Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
ModBargains
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction - V6

Forced Induction - V6 V6 Supercharger, turbo, nitrous discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-10-2009, 09:52 AM   #1
mikevrod
Twisted Brothers MC
 
mikevrod's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2 LT/RS
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Frankfort Il.
Posts: 71
V6 Turboing

I'm lobbying all v6 Camaro owners/future owners to contact Lingenfelter/STS/etc.... via e-mail to put together a bolt on single or twin turbo kit for our 304hp v6's. I've always had big v8's in my former Camaros and other vehicles,but how awesome would it be driving a 400hp+ v6. I've owned a couple of Saab 900 Turbos and what a fun car to drive. The STS rear system would perform and sound great. Your thoughts?

2010 Orange/Cyber Gray stripe LT2/RS

G
mikevrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2009, 10:11 AM   #2
MerlinZero
Big Orange
 
MerlinZero's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kent, WA
Posts: 1,170
Lingenfelter is working on packages for both versions as we speak. I am actually in constant contact with those guys. I want to make my Camaro a Lingenfelter Camaro
__________________
" First, there was darkness, Then, On March 16th, Scott said LET THERE BE CAMARO, and there was Camaro, and Scott saw that it was good. Camaro5 3:16"

VIN: 2G1FT1EWXA9120523
ETA 7/6/09 (Delivered 7/10/09)
MerlinZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2009, 10:46 AM   #3
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikevrod View Post
I'm lobbying all v6 Camaro owners/future owners to contact Lingenfelter/STS/etc.... via e-mail to put together a bolt on single or twin turbo kit for our 304hp v6's......The STS rear system would perform and sound great. Your thoughts?
I've called STS a couple times to see what they were up to. The minute they get a Camaro, they said they were gonna create a kit for the SS, and later for the V6, so long as demand is strong.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2009, 05:29 PM   #4
SemperFi
U.S. Marine Corps
 
SemperFi's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Ducati Streetfighter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerlinZero View Post
Lingenfelter is working on packages for both versions as we speak. I am actually in constant contact with those guys. I want to make my Camaro a Lingenfelter Camaro
Frikin awesome. I hope you are right. But the only problem is that they tend to be pricey. However, they do warranty their work pretty well, so maybe the quality is worth it here.
__________________

Texas Residents: Join the Texas social group!

Semper Fi!
SemperFi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 12:20 PM   #5
Ferrarimk13
 
Ferrarimk13's Avatar
 
Drives: Hopefully a Camaro in a year
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 729
when you say pricey, how pricey would turbos go for? I was thinking if i ever get one, that a turbo would be a good upgrade to eventually get (if its out that is)
Ferrarimk13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 01:07 PM   #6
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferrarimk13 View Post
when you say pricey, how pricey would turbos go for? I was thinking if i ever get one, that a turbo would be a good upgrade to eventually get (if its out that is)
Usually anywhere from 3500 - 4500 for some cars . Depends on size of turbo and how many extra parts they will need to make it work.

If anyone knows something about turbos, rear mounted turbos are junk. I made a thread about Forced induction already but seems the word "turbo" is more recognized.

Rear mounted turbos create twice the amount of time to build boost and you experience a lot of turbo LAG ... The bigger the displacement the less you will be able to notice it but if I end up with the v6 I will just make my own moutning system. I hate rear mounted turbos .. The closer the turbo sits to the exhaust manifold the quicker you build boost and less chances for boost leaks .. Imagine turning on a garden hose that is 100 ft vs 50 ft .. what hose will have water coming out first ? The answer is obvious .
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 01:55 PM   #7
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by 09CobaltSS/Turbo View Post
If anyone knows something about turbos, rear mounted turbos are junk.
Why's that? In the respected rear-mount systems (like STS)...the idea of increased lag time is a falsehood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 09CobaltSS/Turbo View Post
Imagine turning on a garden hose that is 100 ft vs 50 ft .. what hose will have water coming out first ? The answer is obvious .
Not if the 100ft hose is half the diameter of the 50ft hose...
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 02:20 PM   #8
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
Why's that? In the respected rear-mount systems (like STS)...the idea of increased lag time is a falsehood.


