turbonator
Member
Have tools, will travel.....at least to Windsor...LOL.
-
Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.
Your truck knowledge is missing!
- Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
- We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
- Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
- NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
Problems registering? Click here to contact us!
Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!
600 lbs of TQ possible ??
- Thread starter Mike K3500
- Start date
sshewins
Jesus Freak
GW, just a quick thought on thermal efficiencies and air flow/volume. 1st, couldn't we have the face (?) of the head ceramic coated, as well as the exhaust runner/bowl area? This should help keep some of the heat out of the head and in the turbo where it belongs. 2nd, didn't Ted 635 (IIRC) have extrude hone done to his heads and out flow the bejeebers out of Bill Heath's lsr's 6.5 heads with the 6.2 valves?
great white
Well-Known Member
Off the top of my head:
2010 optimizer 6500 ordered through GM parts
Ip - stock ds4
injectors - stock. Bought through Heath
Turbo - stock gm8. Bought through gm parts early 2010
Turbo master
Exhaust - 2.5 crossover, warpspeed. 4" diamond eye. No cat convertor.
PCM - Heath or I flash my own mix (tunercat II and Westers vdf for the cal). Depends on the day.
Intake - stock. K47 rpo with a k&n
Devils own progressive WMI. pretty much used for towing only.
Various other goodies, mostly related to reliability or monitoring ( ie: high flow water pump, Heath pmd, duraterms, gauges, etc)
I've some plans for it this year in the engine bay, but they're just plans an related more to lower temps as much as performance. Mostly denser air in.....
I don't have access to a dyno where I live. Damn island. About all I have for numbers is "dynolicious" which is an iPhone app that calculates g's, weight and time to arrive at numbers. About the same idea as a gtech.
Best I could measure so far has been 12 sec 0-60 and 198 hp.
It doesn't know rpm so it can't calculate that. I'm not watching the tach either ( as if it were good enough to actually depend on :rolleyes5
)The app numbers are a little low. I can't get the truck out of the hole without massive wheel spin. I have to heavily pedal the throttle to get it moving. Nailing it from a stop gets nothing but tire smoke and a sideways rear for 10-15 feet. You can see it in my 60 foot times:
3:32 @ 21.9 mph
That's miserable, even for a truck.
Boosted launches are out of the question.
Once the weather gets nice again (ie: summer), I'm going to play around with some stuff to see if I can get it to hook. Ie: tire pressure, 4wd launch, etc.
The numbers are more a curiosity thing for me. Truck hauls the trailer where ever i want and gets men to work every day in all weather.
That's the nut.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
great white
Well-Known Member
I'll try a response with my limited knowledge later, tough to type on an iPhone...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mike K3500
Member
Maybe considering a WAY better turbo to compliment everything else while you're in the engine bay next ??
I would like to see / hear your thoughts and response to such, as other members response' have been feeling like a whole new animal... (my interpretation)
I would like to see / hear your thoughts and response to such, as other members response' have been feeling like a whole new animal... (my interpretation)
great white
Well-Known Member
Ceramic musings
First off, a disclaimer:
I’m certainly no expert (nor claim to be) on the intricacies of thermodynamics or ceramic coatings. I’m Just a guy who likes to read technical papers, bat theory around until it makes sense to me and maybe put some of it into practice once in a while.
Most of my practical experience with ceramics has to do with high speed spherical bearings and the benefits in wear and friction characteristics of that application (I trust my life to them every day). That’s why Stanadyne starting coating DS4 parts in it in newer replacement units; Superior wear and friction properties.
But I’ll do my best to give some thoughts that I feel may be relevant on the matter of a reciprocating engine. You gents will have to decide for yourself if I’m “full of it” or not…..
As I understand it, ceramic coatings are more for thermal barrier than producing power. Although there is some common ground there based on my rather simplistic understanding of thermodynamics.
Ceramic on a piston crown is primarily for protection. It provides a thermal barrier to protect the aluminum from high combustion temperatures. As I understand it, it can be as much as another 200 degrees of additional tolerance. It prevents/inhibits heat transfer into the piston material, so that is theoretically more energy available to provide MEP (translation: Mean Effective Pressure = more force pushing the piston down).
