Well, speaking as an engineer, I for one AM offended

JUST KIDDING!

But I really am an engineer. Whether an engineer is a help or a hindrance depends a lot on the engineer in question. If he has some real-world wrenchin' and fab experience, then he'll probably help you turn out a much better product. If he's one of these book smart no-experience at anything besides his calculator, computer, and books, he'll probably not be much help and might even be a hindrance.

I was looking at the picts of the manifolds and the headers and thinking about the dual turbos thread. Since the space between the rear of the engine and the firewall is so tight, a set of headers that exited more toward the top-front of the engine - almost like a driver's side manifold turned 180* front-to-back - might be the way to go for dual turbos.

Relocate the fuel filter and have the turbos situated above the 2nd cylinder from the front on both sides. Then have the exhaust pipes from the turbos exiting over the sides of the engine to dual exhausts. Something like that.

Another possiblility with the headers installed as shown in the pictures that link leads you to, instead of having the two pipes going to one snail, have each one go to a smaller turbo and mount them side by side behind and to either side of the intake manifold opening. Then have the exhaust pipes exiting the turbos go over the side of the engine - one on each side - again to dual exhausts. The two turbos would pretty much have to be mirror images of each other and have opposite rotations etc. but I would think that shouldn't be too hard to find.

 

IMHO, What we need to do is test the stock manifolds compared to headers and test a turbo motor with stock manifolds with a header combo if we can come up with one. That would sure be an interesting study. But take a look, headers are said to free up around 55 hp (according to Stans Headers), now add that with the additional power gains of a turbo...I can only imagine the possibly gains with that comination

 

well this stans header place don't impress me much.since they said it can't be done.I do see what your saying thought so mabe this will be worth the efort.

 

LOL! Well, it ain't been done yet

So far someone has made a prototype set for a PowerSmoke. Nobody's made a set and fit them to an IDI - yet.....

'Cmon man, get busy, BE THE FIRST!

(nuthin' like a challenge to motivate most folks)

 

ya your right I hope someone dosen't do it befor I get the time

 

Any progress on this project?

 

all I have sofar is the flanges that I cut in the water jet.this is gonna be slow.my personal tig is down at the moment and the only one I have now is at work.I'll get it done eventually

 

they ain't powersmokes.it either powerjoke or jokestroke

 

FWIW I love my Stans headers an the power I get out of my N/A IDI truck, (without the fuel turned up)- Are you guys way of the original topic or what??? AS that great CANADIAN Icon Red Green sayes, "we're all in it togeather"

 

ok you say you have lots of power with no turbo or increased injection pump.well your missing the real power that motor can make.I have water/methinal to add and I will reach my goal of 300+ hp and 550+ lb ft of the the stuff that matters.BULL****E you say well that means I'll have to sebd you the next dyno print out.if I blow the entire truck up I don't care couse I built that kinda #s from a little old 7.3idi

 

Whitefordaward, I doubt you were told anything wrong.

The guys here were referring to the long tube headers which are designed to help scavenge the cylinders. Putting an obstruction(such as a turbo) at the end completely defeats the purpose of this type of header, and in this case the other points about heat/exhaust velocity and such are spot on as well.

However, you mention a 'shorty' style header, which really is a steel tube manifold. They don't promote anything beyond a stock iron manifold unless the stocker is a point of constriction, which is rarely the case. For turbo use, the shorty header is a very common part. Thousands have been made for the very reason of installing a turbo. No, I'm not referring specifically to IDIs, but to engines in general. This type of 'header' is very easy to make as the concerns that must be met in a long tube header are simply not there(tube size, tube length, keeping all the same length, etc).

So a shorty header fabricated to mount a turbo is not uncommon at all, and not difficult to make a good one either. Typically the mounting flange(head side) is a hurdle but many engines have bare flanges available just for building one's own. Another issue is fitment inside the intended vehicle. Ie, clearing steering, frame, etc. Some apps are easy, others not so.

Ken

 

Its all good. I thought I would check and see how the build is goin

 

OK so then whats the bases of building a header to turbo set up if a shorty style header dosen't improve anything.I not going to build a header that gose below the fame and turns back up to the turbo.if I need tubes that long to make it work then I wont even bother.there is ways of building power with less work and headake.a shorty header would be worth it.now I'm being told that a shorty header in theory is piontless.I'm looking for a flow eficent system.if I can't flow the exaust faster from the motor then I wont even bother.

 

All I wont to do is permit better flow to the turbo.if a shorty header can't do that any better than a stock manifold.I'm wasting my time.the only reason I wont a header sysytem is to acheive better eg flow to the impeler wheel of the turbo.I got the idea that if I increassed the flow to the impeler wheel I could spin the turbo faster and create a little more boost.If I am rong about this then some one say so and I'll clean the my slate and go back to starting my fab buissnes.

 

In a perfect turbo setup the firing order of the engine would come into play, the exhaust pulses from each cylinder would arrive at the turbo in order and evenly spaced.
The tubes would be smooth bends and rather small in size since the more volume of air in the tubes you have to compress between the exhaust valve and the turbo impeller, the more turbo lag you have.
Also larger tubes mean the exhaust is going slower after it builds the required pressure to spin the turbo.
Smaller turbo's will spool faster, but lack being able to build big numbers.
Bigger turbo's can build big numbers, but also spool much slower.
Keeping as much heat as you can in the exhaust gasses helps spin the turbo faster since the exhaust volume is larger the hotter the exhaust is.
Most multi turbo systems use the turbo's in series, to build big boost.

Given all the above conditions and looking at the engine compartment size restraints, I think ATS did a rather good job building their system using stock manifolds.

I am sure it could be improved, but the cost of such a system would make it hard to justify for what I think would be a limited return on the dollar.

With the boost numbers I can get out of an ATS system, before I spent 1000 dollars improving the turbo I would install an intercooler. I think I would see a bigger return per dollar going that way.