Not if the 100ft hose is half the diameter of the 50ft hose...
Except that a conventionally mounted turbo could easily be within 1 foot of the head and a rear mount would be 10-12 feet away. And the exhaust is going to transfer heat to the pipes as it travels to the rear mounted turbo(s) leaving it with less energy to spin the turbo with when it gets there.

But my biggest issue with the STS system is in the pics I’ve seen it looks like the air filter is going to get soaked if you ever take it out on a wet day. That might not bother some people, but I live in Seattle and will drive mine in the rain.

The pics also show non-metallic pipes bringing the compressed air back to the engine. It sure seems like switching that that to stainless and adding a couple fins could cool the air a bit…
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 02:23 PM   #9
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
PS. There must be a reason why every factory turbo is snuggled up against the engine…
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 02:40 PM   #10
vladkgb
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS Pewter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 179
theres no way a turbo or super charger "bolt-on" kit will be made and still run on pump gas. its impossible because the v6 has 11:1 compression due to the direct injection, this engine wont be able to take much boost at all before detonation will be a big problem. If the v6 gets any type of forced induction expect atleast a head change to lower the compression ratio, which = big monies.
vladkgb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 03:23 PM   #11
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grape Ape View Post
PS. There must be a reason why every factory turbo is snuggled up against the engine…
Good point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vladkgb View Post
theres no way a turbo or super charger "bolt-on" kit will be made and still run on pump gas. its impossible because the v6 has 11:1 compression due to the direct injection, this engine wont be able to take much boost at all before detonation will be a big problem. If the v6 gets any type of forced induction expect atleast a head change to lower the compression ratio, which = big monies.
That's not necessarily true. The LLT does everything it does with regular 87 octane fuel. Detonation has a reduced chance of happening because of the nature of Direct Injection. It's not hard to imagine that mild boost will work fine with 92+, just like any other engine.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 03:25 PM   #12
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladkgb View Post
theres no way a turbo or super charger "bolt-on" kit will be made and still run on pump gas. its impossible because the v6 has 11:1 compression due to the direct injection, this engine wont be able to take much boost at all before detonation will be a big problem. If the v6 gets any type of forced induction expect atleast a head change to lower the compression ratio, which = big monies.
Todays engines are equipeed with advanced ECU's and this engine in particular has DI on it .. Not going to handle much boost is a vague statment .

With the advances in tuning and DI I Imagine the motor will handle 15 PSI with NO PROBLEMS ....

I am running 22.5 PSI spiking 25 PSI on 91 Octane on a 2.0 LNF with CAST pistons .. Yes it does have some KNOCK and tends to run LEAN in colder conditions but the ECU accounts for that KNOCK and automatically retards the timing to produce less knock I am at 5000 FT ..... 300 HP on a 2.0 w/ 22.5 PSI pump gas stock EVERYTHING stock turbo... If I could get a good look at the 3.6 pistons I would be able to tell you what kind of boost levels we will be able to run just by the design of the pistons .. Everything else in the motor is pretty much good to go as far as internals only thing you might consider is the fact the stock 3.6 DI pistons are Aluminum which can cause some heat problems under high boost ...
__________________

Last edited by 09CobaltSS/Turbo; 04-17-2009 at 03:38 PM.
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 03:31 PM   #13
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
Why's that? In the respected rear-mount systems (like STS)...the idea of increased lag time is a falsehood.


Not if the 100ft hose is half the diameter of the 50ft hose...
LOL yeah you take Charge piping from a turbo and Decrease its diameter by half and see what happens LOL can you say Loss in PSI .. Why not just stick a cork in it . The idea isn't to restrict the Boost tubing or ( Charge piping ) that would just create tons of loss in boost ... Can you blow air through a garden hose easier or a straw ... Put it that way
A turbo works by using the excess gas not being burned by the engine which is injected into the turbo pumping hot exhaust through the cold side or ( intercooler ) back to the engine . Hence the name Forced induction ... A supercharger is basically just cork screw fans hooked to the pulleys of the engine forcing air into the intake which in turn you usually loose a lot of horsepower do to the fact your engine is turning another device on the pully system , its like turning on the A/C you loose power because of the motor has to work extra hard to turn the AC compressor ....

I like turbos my self because I am a Torque fiend .....
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 03:49 PM   #14
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
I know how it all works....

