Man, I can't win for losing. This is a update for anybody following my Turbo installation woe's. I just talked to Engineered Performance who is fixing my blown head gasket, and checking the Turbo setup. They got the heads back and everything back together and tested it when the Turbo itself started blowing oil. Man this is killing me in time and money so far. My car has been down for about 2 months now, and the costs are going to be astronomical with all I am having to get done to fix it. They are checking to see how bad the damage is on the Turbo, but I know it will cost at least another $400.00 + to rebuild it if it's necessary. Right now I really wish I had not bought the Turbo kit. I bought the car just few months earlier with only 14,000 miles on it, and it ran fine. I thought the turbo kit would be cool to have on it. I never dreamed it would turn out like this. Don't get me wrong here. I am not knocking Engeneered Performance. They are doing what they can, but this is a warning that it might not be a good idea to buy a kit from an ebay auction. I will have paid enough money to have bought a kit and had it installed new by the time I am done with all this, and that would have been with a guarantee. Anyway enough crying for now

------------------

Man, bummer. Can you just get a kit to rebuild the turbo? Why not ust disconnect it until your a little more liquid? Keep us posted.

Sorry Dude,
Roy

are u sure u blew the turbo. when head gasket blew it just may have sucked a bunch of oil in it, have to burn it off. as far as i know the only parts in it are impeller, case, bearing and oil fittings????

I am not sure about the Turbo. I got the information from the guys that are working on the car. They are having the Turbo sent off to be checked for problems. It seems as soon as I think I am going to get my car back to drive something else happens. The way the exhaust system is hooked up I can't take the Turbo off and run without it without modifications done. After all I will have spent my wife will probably kill me if I end up with nothing after all this is said and done so I am going to have them do what they have to do to fix it, and I will just eat the cost. I see a second job in my future

------------------

Yeah but when you get that fiero back and mat the throttle you will have a smile on your face bigger than the state of Texas.

Can you say quarter mile in 13.8 seconds?

I sure hope so. Thanks for the pick me up. I was kind of down after the news of the Turbo.

------------------

It certainly is not nice to see somone go through your pain espcially since IT WAS NOT NECESSARY. There were countless postst on forced induction and I always advocated the Supercharger setup. Tested warantied More powerfull than the Turbo and so on and so on. Sorry to hear that the Turbo gang kind of suckered you into this predicament. I hope nothing else goes wrong with your setup once it's finished just keep an eye on the spider web mess (oil lines coolant lines) more things to go wrong.

Good luck

Later

Gee Sillhouette, was that an "I-Told-You-So?
Not very supportive - or well timed.
And wrong as well.

I'd much rather have a turbo.. properly set-up turbo system has lots more potential than a supercharger. Just because you're trying to sell supercharger kits doesn't mean they're the right way to go, Sillhouette..

Hope everything works out, Predator!

Wrong again. I'm not trying to sell the supercharger. This is the third turbo that I have heard break. In a rear engine car the turbo just does not work. Too much heat. You are not dealing with high temperature resistant material only with standard steel. That has to be cooled properly. Intercooler works but you can't mount it efficiently as if it were a front engine car.
See this is why I no longer deal with Fieros. No matter what proof I give them about a system not working or a shop that will keep lying and overcharging somehow those cars will still have the same thing installed the same shop butchered. I have no idea why?

Later

Come on Sill,

I've talked to several people who have turbos in their Fieros with NO problems. I've got a friend in my Fiero club that ran one for 80,000 miles WITHOUT a problem and, it didn't have an intercooler or waater injection. The same turbo system was removed (in favor of a SBC) and sold to a friend for his re-body where it's still going strong.

I'm sure all of use support your right to supercharge rather than turbo charge. But statements such as youys are just plain -- UNTRUE. Be a sport, drop the attitude and just enjoy the diversity of the group. After all, there are plenty of people who call you wrong for going with a supercharger for power instead of SBC.

Peace,
Roy

I'll trade ya!

i'll take that nightmare right off your hands.. or theres a 350 in the back of the shop we can stick in it!

uuum sill.. it's not the cars fault the turbos fail... Porsche, lotus, Koenig, Bugatti, Toyota all make mid/rear engine turbo cars and non of them have problems.. it's turbo manufacture error and engine issues not heat. heat really is only a HP making problem. the block on a N/A car heat soaks in 10 minutes idleing, the turbo only makes more heat under boost.. JUST like the Rotex unit that RSM uses.. it's a centrifugal S/C if it was a roots type you'll have less heat cause you'll have less boost (more torque but less boost) if a roots type starts getting any kinda decent boost they self destruct. (well magnusen and eaton do) Kennebell(messaged eaton), and Holley/Weiand have the market cornered on monster boost roots type but they would take astronomical amounts of dough to make fit on a 60* V6. Engineered has built many psycho turbo cars and only one has come back with problems... and thats because he was still running the 60 shot of nitrous he was running before the turbo install. Driver error not turbo issue.