There could be some benefits to coating the precombustion chambers, but I’m a bit leery of that. Precombustion chambers are a funny bit of engineering and often don’t seem react the way you think they would for a given modification. I suspect it has to do with the fact there are so many different things going on in the chamber during any given point of the 4 cycles. Coating the chambers (all of it, not just the inserts) would form a thermal barrier and could lead to lower ECT’s. Very important in an IDI design where so much heat is retained in the heads and imparted to the cooling system. There could also be a benefit due to less energy lost in the prechamber and subsequently transferred to the main chamber, thus available to contribute to MEP at the piston "face".
The possible drawback is that heat is a part of the precombustion chambers scheme in breaking up the coarse fuel spray of the 6.X engines. The prechamber may still retain sufficient heat, it may not. Only one way to find out.....
Swirl/turbulence/tumbling is the other factor at play in the precombustion chamber. Whether the smoother coating would aid or hinder that swirl is something I’m not sure of. There are a lot of things in play when producing swirl/turbulence.
Effects on the prechamber of ceramic coating will just have to be tried and proven or discounted in a practical experiment I'm thinking. Way to complex a model to say for certain from theory. At least at my level of understanding it's not really possible to cypher it out...maybe there's some "willie coyote Super geniuses" out there that can....
Coating the firedeck (or combustion chambers if you prefer) is another area where I’m not sure there would be any measurable gains. Perhaps the thermal barrier imparted by ceramics would protect the valve bridge a little better. Perhaps not. There’s redesigned heads out there now that seem to have done away with the cracking issue so ceramics on the fire deck seems like it might be redundant at best. I would think on the fire deck you’re just looking to minimize energy loss more than protection. Given the design, I would think that to be an incremental gain at best (IE: not very much)
Where I could see some benefits in a turbo engine is in the exhaust ports, manifolds and turbine housing. Ideally, you want to expend all of the available energy (heat, pressure, etc) in the cylinder. We all know that just isn’t possible in a conventional reciprocating design. So energy not harnessed for MEP is now waste. Waste is something you have to get rid of quickly or it can impinge on the next intake charge. Coating the exhaust ports, manifolds and housing would keep the heat (IE: energy/velocity) of the waste up nice and high, by imparting less of the energy to the surrounding metal. The smoothness of the coating may also be a benefit in moving the exhaust mass efficiently(assuming the ports and manifolds are properly constructed with efficiency in mind).
An added bonus of this increased energy transfer in the exhaust in a 6.x is that it slams head on into the turbine.
Mucho Buenos.
More energy (or drive pressure if you prefer) imparted to spinning that turbine. Which spins the compressor. Which makes more mass flow. Which means more fuel. Which means more MEP, which drives the turbine, which…..well, you get the idea.
Remember, in the greater scheme of things you don’t want the “heat” in the turbo; you want it in the cylinder contributing to MEP. As I mentioned, it’s not practical in a conventional reciprocating engine to use it all so it’s waste. You just can’t harness all the energy released. Ideally; you could harness all the energy released in combustion which would pretty much make your exhaust ambient (in an unachievable “perfect” design). But you’d have to have a stroke long enough to allow the crank to extract all the energy out of combustion for that to happen. The piston would just keep travelling until there was no more pressure pushing it down. That’s just not practical, the crank would probably need a throw measured in feet to do that.
But oh my, the torque you would get from that! It would be like having the engine torque of a supertanker at your right foot’s disposal……ah, is to dream……:rolleyes5:
Internal combustion engines are not a very efficient design in terms of energy in for work out. But it’s the best we’ve got for now.
But, that’s what makes the turbo so viable; waste energy. It extracts more work after the fact from the waste to give you something that would have disappeared out the pipe. Keeping the energy in the cylinder is preferred for max work, but once it’s out you would prefer to get it to the turbine without loss to have a second shot at extracting work from it.
I guess you could look at a turbo as a gear head’s personal recycling program. How about that? We're "green" and we didn't even know it!
635 did have lots of extrude honing and coatings done. Unfortunately, the engine took a dump (crank bearings) before he ever really got a chance to see how the theory translates into practice.
That’s just my outlook on ceramics and thermodynamics in a reciprocating engine. Pretty simple understanding and I’m sure there are lots of “holes” in my reasoning.
