny aspect, my lightning is a '93. they had the crappiest trannies of all of the lightnings made. ive actually had my truck for 5 years and put 35k on it and im getting ready to put the 3rd trans in this truck. the first rebuild didnt get all of the upgrades that the later models came stock with.
'96 Contour GL ATX 2.5 v6 -- Daily Driver
'93 SVT Lightning -- The Toy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
Regardless.............the tranny in your truck is made for a truck, hence it is a little more robust than the complete POS they slapped into the Contour.
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 117 |
i was in no way trying to defend the trans in my truck, its just as worthless as the auto in a contour. if you read the post you would see that i wasnt defending the auto trans at all. the trucks trans is barely adequate for a stock vehicle, hence why it blew with my only mods being an e fans, exhaust, and an airfilter. it is definately not up to the task, just as the atx isnt in a contour.
demonsvt -- congrats on those times, thats really respectable for an n/a motor.
im hoping that my trucks engine runs mid 13's n/a. at 8.5:1 comp that will be a feat. im hoping to turn mid 11's with the turbo setup tuned.
'96 Contour GL ATX 2.5 v6 -- Daily Driver
'93 SVT Lightning -- The Toy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3
Newbie
|
|
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
You obviously are not mapping out your ideas.
Do some math and figure out what pressure ratio would be required on the tiny T3 to generate any worthwhile power gains. (stock is ~18psi on the 200 crank HP 2.3L IIRC ) Then consider all the heat introduced from running that high of a pressure ratio. Then consider the stock compression is 9.7 to 1.
You want to size the turbo so you can run a lower pressure ratio while still being in the peak efficiency range so the heat introduced is the lowest possible. Then you'll still want an intercooler or a band aid approach like water/meth injection. (yes it works but it's definitely not ideal by itself!)
Then figure to spend just as much on the POS slushbox.
Uhh, what?
1. Stock on the best engines is only 15 psi and 200 HP, the 87-88 TC made 190 crank HP with an IHI(SMALLER than a T3) and at 15 psi, but could run up to 18 psi, which is over 200 crank HP obviously, so no you don't remember correctly. I have had an IHI car at around 240 WHP and another Turboford guy has knocked out 13s in a 3700 lb car. The T3 is much larger and is capable of 300 WHP. With a bigger engine that 300 WHP simply happens at a LOWER pressure ratio. Compression has nothing to do with it and only limits max boost due to detonation, the higher compression and bigger displacement simply results in a super quick spooling torque monster that is limited to 9 psi boost, maybe 15. And unless you've been through three different turbos to know how they all feel, you can't really appreciate a small turbo the way I do. Everything's speculation until you look at a compressor map.
My estimations from a 60 Trim map show over 65% efficiency at 240 WHP or so. That's darn good in my book for a junkyard setup, with a good intercooler it's not even an issue, especially with a bigger housing like a .82 A/R exhaust hsg. No where near overspeeding the turbo either. And who said T3s weren't good quality? Millions of production cars sure seem to work just fine with them? Just because the GT series or a hybrid is new and shiny does that make it better? Not always, and they're a lot more expensive. And to think that headers and intake would give you the jump a "measly" T3 would give is just preposterous.
2. Let the freakin' tranny blow, who cares? If it blows then put something better in. Stop crying about how it'll never last, if you want to make power then you have to deal with the consequences. Matt obviously understands that $hit breaks or he wouldn't be messing with turbos to begin with. And why make an attack on his person? He was just asking a question, just because he could search and find that everyone else uses "X" turbo doesn't mean that's all that will work.
Oh and water and methanol is not a band aid. 28 psi on pump gas tells the whole story, and it's been done. How much boost were you running again?
What an excellent first post...
-John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
The T3 in question flows about 320cfm at 15psi. (I have the compressor map btw) That wouldn't even break 200 wheels through the ATX. I'm not saying it wouldn't make life much more liveable but you are never going to get remotely close to 300 wheels with it. With nearly any T3 actually. The entire point I was trying to make is you just don't go throwing things together haphazardly. (well at least shouldn't  ) You should do some homework. You had one very good and clear point in your post. "Everything's speculation until you look at a compressor map." I couldn't agree more. In fact I even stated it discreetly myself in the post you quoted didn't I. Another point of my post. 
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,065
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,065 |
Just because someone isn't running boost on their car doesn't mean they have no knowledge on the subject. 
|
|
|
|
|