[This message has been edited by 1FST2M6 (edited 01-19-2001).]

Thanks Trav but I will keep it .
Please don't think I am knocking Engineered Performance about this. It's just the situation. I love the idea of the Turbo setup, and I will see it through. It just gets frustrating for as long as the car has been down trying to get it installed, and working. Most of that time was me waiting for parts. Engineered has only had the car two weeks, and they were mainly waiting on results from having the heads checked. I brought it to them to fix right, and I knew it was going to cost so I will let them do their job. I just got a little depressed when they told me the Turbo blew after they got everything else back together. The Turbo was supposed to be new. That will teach me to buys stuff off of ebay.

------------------

Ill keep my turbo over the supercharger anytime.....thank you very much. Turbo has given me not a single problem since I put chassis together 3 years and 40k miles ago. Turbo only puts the power on when you need it, supercharger does give you more on bottom end too, but its running all the time. I wonder why all the indy and formula, and exotics use turbos instead of blowers. I think they know something US manufacturers dont. Rear engine turbos dont work???? can you say Porsche Carerra, 6 cyl, 150 cubes, almost 500 HP >>>>>>>>>>>>>

[This message has been edited by rogergarrison (edited 01-19-2001).]

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Turbo only puts the power on when you need it, supercharger does give you more on bottom end too, but its running all the time.

True, the supercharger is running all the time, but its really not 'working' unless you give it load. By working I mean boost. The turbocharger is also working all the time (spinning), but it doesn't 'work' (or give boost) unless its under load. I just wanted to point that out.

I agree with mrfixit58 on the comments above.

------------------

BBBAD V8

BBBAD GT

BBBAD 5.0

An engine with a turbocharger has the potential to make way more power than a supercharged engine because the turbocharger utilizes the normally wasted energy from the exhaust, that is the heat that goes out the exhaust. A supercharger puts huge parasitic loads on the engine consuming horsepower to turn the turbine. They can both be reliable but the turbocharger I think has the upper hand in reliability.

My two cents.

------------------

The turbo using the wasted exhaust gases as power only means that it's more EFFICIENT not more powerfull. Case in point. All serious 1/4 mile racers the ones in the 4s range have very larger superchargers sticking out of the hood.

Turbocharger in INDY are only designed for 500 miles and not more I don't think you can compare that to our type of driving. Also those engines are not made for power mostly a perfect balance between power handling and the rules that govern that type of racing.

The Porche Carrera does not have cooling problems because of the intricate cooling system that they have with the radiator sticking up at certain temperatures.
Can you do that to your turbo Fiero. I don't think so.

The Toyota MR2 I assume your talking about is no longer built. Why?

This gets back to the neverending story of which is better turbo or Supercharger. I only like turbos built by manufacturers. Putting one together from other cars and rebuilding them in your garage is a very bad idea. The turbo charger more than a supercharger functions on very close tolerances you pretty much have to work in a clean room.

I don't care which system you want. RSM is not selling the system anymore. I have a supercharger on my car that has been running perfectly from day one. I never worry about cooldown period before shut down. I don't worry about it not working exploding. Oh yeah it's the VORTECH G90 just to be different and later I'm going for some low pressure pistons and boost it up to 20psi. The only ones close to my times in 1/4 mile are the V8 conversions. This of course is an educated guess. What I see from the Trubo post 1/4 mile times are quite high. I have not seen v8 1/4 mile times yet. Oh keep the mustang and non Fiero out of this. Once I finish my Fiero than I'll go against those.

No flames intended.

Later

quote Originally posted by Sillhouette.com: Oh yeah it's the VORTECH G90 just to be different and later I'm going for some low pressure pistons and boost it up to 20psi.

I'd really like to see this. 20 psi isn't anything like the 10 psi you are probably running. You would have to run the belt tighter than a bango string if you are running an 6 or even a 8 rib belt. Cogs would most likely be the only way to get a true 20 psi (I'm not sure if the G90's bearings can handle cogs tho), and then what kind of fuel system are you planning? Anything over 15lb of boost in my opinion would need a race bypass/blowoff valve, not the standard bosch bypass in the normal vortech kits. Why is 20 psi your goal?

------------------

BBBAD V8

BBBAD GT

BBBAD 5.0

The MR2 quit being exported to America because of the weak yen. In 1995 (the last year it was available here) a fully loaded turbo model was over $30K......way too much for what you got.

The MR2 continued on in Japan and Europe until just a few years ago ('99 ?).