Now, would I personally use ceramics?
Sure, if I had it apart, had the down time and had access to proper facilities. I’d probably look to do the piston crowns, manifolds and turbine housing. But it would be professionally applied; no “rattle can” solutions thank you. Not worth the chance of it coming apart or just not doing anything. I don’t mind experimenting a bit but when it comes to risking thousand on an engine rebuild, my risk management model is a tad to the conservative side. If I’m going out on a limb, I want solid theory behind the risk and properly constructed bits.
I’d also be looking for low friction piston skirt coatings at the same time. Plus blending, matching, probably gapless rings, etc, etc.
Remember, as I said; I’m no expert or physicist.
I could be way out in left field on some or all of this stuff…
First off, a disclaimer:
I’m certainly no expert (nor claim to be) on the intricacies of thermodynamics or ceramic coatings. I’m Just a guy who likes to read technical papers, bat theory around until it makes sense to me and maybe put some of it into practice once in a while.
Most of my practical experience with ceramics has to do with high speed spherical bearings and the benefits in wear and friction characteristics of that application (I trust my life to them every day). That’s why Stanadyne starting coating DS4 parts in it in newer replacement units; Superior wear and friction properties.
But I’ll do my best to give some thoughts that I feel may be relevant on the matter of a reciprocating engine. You gents will have to decide for yourself if I’m “full of it” or not…..
As I understand it, ceramic coatings are more for thermal barrier than producing power. Although there is some common ground there based on my rather simplistic understanding of thermodynamics.
Ceramic on a piston crown is primarily for protection. It provides a thermal barrier to protect the aluminum from high combustion temperatures. As I understand it, it can be as much as another 200 degrees of additional tolerance. It prevents/inhibits heat transfer into the piston material, so that is theoretically more energy available to provide MEP (translation: Mean Effective Pressure = more force pushing the piston down).
There could be some benefits to coating the precombustion chambers, but I’m a bit leery of that. Precombustion chambers are a funny bit of engineering and often don’t seem react the way you think they would for a given modification. I suspect it has to do with the fact there are so many different things going on in the chamber during any given point of the 4 cycles. Coating the chambers (all of it, not just the inserts) would form a thermal barrier and could lead to lower ECT’s. Very important in an IDI design where so much heat is retained in the heads and imparted to the cooling system. There could also be a benefit due to less energy lost in the prechamber and subsequently transferred to the main chamber, thus available to contribute to MEP at the piston "face".
The possible drawback is that heat is a part of the precombustion chambers scheme in breaking up the coarse fuel spray of the 6.X engines. The prechamber may still retain sufficient heat, it may not. Only one way to find out.....
Swirl/turbulence/tumbling is the other factor at play in the precombustion chamber. Whether the smoother coating would aid or hinder that swirl is something I’m not sure of. There are a lot of things in play when producing swirl/turbulence.
Effects on the prechamber of ceramic coating will just have to be tried and proven or discounted in a practical experiment I'm thinking. Way to complex a model to say for certain from theory. At least at my level of understanding it's not really possible to cypher it out...maybe there's some "willie coyote Super geniuses" out there that can....
Coating the firedeck (or combustion chambers if you prefer) is another area where I’m not sure there would be any measurable gains. Perhaps the thermal barrier imparted by ceramics would protect the valve bridge a little better. Perhaps not. There’s redesigned heads out there now that seem to have done away with the cracking issue so ceramics on the fire deck seems like it might be redundant at best. I would think on the fire deck you’re just looking to minimize energy loss more than protection. Given the design, I would think that to be an incremental gain at best (IE: not very much)
Where I could see some benefits in a turbo engine is in the exhaust ports, manifolds and turbine housing. Ideally, you want to expend all of the available energy (heat, pressure, etc) in the cylinder. We all know that just isn’t possible in a conventional reciprocating design. So energy not harnessed for MEP is now waste. Waste is something you have to get rid of quickly or it can impinge on the next intake charge. Coating the exhaust ports, manifolds and housing would keep the heat (IE: energy/velocity) of the waste up nice and high, by imparting less of the energy to the surrounding metal. The smoothness of the coating may also be a benefit in moving the exhaust mass efficiently(assuming the ports and manifolds are properly constructed with efficiency in mind).
