Turbo systems for X1/9's

[Rob1400T]

I'm rather late to this thread but I've had a scan through and have found a lot of the conversation familiar. Mine is a road car with the engine from a 1.4 Uno turbo. I still retain both boots as I wanted to keep it as 'standard looking' as possible. If I can help with anything, just let me know. Some of you will know me on my Instagram @retrokid1983

 

[Rob1400T]

 

[Dr.Jeff]

Glad you posted in this thread. Nice job with your build and the car looks good.

The general engine layout is similar to what I'm doing, except I'll have a air-to-air rather than water intercooler. This arrangement provides short piping with a direct path between the turbo and intake.

1.6 bar boost is pretty high, I'm guessing your engine isn't completely stock internally? Sure makes good power.

 

[dllubin]

I'm rather late to this thread but I've had a scan through and have found a lot of the conversation familiar. Mine is a road car with the engine from a 1.4 Uno turbo. I still retain both boots as I wanted to keep it as 'standard looking' as possible. If I can help with anything, just let me know. Some of you will know me on my Instagram @retrokid1983View attachment 38117View attachment 38118

Did they just assume a 12.5% power train loss to derive the engine horsepower or do they have representative data on loss for similar configurations?

 

[Rob1400T]

Glad you posted in this thread. Nice job with your build and the car looks good.

The general engine layout is similar to what I'm doing, except I'll have a air-to-air rather than water intercooler. This arrangement provides short piping with a direct path between the turbo and intake.

1.6 bar boost is pretty high, I'm guessing your engine isn't completely stock internally? Sure makes good power.

Glad you posted in this thread. Nice job with your build and the car looks good.

The general engine layout is similar to what I'm doing, except I'll have a air-to-air rather than water intercooler. This arrangement provides short piping with a direct path between the turbo and intake.

1.6 bar boost is pretty high, I'm guessing your engine isn't completely stock internally? Sure makes good power.

Yes it's compete with forged pistons and rods. The turbo is clocked upwards so pipework goes straight into the charge cooler, rather than under the car. I'm about to add a tubular exhaust manifold next week and after that the 1400cc engine will be at its limit. The only way forward after is to stroke and enlarge the capacity. I use the Uno gearbox with the larger Punto flywheel which means I can used the largest Punto clutch, 210mm off memory. I had a paddle clutch made from CG Motorsport and it's not slipped yet.

 

[Rob1400T]

Did they just assume a 12.5% power train loss to derive the engine horsepower or do they have representative data on loss for similar configurations?

I really wouldn't know to be honest with you. The mapping is done by FC performance. Leighton is regarded as the best in the business for Fiat's here in the UK. He mapped the 1.9 Guy Croft Uno turbo engine that's documented all over the web.

 

[dllubin]

Sounds like they should have a reasonable idea then if they are heavily into Fiats. The 12.5% number seems to be in the ballpark of other numbers I've heard.

 

[Bjorn Nilson]

Wow! Very nice looking car with impressing power @Rob1400T . I have a similar setup and just like on my 1.3l Mk1 your curves are dropping drastically at around 6800rpm. I wonder why these engines tend to die above 7k rpm. I got 205whp/267wNm @1.6 bar. I could do just a little bit more boost but I am very close to max what the TD04HL 14T can handle. I am about to install a Mk2 C510 gearbox as I expect the X1/9 gearbox won't handle the load in the long run. I would also like to have a Torsten diff which is easier to find for the C510 box. My biggest concern is to have a good working cable gear shift. Can you advise me on this matter? I've heard cables etc from MGF would fit quite well, but that is impossible to get here in Sweden. What do you have? Do you have any pictures?

 

[Rob1400T]

Wow! Very nice looking car with impressing power @Rob1400T . I have a similar setup and just like on my 1.3l Mk1 your curves are dropping drastically at around 6800rpm. I wonder why these engines tend to die above 7k rpm. I got 205whp/267wNm @1.6 bar. I could do just a little bit more boost but I am very close to max what the TD04HL 14T can handle. I am about to install a Mk2 C510 gearbox as I expect the X1/9 gearbox won't handle the load in the long run. I would also like to have a Torsten diff which is easier to find for the C510 box. My biggest concern is to have a good working cable gear shift. Can you advise me on this matter? I've heard cables etc from MGF would fit quite well, but that is impossible to get here in Sweden. What do you have? Do you have any pictures?

I had the mgf system and had cables made from speedy cables. Sadly all of this went in the bin because I couldn't justify the sloppy feel of it all. The MK2 MR2 system worked beautifully for me and it's my favourite part of the car.

 

[Dr.Jeff]

I wonder why these engines tend to die above 7k rpm.

I'm only making a wild guess, but it might be due to the limit of head flow capability. Perhaps a crossflow head with four valves per cylinder or such would allow more top end with everything else the same? There is a point where more boost won't result in more power because of this. The flow restrictions then create more heat and detonation will destroy things. But I don't know for certain if that's the case for these engines.

 

[fiatfactory]

I'm only making a wild guess, but it might be due to the limit of head flow capability. Perhaps a crossflow head with four valves per cylinder or such would allow more top end with everything else the same? There is a point where more boost won't result in more power because of this.

Actually it's more likely to be related to the size of the turbocharger exhaust housing, at a point of flow (actual exhaust volume is determined by revs) the housing is becoming restrictive... it becomes a trade off though, as a bigger exhaust housing will tend to spool slower.... there is simply no limit to flow capability thru the inlet side, the fluid dynamics of charge under pressure is very different to a NA motor.

the point of more boost and no more power (or a drop) will be related to charge air temperatures, a clever guy called Boyle worked out that pressure / temperature and volume are directly related... so bump the pressure and the charge temp also goes up.