I have no opinion on the turbo vs. SC debate.......I don't own a car with either one.

OK, Ill give you that indy engines only are good for 500 miles. Now look at GT/Touring like 24 Hrs Daytona, Sebring,LeMans. Those cars take more abuse in powertrain than any of us could give in a 100,000 miles. If im correct I NEVER remember ANY being supercharged. The Porsche 908, which was completely street legal, and sold to common people almost the same as was raced, made over 1,100 HP !! No one even makes 1/2 of that anymore and still be streetdriven. I know you can get that with supercharger on strip-but I dont see them driving around town either. I dont think the case for either one will ever be won though, everyone will always want their own thing.

Sill --

The reason drag racers use blowers is very simple. Superchargers make power from idle to full design rpm. If your only planning on going 1/4 mile at a time, as fast as you can, then by all means, go with a blower.

Turbos are both good producers of power and economical to operate. At constant speed, the turbo add little to no boost therefore engine economy is vertually unchanged. (not so with blowers).

As for you statement, "The turbo using the wasted exhaust gases as power only means that it's more EFFICIENT not more powerfull.". I beg to differ. If you make an engine more efficient by burning more (i.e., percent effiency) of the normally unburned hydrocarbons, the motor will make more power. How do you think the newer F.I. motors are making more power? They make more power because they use precise computer fuel/air control.

Efficency means power.

Roy

Right now the system is set up to be at 10psi. There is already a pulley system on the bracket to take care of the belt slippage. The G90 is rated at 20psi I just want to increase it as much as I can just to see what happens. Certainly the fuel system has to be changed but I'll cross that bridge when I get there. I'm not using anything else Vortech has to offer. I'll probably go with a Greedy pop of valve and use some other cars fuel system.

The 24hr LeMans is once again not our type of racing. You're right that those cars see abuse the same as we see in 100,000 miles but those engine are much more expensive than our engines. If you can spend the ammount of money a LeMans team has on an engine It would be a waste on a Fiero. You might as well buy an exotic (Ferrary Lambo Porche and so on)

If I got 30,000 on an MR2? I was ready to spend 60,000 on my Fiero or buy a Viper. Now I'm leaning more towards the Corvette S01. (I don't know yet) I'll keep my Fiero because I can work on that the exotics would have to be taken in to specialized shops.

Let's not mistake two terms. An efficiently burning engine is not the same as an efficiently running engine. I'm the first to addmit that a supercharged engine is not an efficiently running engine. It is however an efficiently burning engine because of the time and care spent in modifying the VE tables spark advance in the PROM.

Now that it seems that the two systems are pretty much the same. The next question remains which is more reliable and which is more affordable. On both of these I have to say the Supercharger.

Thanks for keeping it civil

Later

What pulley system on the bracket do you have? How big is the belt on the pulleys? What size pulleys will you be running for this 20 psi? I'm just curious because I've basically seen it all with Vortech's, and if you only have a 6 rib setup, it'll most likely slip. There is also the issue of how tight you make the belt and how much side load you have on the crank. I went with 10 rib on the Stang to help reduce the load on the crank, while providing no slip boost.

The turbo/blower debate has been beaten to death over on the 5.0 boards, mainly because of the Incon twin turbo entry into the market. Both make excellent power, it really comes down to packaging and price. Sure there is the power loss with the blower because its being run off the crank, but thats normally a moot issue with the amount of power the blower adds.

I have both, a turbocharged four cylinder in the Mustang SVO, and a centrifugal blower in the Mustang 5.0. They are completely different in their attitude.

Boost is a good thing

------------------

BBBAD V8

BBBAD GT (sold)

BBBAD 5.0

Which supercharger are you using from Vortech. I've got the smallest one they build. If you have the same one, than I'll probably have to ribb the pulleys. If it's a bigger one than it's the inertia, pressure burps you have to overcome to spin that S/C. Currently it's a tensioner pulley with the 3.8S/C belt on it. Not ribbed.

Later

Currently have the V1 S-trim (2.95" blow pulley and 6.87" crank pulley), had an A-trim, and most likely going up to the T-trim when the 351 is dropped into the Stang. I'll probably continue the 10 rib, because they are good for up to 15 psi without much problems. Cogs are the way to go if you want no slipping blower (the T trim has the HD bearing to handle the cogs, the A/std S trim don't). I'm not sure how much boost the std 3.8 S/C tensioner system handles, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't designed for to tension crazy boost , but I could be wrong. Paxton's Novi tensioner has it coming from both sides of the beletwith thick billet mounting plates, which I think is the best in the market today for centrifugal blowers.
What pulleys are you running (size of the crank and blower)? You can calculate the blower speed pretty easily knowing the step up ratio of the blower, and mix and match different pulleys to get your desired blower rpms.
Nothing is more fustrting than a slipping blower belt, seeing on the boost gauge 7-8lb of boost at 4000 rpms and it not increasing up to redline (and all that black belt resin around the blower, turbo guys laugh at this).

