6.4 owner looking for a 4 digit HP number

Kind · May 23, 2012

bigrpowr said:
Plumbing will be fun. That was our first thought just an absolute headache but done right you can do it no gate which saves a lot of backend space. But if your atmo is going in the valley you are size limited. I like this idea very much. Mine spools instant , drives smoke free and will eat up kind's setup lol.

Yeah, the amount of air you have is absurd!!! Lol. I can match fuel but no way I have close to the cfm. Or would I try lol.

I haven't done the math but according to Bill at Bullseye I have more then enough cfm for 1200hp. Which Mike did at half throttle lol. Which considering I'm no longer in pursuit of 9's with this truck, is enough lol.

I'm also aware both my 62's aren't the same as a 124. If someone does figure out the math that would be great...

bigrpowr · May 23, 2012

I can get that math for u

Tree Trimmer · May 23, 2012

90......95 ish mm

bigrpowr · May 23, 2012

Tree Trimmer said:
90......95 ish mm

we must not be doing the same math.. my calculation came to ... not enough. LOL

Dzchey21 · May 23, 2012

Its just like nitrous jets...

bigrpowr · May 23, 2012

i have that calculation.... and it prolly is somewhere in the low 90s.

Erikclaw · May 23, 2012

Dzchey21 said:
Its just like nitrous jets...

correction factor, FTW

bigrpowr · May 23, 2012

Erikclaw said:
correction factor, FTW

guess you didnt do to well in geometry.

Corb@CorbinShipping · May 23, 2012

bigrpowr said:
guess you didnt do to well in geometry.

LOL

Kind · May 23, 2012

Awe poor me, only a 90ish lol.

And since mine are double batmofantastimo and your calculation are for mortal turbo chargers, I'd say multiply you calculation by 1.666, then maybe you'll stumble on the correct number.

Didn't you guys know triple turbo'd batmofantastimo will twist the oversized nipples of of Godzilla and King mother***in Kong? Just thought I'd enlighten the rock stars. Lol.

Sent from beside you

bigrpowr · May 23, 2012

Kind said:
Awe poor me, only a 90ish lol.

And since mine are double batmofantastimo and your calculation are for mortal turbo chargers, I'd say multiply you calculation by 1.666, then maybe you'll stumble on the correct number.

Didn't you guys know triple turbo'd batmofantastimo will twist the oversized nipples of of Godzilla and King mother***in Kong? Just thought I'd enlighten the rock stars. Lol.

Sent from beside you

well played sir.

dstryr · May 23, 2012

Kind said:
Awe poor me, only a 90ish lol.

And since mine are double batmofantastimo and your calculation are for mortal turbo chargers, I'd say multiply you calculation by 1.666, then maybe you'll stumble on the correct number.

Didn't you guys know triple turbo'd batmofantastimo will twist the oversized nipples of of Godzilla and King mother***in Kong? Just thought I'd enlighten the rock stars. Lol.

Sent from beside you

Where can I get whatever you are takin.... :toast:

forcefed6.4ford · May 23, 2012

Your friendly neighborhood freelance pharmacist...

Wayne · May 23, 2012

if you don't factor in the non-flowing center of the turbo, a crude way to compare is surface area measurement. for example, a 62mm diameter goes like this: 31mm (raidus) x 31mm x 3.14(pi) = 3017.54(surface area of one turbo) x 2 turbos = 6035.08 square mm. take that and divide it by 3.14 = 1922. square root of 1922 = 43.84 (radius of equivalent surface area of 2 62mm circles) 43.84 x 2 (double radius equals diameter) 87.68

Kind, your two 62 mm turbos inlet surface area equal roughly one 88 mm turbo FWIW. obviously much more goes into cfm & efficiency, but that gives you a little idea. This is also a good way to calculate nitrous jet sizing. two 62 jets roughly = an 88 jet.

In Erik Clausen's case, his two 82 jets = a single 116

Kind · May 23, 2012

dstryr said:
Where can I get whatever you are takin.... :toast:

You can't. Custom made! lol

But Jager will get you close.