An added bonus of this increased energy transfer in the exhaust in a 6.x is that it slams head on into the turbine.
Mucho Buenos.
More energy (or drive pressure if you prefer) imparted to spinning that turbine. Which spins the compressor. Which makes more mass flow. Which means more fuel. Which means more MEP, which drives the turbine, which…..well, you get the idea.
Remember, in the greater scheme of things you don’t want the “heat” in the turbo; you want it in the cylinder contributing to MEP. As I mentioned, it’s not practical in a conventional reciprocating engine to use it all so it’s waste. You just can’t harness all the energy released. Ideally; you could harness all the energy released in combustion which would pretty much make your exhaust ambient (in an unachievable “perfect” design). But you’d have to have a stroke long enough to allow the crank to extract all the energy out of combustion for that to happen. The piston would just keep travelling until there was no more pressure pushing it down. That’s just not practical, the crank would probably need a throw measured in feet to do that.
But oh my, the torque you would get from that! It would be like having the engine torque of a supertanker at your right foot’s disposal……ah, is to dream……:rolleyes5:
Internal combustion engines are not a very efficient design in terms of energy in for work out. But it’s the best we’ve got for now.
But, that’s what makes the turbo so viable; waste energy. It extracts more work after the fact from the waste to give you something that would have disappeared out the pipe. Keeping the energy in the cylinder is preferred for max work, but once it’s out you would prefer to get it to the turbine without loss to have a second shot at extracting work from it.
I guess you could look at a turbo as a gear head’s personal recycling program. How about that? We're "green" and we didn't even know it!
635 did have lots of extrude honing and coatings done. Unfortunately, the engine took a dump (crank bearings) before he ever really got a chance to see how the theory translates into practice.
That’s just my outlook on ceramics and thermodynamics in a reciprocating engine. Pretty simple understanding and I’m sure there are lots of “holes” in my reasoning.
Now, would I personally use ceramics?
Sure, if I had it apart, had the down time and had access to proper facilities. I’d probably look to do the piston crowns, manifolds and turbine housing. But it would be professionally applied; no “rattle can” solutions thank you. Not worth the chance of it coming apart or just not doing anything. I don’t mind experimenting a bit but when it comes to risking thousand on an engine rebuild, my risk management model is a tad to the conservative side. If I’m going out on a limb, I want solid theory behind the risk and properly constructed bits.
I’d also be looking for low friction piston skirt coatings at the same time. Plus blending, matching, probably gapless rings, etc, etc.
Remember, as I said; I’m no expert or physicist.
I could be way out in left field on some or all of this stuff…
great white
Well-Known Member
Sorry Mike, my brain is a bit burnt after my last post.
I'm not getting what you're asking.
Theory behind mass flow, density, drive pressure and turbo's maybe?
I don't think my old grey matter could handle another "run through the weeds" today....
Mike K3500
Member
As in giving that GM 8 the good ole "hook shot" in to the scrap and opting for a far superior flowing turbo ??
What happpened to your sig. pic anyways ??
What happpened to your sig. pic anyways ??
great white
Well-Known Member
I'm still pouring over turbo maps and trying to honestly assess my personal needs and use on that one.
Sig pic?
Changed it, same as my avatar.
Just mixing it up a little now and then...
Mike K3500
Member
Don't be selfish... It's not your "personal needs", it's your Optimizers needs....LOL. 
turbonator
Member
:iagree:
Don't be selfish... It's not your "personal needs", it's your Optimizers needs....LOL.
great white
Well-Known Member
Don't be selfish... It's not your "personal needs", it's your Optimizers needs....LOL.
I've got a couple thoughts.
It may end up staying with the gm8.
The GM8 may get a few tweaks.
I may toss the whole thing and start from scratch.
I may have some pre/post-turbo ideas.
Just don't know where it will go.
Like I said, still researching and I've got to get in contact with a few people first.
It's about what I want the truck to do.
That's all weather daily driver and occasional weekend tow rig.
Finances may kibosh the whole thing......life's funny like that.