I was just referring to the design that STS uses in response to your hose anaolgy. The volume of the piping of their system is roughly the same as a traditional system plus an intercooler. They achieve this by using skinnier pipes on the return side.

Yes, it's farther away from the engine, so there's a heat loss, but they sized the turbo(s) specifically to work from back there, and consequently, the time it takes to pressurize the intake piping is the same as any other turbo system.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 03:53 PM   #15
MrIcky

 
MrIcky's Avatar
 
Drives: Dodge Ram Megacab & Cobalt SS
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boise
Posts: 1,536
I thought the STS type turbos had some real benefits in aftermarket systems. The main one is that the exhaust gas is several hundred degrees cooler so the turbos don't have to be oil jacketed for fluid bearings. Therefore it's more straight forward as a bolt on, even though you might not be able to get quite as much power.

But in a fully plumbed system hot air in the exhaust in front of the turbo expands which creates more pressure on the turbine side so it spools faster. I actually understood that was more the reason for the lag, not the length of pipe.

As far as PSI, who knows- it's more airflow CFM then PSI. 5 PSI on a big housing can flow alot of CFM. And STS's run pretty large turbos. I see the appeal if you are trying to keep your engine as stock as possible.

Most of my turbo knowledge is from my truck though. I haven't messed with my car's turbo so I'm not sure if it 100% applies.
MrIcky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 05:09 PM   #16
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
I thought the STS type turbos had some real benefits in aftermarket systems. The main one is that the exhaust gas is several hundred degrees cooler so the turbos don't have to be oil jacketed for fluid bearings. Therefore it's more straight forward as a bolt on, even though you might not be able to get quite as much power.

But in a fully plumbed system hot air in the exhaust in front of the turbo expands which creates more pressure on the turbine side so it spools faster. I actually understood that was more the reason for the lag, not the length of pipe.

As far as PSI, who knows- it's more airflow CFM then PSI. 5 PSI on a big housing can flow alot of CFM. And STS's run pretty large turbos. I see the appeal if you are trying to keep your engine as stock as possible.

Most of my turbo knowledge is from my truck though. I haven't messed with my car's turbo so I'm not sure if it 100% applies.

Big turbo systems hook the turbo right onto the Exhaust Manifolds. The bigger the displacement the less of an issue it is but here is a pic of a twin turbo v6 .. Done right .



Thats what I am saying ^ TT v6 ( porsche/VW )
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 05:12 PM   #17
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
I know how it all works....

I was just referring to the design that STS uses in response to your hose anaolgy. The volume of the piping of their system is roughly the same as a traditional system plus an intercooler. They achieve this by using skinnier pipes on the return side.

Yes, it's farther away from the engine, so there's a heat loss, but they sized the turbo(s) specifically to work from back there, and consequently, the time it takes to pressurize the intake piping is the same as any other turbo system.
LOL I didn't even see your MOD status dude.
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 05:14 PM   #18
speedster
SST...
 
speedster's Avatar
 
Drives: SST Camaro 2010
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: East Coast of Florida
Posts: 6,057
Pick up a copy of the latest issue of Hot Rod. The place that made the engine on the cover (Nelson Racing Engines) is making complete twin turbo setups for the SS Camaros.
__________________
speedster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009, 05:20 PM   #19
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedster View Post
Pick up a copy of the latest issue of Hot Rod. The place that made the engine on the cover (Nelson Racing Engines) is making complete twin turbo setups for the SS Camaros.
I'm trying to tell them the days of just slapping on a power adder on are here. A lot of companies are even starting to offer the option of a turbo charger on 75% of the entire line up of vehicles.... The future is here.
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 02:03 AM   #20
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladkgb View Post
theres no way a turbo or super charger "bolt-on" kit will be made and still run on pump gas. its impossible because the v6 has 11:1 compression due to the direct injection, this engine wont be able to take much boost at all before detonation will be a big problem. If the v6 gets any type of forced induction expect atleast a head change to lower the compression ratio, which = big monies.
I saw a Canadian outfit the sells twin turbo upgrades for the VW R32 (AWD V6 Golf) that was offering head spacers on their higher HP kits. You might also need a new intake manifold (or more spacers) and longer timing chains/belts but still probably cheaper than head work.