Anyway, this is the layout we are planing to copy lol. 100% props to Trent@EPR. According to him in his race truck thread his S400 framed secondary and GT40something primaries light a tad slower then a single S366. As well he states having the secondary exhaust head strait to the primaries helped his spool dramatically.

http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo80/trentnell/DSCF6949.jpg

Not sure what he had for fuelling, however the dyno indicated over 930hp uncorrected.

I don't think one would need S400's or GT40+ to make that kind of power as I believe the mega cab WOP built did over 1000hp on smaller chargers. Fairly clean to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZviZuIdP8jI

Kind · May 23, 2012

Wayne said:
if you don't factor in the non-flowing center of the turbo, a crude way to compare is surface area measurement. for example, a 62mm diameter goes like this: 31mm (raidus) x 31mm x 3.14(pi) = 3017.54(surface area of one turbo) x 2 turbos = 6035.08 square mm. take that and divide it by 3.14 = 1922. square root of 1922 = 43.84 (radius of equivalent surface area of 2 62mm circles) 43.84 x 2 (double radius equals diameter) 87.68

Kind, your two 62 mm turbos inlet surface area equal roughly one 88 mm turbo FWIW. obviously much more goes into cfm & efficiency, but that gives you a little idea. This is also a good way to calculate nitrous jet sizing. two 62 jets roughly = an 88 jet.

In Erik Clausen's case, his two 82 jets = a single 116

My head hurts...

So basically what you are saying is Godzilla and King mother***in Kong are looking at me like I'm holding a .22 to their 12gauge?

Eh, .22's still can penetrate some bullet proof vests lol. Where as Mikes "12 gauge" barely makes it 50 yards lol Sorry Mike, had to.

Humor aside thanks for the calculations! As well like you said cfm and efficiency based on specific chargers play a viable factor too. And you forgot my 1.666 correction factor for batmoawesomness over silly normal billet wheels.

Black_Lightning91 · May 23, 2012

Fast-6.0 said:
We have a set of compounds we are releasing that will support 1000hp and are half the price of max-powers. They are called Raw-Power compounds as they don't have all the bells and whistles as max-powers.

These get my vote over a comparable sized conventional 2 into 1 triple setup either way you dice it two turbos is easier to turn then three when moving the same amount of air. A triple compound setup like mikes is the ticket to huge power but with that kinda boost things break a lot lol The only way to lower boost in the triple setup is to gate drive pressure to atmosphere then you run into effeciency issues because you go too low in compressor the map. Also good sized twin compounds can move equal air at lower boost. Not saying either of these setups are comparable in flow to mikes triples but a 59vgt with an 88 sounds good perfectly streetable and should be enough cfm for 1k on fuel. I would like to see a 64vgt and maybe a 90-96 somewhere in there. This all being said the triples at the higher boost pressures would be a smother more seemless type of power that went strong from the bottom all the way to redline with three properly sized turbo's. All this is just my educated opinion as I dont even have a truck but I do learn and read a lot! If I am wrong on anything someone correct me.

Kind · May 23, 2012

In theory one would be inclined to assume with twins, given less turbos to spool would turn easier. However actual daily driven data declares the opposite. Most triple owners despite investment cost would never do twins after trips... reasonably sized trips might I add. Not ***in a 80mm secondary with 70mm+ primaries lol.

PTSUPERD · May 23, 2012

Part out all the bs....and this is a great thread. Good info here fellas. Rock on.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Black_Lightning91 · May 23, 2012

Kind said:
In theory one would be inclined to assume with twins, given less turbos to spool would turn easier. However actual daily driven data declares the opposite. Most triple owners despite investment cost would never do twins after trips... reasonably sized trips might I add. Not ***in a 80mm secondary with 70mm+ primaries lol.

Any graphs or data logs to support this as I dont like just taking the fact that they liked triples more than twins. I want to see data showing one is more efficient than the other at moving the same amount of air perferably at same boost pressures. because I think the boost pressures had a hand in what happened to mikes truck but I could be wrong there just a quick as anyone else. Not being a dick just want to see numbers info not just word of mouth.