------------------

BBBAD V8

BBBAD GT (sold)

BBBAD 5.0

It's the G90 CW running system that's on Vortechs webpage. It's much much bigger than the Rotrax just barely fitting into that small place. I have a 3.5" diameter pulley on it and the boost gauge shows 10psi. I don't know how accurate that boost gauge is also the tensioner had to be added because of that frustrating belt slippage. The current system will not have the belt slipping at 10psi. The next one I will probably have headaches with but what the hay..... It's all in good fun.

Later

You poor devils with your belt slippage. I'm getting measurable boost with my little IHI turbo at 2000 RPM. Full 10psi boost at 2500 to 6000 RPM, and no squeeky belts, no pings and no problems.
Uh oh, I have to run premium fuel!
Ah well...The price of progress.

How come you don't get anymore rise in pressure past 2500 rpm?

I run 12.9 in 1/4 drag slick. What do you run?

[This message has been edited by Sillhouette.com (edited 01-20-2001).]

12.9 in the QUARTER MILE! Man what the blank kind of motor do you have in your fiero. It can't be a 2.8-liter motor can it? What was your mph?

You need about 280-300 horsepower to run a 12.9 in the quarter mile with the five-speed transmission

------------------

Sill, ever hear of a waste gate?
Don't know what it'll do in the 1/4 mile.
Don't care.
Fuel milage on the highway is excellent, street drivabilty is perfect, throttle response is better than I expected, underhood heat is reasonable, and yes, pretty soon I'll have to replace my sqeeaky air-conditioning belt.
Gotta go run some errands in it now.
Chow fer now!

Here is the 1/4 mile sheet. The engine is a bored out 2.9 with custom pistoms roller rockers crane cam balanced bottom end. Full stainless steel exhaust using stock manifolds and a larger cat. Port / polished throttle body intake runners. RSM supercharger G90.

Quick note, I've never seen a 12 sec 1/4 mi run at under 100 mph. Same way with the 1/8 mi times, very low mph for the et. I wouldn't bring this up if the 60' was some heller 1.5-1.6, but a 1.80 is slow for the et posted. Also, which track is open in Januray? Is that date Jan 24, 1977? I've only see these big variances in et/mph in pure drag cars, that have a dedicated suspension to put down the lowest ET possible (normally have ET's lower than the normal street car with the same MPH).

In contrast, my Stang always runs a higher ET for the MPH, mainly because I don't speed shift and I don't launch as great as other drag cars. My 127 mph (at 3400lbs)normally equals mid 10's, but I'm only doing low 11's for the present time. (I've even done a 7.2 @ 106 mph at the local 1/8 mi track, which should be mid to high 6's).

Weird.

January 24, 1977??? You must be running the super prototype Fiero, huh? Is that Cayuga, New York? You get good traction on ice.

Roy

i know your not knocking Engineered Donald.. that does suck that your seals are wiped though...

my 13.6 run on nitrous was at 103mph. my 14.1 times on street tires were 94-95ish!

but in his favor.. the date on my runs say sept. 20th 90 when it was really july, 31 99.

Here is the example I was pointing out, I've inputed Sil & Trav's ET/MPH and guessing weights would be the same (both have no AC I believe). Here is the link for the program http://www.corral.net/tech/brakehp.html :

Sill's run:
Initial Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
WEIGHT 3000 pounds
TRAP SPEED 99.5 mph
E/T 12.9 seconds
Dyno Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Total Horsepower 235 bhp
Horsepower Used 276 bhp
Best E/T 13.60 seconds
This is showing that Sill is using more horsepower than is avail. His best ET given the MPH/weight should onlyn be 13.60.

Travs:
Initial Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
WEIGHT 3000 pounds
TRAP SPEED 103 mph
E/T 13.6 seconds
Dyno Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Total Horsepower 261 bhp
Horsepower Used 235 bhp
Best E/T 13.14 seconds
This shows he was using less HP than he has to get that 13.6 time. It shows that if he used all of the HP avail, then his best ET based on MPH/weight should be 13.14. This is normal, people haveing slower ET for the MPH given because of a ton of factors (number one being most cars don't have optimal drag suspension)

For giggles, here's my Stang:
Initial Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
WEIGHT 3400 pounds
TRAP SPEED 127 mph
E/T 11.13 seconds
Dyno Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Total Horsepower 555 bhp
Horsepower Used 487 bhp
Best E/T 10.65 seconds

Of course this is only pushing numbers, and this is close to reality that I've seen, but of course there will always be some deviations of this.