twin or triple turbo?
Turbo Mini Forums

I was wondering if anyone had considered this besides me. A twin or triple turbo set up. Twin using one shared pip and then two on the sides or a triple using three small turbo's each with it's own pipe and support brackets. If you were to build three different turbos, using them for different power levels I think this might be a good set up, obviously barring the problem with fueling and set up... Also the amount of exhaust pressure would have to be played with... Thoughts anyone?

-James

Sounds like fun to fit together in the vast expanses of a mini engine bay

On 12th Nov, 2009 Paul S said:

I think Gary OS has taken over my role as the forum smart arse

Waste of time. A single turbo can be sized to achieve what is required to make a useable car, be it a road car or an out and out racer.

I think it would be a nightmare to fit into a mini's engine bay, and as far as having a single turbo in the bay, yes it can be made very useable, but wouldn't it be nice to say you have the only triple turbo'd mini in the world? And if change up the compressor wheels and such couldn't you make each turbo spool at different times and have a constant turbo spool thereby increasing acceleration? It's just something to toy around with, not necessarily for useability...

-James

The only real reason / need for a twin turbo is because you have two piston banks, i.e. V or Flat. It just makes the plumbing easier. To just do it for the sake of it seems a waste. Modern turbos can do everything you need without the hassle.

http://www.twin-turbo.co.uk
http://www.hillclimbandsprint.co.uk/default.asp

A man without a project is like a like a woman without a shopping list.

Wasn't someone on here building or experimenting with a twin turbo set up on a k1100 head?

Or am i mental?

I say do it. I don't know if anyone was doing a twin turbo, but in case they are, bypass that idea and go straight to a triple. After all, a single turbo can make 250hp easy in a 1300, so two must be 500hp and three must be 750hp.

Let us know how you get on.

Edited by turbodave16v on 6th Aug, 2009.

I'm thinking, going back to a thread I had spoken of a 1430cc ealier, triple turboing a 1430cc with turbo's built for the low rev(1500-2000) all the way to the top end. Might give the acceleration that people say is lacking in a turbo 1430, as I gathered that people thought a turbo was just not economical on a 1430. I'm going to drop one in a clubman, with the motor moved just a shade forward to help with clearances...

-James

http://www.mgcars.org.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runp...al-show-08.html

Gosh that's pretty.

An A series crank has 3 main bearings and 4 con rods that’s 1.33:1 ratio of condors to main bearings, The A series is an under square engine that means its stroke is longer that its piston is wide.
These two things combine to make an engine that hammers cranks at the best of time then we turbo them meaning we are hammering the crank even harder. Now you want to make the engine more under square. This will only compound the problem further you need to buy TBASE and read it before you go any further.
rd,
P

Now, I don't want to be daft with this, but what I'm gathering from all the responses is that it's more or less pointless and possibly terminal to the engine to turbo put that many turbos on an a series, especially a 1430cc. While I'll agree that it might kill the motor, I don't see it as pointless. It may not give me any more power, or it may, but it will be unique and fun to drive. If multiple turbos is pointless, so would be EFI because the carb does the same job.

In the 13's at last!.. Just

It may not give you the exactness of EFI, but it still gets the car going, and plenty of people are pushing out the same bhp figures as the ones with efi, they just haven't spent the bundle of cash on efi.

EFI isn't strictly about power. In some ways it it equivelent to MJ versus a dizzy. A dizzy will always make the same peak HP as MJ but there is still a world of difference in driveability etc.

Just build the triple turbo and prove all us doubters wrong

On 12th Nov, 2009 Paul S said:

I think Gary OS has taken over my role as the forum smart arse

LOL!! STOP!! HAMMER TIME!!

Edited by 1972-ANGUS on 7th Aug, 2009.

Edited by Sprocket on 7th Aug, 2009.

lol. I was wondering if anyone else caught that.

turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)

Denis O'Brien.

and dont meen to nit-pick paul but your average V8 has a ratio of 1.6:1, doesnt make all v8's naturally flawed :)

turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)

Denis O'Brien.

It may not make more torque or power than a single turbo, but wouldn't it be possible to create the same amount of torque through the rev range, or a good portion of it, with multiple turbos? I'm just looking at feasibility here, as I think it would be fun to try. It might blow up in my face, literally, but fun to watch.

Or just fit a twin screw blower and be done with it.

Oh...and fabricate a new gearbox and clutch to handle it.

9.85 @ 145mph
202mph standing mile
speed didn't kill me, but taxation probably will

turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)

Denis O'Brien.