Time will tell.
turbonator
Member
awww come on yaaa know yaaaa want it.....
sshewins
Jesus Freak
I just remembered something from a few years ago. Bruce Malinson, from Pittsburgh Power (heavy-duty truck stuff, also has a series of articles called 'high performance diesels') did an article a while back about how he used header wrap from the turbo back. Basically, he stated that the hotter the exhaust remained, it would be less dense and the engine would work less to push the exhaust out the pipe (or stack). In theory and practice, it would free up some HP.
Now maybe this is pushing the ROI (return on investment) a little, but if we're dreaming on some of this stuff, why not dream big?
Now maybe this is pushing the ROI (return on investment) a little, but if we're dreaming on some of this stuff, why not dream big?
Mike K3500
Member
In some ways I have been very fortunate and some I haven't..
Fortunately I don't have any house payments or or bills that go along with.. Therefore allowing me to maybe spend a lil more frivolously on this thing then I should.
I was basically given the house I live in and the joint 40 acres that its on (all river front property). However the area I live in and the occupational paths I have chosen, seem to keep me at a certain income bracket that I cannot seem to break past, not to mention they have been roller coaster rides..( hence me being layed off right now ). I have figured out other ways of making "supplemental" income to try and balance things out and to make sure my family's needs are met. I will leave that unmentioned to save for being scoffed at, however it is only a seasonal supplementary income and is paying for my truck project.
I feel that I am at a crossroads in life now and am wanting to venture out and do different things, that don't include working here in Mt. Pleasant Michigan...
Now back on topic... I know I may be expecting / asking for a bit much, but I am striving to be at or above the 300+ / 500+ rear wheel mark and not have a purpose built truck other then general purpose... For some reason that is where my very "stubborn" mind set is and I'm slightly determined to do it AND do it simple so it is repeatable if so desired.
GW.. you know you want to see this happen as much as everybody else AND just think with all that TQ you could probably burn your tires off in 4 high...
Fortunately I don't have any house payments or or bills that go along with.. Therefore allowing me to maybe spend a lil more frivolously on this thing then I should.
I was basically given the house I live in and the joint 40 acres that its on (all river front property). However the area I live in and the occupational paths I have chosen, seem to keep me at a certain income bracket that I cannot seem to break past, not to mention they have been roller coaster rides..( hence me being layed off right now ). I have figured out other ways of making "supplemental" income to try and balance things out and to make sure my family's needs are met. I will leave that unmentioned to save for being scoffed at, however it is only a seasonal supplementary income and is paying for my truck project.
I feel that I am at a crossroads in life now and am wanting to venture out and do different things, that don't include working here in Mt. Pleasant Michigan...
Now back on topic... I know I may be expecting / asking for a bit much, but I am striving to be at or above the 300+ / 500+ rear wheel mark and not have a purpose built truck other then general purpose... For some reason that is where my very "stubborn" mind set is and I'm slightly determined to do it AND do it simple so it is repeatable if so desired.
GW.. you know you want to see this happen as much as everybody else AND just think with all that TQ you could probably burn your tires off in 4 high...
great white
Well-Known Member
Chip wagon?
Squeegee kid?
Oxyclean Spokesman?
Hand model?
Chippendale dancer?
:rofl:
Sure would. Nothing like someone else doing the R&D for you and spending their money instead of yours......
I may be able to do that now, haven't tried it yet. Rear tires with the G80 locked are useless from an idle rpm standing start right now.
Well, at least a good squeak in 4 HI anyways......
Mike K3500
Member
What about 2 turbo's. such as maybe 2 351 VGT turbo's ??
great white
Well-Known Member
Sequential or twin?
Both have benefits...and drawbacks.
Slightly different properties required for sequential though.....I'm thinking you mean twins since two of the same?
great white
Well-Known Member
Header wrap is cheap stuff, why not?
I used to wrap motorcycle exhaust for the same reasons.
Keeping the heat in is actually keeping the energy in the mass flow, which keeps the velocity up, which enhances evacuation of the spent gas, which reduces pressure felt on the exit side of the turbine, which allows more mass flow through the turbine, which enhances the compressor drive, which......eh, I could go on forever.....so I won't.
Be ready for increased corrosion of the pipes though.....header wrap is a biotch that way.
Mike K3500
Member
Twin.. and taking full advantage of the variable housings, especially if there's only 4 cylinders running each