But you might be able to kill two birds and swap in shorter, forged rods and/or pistons that would allow high boost by being stronger and by lowering compression.

But I don;t think there will be a problem with moderate levels of boost since as Dragoneye mentioned it runs fine on 87 octane. And more convincingly, there are already Cadillacs running around with blowers on the same V6.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 02:17 AM   #21
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
I know how it all works....

I was just referring to the design that STS uses in response to your hose anaolgy. The volume of the piping of their system is roughly the same as a traditional system plus an intercooler. They achieve this by using skinnier pipes on the return side.

Yes, it's farther away from the engine, so there's a heat loss, but they sized the turbo(s) specifically to work from back there, and consequently, the time it takes to pressurize the intake piping is the same as any other turbo system.
The intake piping might have the same volume as an inter cooler, but I'd rather have either an inter cooler cooling the air or a short pipe without one so the system could pressurize faster. This sounds like the worst of both worlds.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:04 AM   #22
fierodeletre
 
Drives: 02 WS6 TA, 88 Fiero Formula
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Utard
Posts: 296
The issue of compression is not traditional and should not be viewed as such. No fuel/air is compressed in a DI engine. This is the reason they went with the high C/R. Because they could get away with it, because it makes a higher specific output powerplant. Having the high C/R in a boosted setup really would only be a question of fuel pressure, since the new TDC cyl pressure would now be 5-25 PSI + 1 bar X 11.1 instead of < or = 1 bar X 11.1, and you'd have to be sure that the 1200 psi (I think) max fuel pressure would be enough to atomize into such a high-pressure volume of air. It's been said a thousand times before. They didn't "tune" the engine for 87 octane. You can run any octane you like in it. They use 87 because it's a great selling point for customers and it illustrates the brilliance of the idea. You can't detonate dry air. Again, the biggest hurdles to FI on the LLT will be sufficient fuel pressure and perhaps head gasket integrity, not C/R.
fierodeletre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 11:38 AM   #23
Rock
 
Drives: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 35
Your biggest issue is going to be fuel management and ecu tuning,depending on how hard the ecu is to crack. DI is also a relatively new technology, what we do know is you can run higher C/R due to much more accurrate and cleaner fuel burn directly into the combustion chambers. Hard part is you better hope that the stock Injectors can handle an increased fuel demand.
On my Mazdaspeed3 with a 2.3L DISI it has a 9.5:1 C/R that puts out 256/280 hp/torque. Not bad for a 4banger. It took about a year to get anytype of tuning out as well as fuel upgrades. However, one of the first modifications to help with the fuel problems and detonation was methanol injection. You will aslo probably want to change your plugs out for 1 or 2degree colder plugs and run on 93 octane. You will get huge power from going turbo. I'd put pricing for a kit at around 4500 minimum for a single turbo setup. More than likely going to come with a enginemanagement of some sort,turbo, turbo manifold, downpipe, intercooler, piping, possibly fuel upgrades, and various hoses,fittings,and clamps.
Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 05:28 PM   #24
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock View Post
Your biggest issue is going to be fuel management and ecu tuning,depending on how hard the ecu is to crack. DI is also a relatively new technology, what we do know is you can run higher C/R due to much more accurrate and cleaner fuel burn directly into the combustion chambers. Hard part is you better hope that the stock Injectors can handle an increased fuel demand.
On my Mazdaspeed3 with a 2.3L DISI it has a 9.5:1 C/R that puts out 256/280 hp/torque. Not bad for a 4banger. It took about a year to get anytype of tuning out as well as fuel upgrades. However, one of the first modifications to help with the fuel problems and detonation was methanol injection. You will aslo probably want to change your plugs out for 1 or 2degree colder plugs and run on 93 octane. You will get huge power from going turbo. I'd put pricing for a kit at around 4500 minimum for a single turbo setup. More than likely going to come with a enginemanagement of some sort,turbo, turbo manifold, downpipe, intercooler, piping, possibly fuel upgrades, and various hoses,fittings,and clamps.
I think the prices for a turbo upgrade will be closer to $6000+.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 11:25 PM   #25
09CobaltSS/Turbo
 
09CobaltSS/Turbo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo 97 tahoe
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
I think the prices for a turbo upgrade will be closer to $6000+.
If we are lucky
__________________
09CobaltSS/Turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.