One thing that I have not seen discussed in this thread so far (although I'll admit I havent read every post) is a draw thru or blow thru carburetted system. Jeff if your thinking only baby boost (under 0.5 bar) then a blow thru carb would be easier / cheaper and easier to tune. Think maserati Bi turbo with a 36DCNVH being blown thru, they are made to handle boost.



SteveC

 

[Dr.Jeff]

Actually it's more likely to be related to the size of the turbocharger exhaust housing

Quite possible however the two examples discussed above have completely different turbos with different exhaust housings, and yet they both drop off at the same point. So that doesn't completely follow the logic.

One thing that I have not seen discussed in this thread so far (although I'll admit I havent read every post) is a draw thru or blow thru carburetted system.

Ha, what century are you living in? There is good reason why carbs are not used for turbo systems - or just about any engine - any more. But that doesn't mean someone can't still do it, along with their breaker points ignition.

But seriously, I'm planning around .7-.8 Bar to start. Although that's certainly not high, it is around or above most factory turbo systems, which is my project goal - to mimic a factory concept. The objective is to apply that concept to a stock US spec X1/9 1500 SOHC and see how it works. It is not intended to be a high performance engine, only to make the X more drivable - like it should have from the beginning. So it is a conservative project plan.

 

[fiatfactory]

well the reason is purely economic from a production car standpoint...

not my work, this is my Father's race car.... uno Turbo with a 2 litre lancia transplanted into it..., draw thru 55DCOE, 28psi of boost, a reliab;le 400hp and many state championships and many many race wins later, people stopped laughing.....

if the turbos on these two engines are indeed different exhaust housing sizes (a noteable difference, not a little bit) thn perhaps the stock manifold is the point of exhaust restriction... but the point I made about fuid dynamics of charge under pressure still hold true, the exhaust is not under pressure (well not like the inlet is) it is has serious volume though as such a large qty of air / fuel has been burned (way more that 100% volumetric efficiency with a turbo)

SteveC

 

[Dr.Jeff]

I get your point, I was only having fun with you. Actually in the air-cooled VW world turbos with a carb were very popular on some very successful drag cars. And there are a few guys in the US still building carb based turbo small-block Chevy engines. So it can be done.

But keep in mind that the US spec 1500 X's were fuel injected. So from a economic and production point it would be easier to keep it injected when adding a turbo. With a programmable ECU the tuning can be dialed in much finer than with a carb. Plus it will control the ignition along with the fuel, so also much more efficient overall.

One of the primary goals in my case is to see just what it will cost to do this. So far I've managed to keep everything very reasonable. It looks like a mild turbo system can be added to the 1500 for less than a performance NA build, and done with enough safeguards to be at least as reliable. Plus it should offer as much or more power - particularly torque. But all this is what I'm looking to find out so we'll see. Not to say a performance NA 1500X isn't a good idea, just exploring options. Purely a learning exercise for me.

 

[Janis]

well the reason is purely economic from a production car standpoint...

not my work, this is my Father's race car.... uno Turbo with a 2 litre lancia transplanted into it..., draw thru 55DCOE, 28psi of boost, a reliab;le 400hp and many state championships and many many race wins later, people stopped laughing.....

View attachment 38139

if the turbos on these two engines are indeed different exhaust housing sizes (a noteable difference, not a little bit) thn perhaps the stock manifold is the point of exhaust restriction... but the point I made about fuid dynamics of charge under pressure still hold true, the exhaust is not under pressure (well not like the inlet is) it is has serious volume though as such a large qty of air / fuel has been burned (way more that 100% volumetric efficiency with a turbo)

SteveC

Isn’t there or I can’t find piping to intercooler?

 

[fiatfactory]

you can't intercool a charge that has fuel in it, the fuel condenses out as droplets. it relies on the "latent heat of evaporation " to cool the charge, the inlet pipe gets condensation on the outside. There is alos water injection and you will notice several "hobbs" pressure switches around the engine, it was set up to spray water / methanol mix as well as additional fuel into the inlet pipework as the boost rose.

SteveC

 

[fiatfactory]

One of the primary goals in my case is to see just what it will cost to do this. So far I've managed to keep everything very reasonable. It looks like a mild turbo system can be added to the 1500 for less than a performance NA build, and done with enough safeguards to be at least as reliable. Plus it should offer as much or more power - particularly torque. But all this is what I'm looking to find out so we'll see. Not to say a performance NA 1500X isn't a good idea, just exploring options. Purely a learning exercise for me.

I'm definitely thinking in terms of cost.... lemons racer is all about cost.

In australia the lemons rules allow for a carburettor replacement not as part of your lemons dollars, I guess they want to make sure that no one has fuel leaks... anyway it opens up an interesting loophole that I've exploited by fitting a 36DCA. the DCA is used in a boosted application too, as a draw thru caburettor for a supercharged Fiat / Lancia engine.

With the plenum I'm using above my carbuettor, it would be very simple to add boost as the top of the carb is already sealed, the DCA also uses a spansil float (not brass like the dcnf) so it will handle boost.

$160 aud for a chinese t25 copy turbocharger... I can make an adaptor or pipework from the standard sinlgle or twin outlet manifold to feed the exhaust turbine....reverse engineeing vacuum advance to become boost retard isnt too difficult either, now that has got to be cheaper than building an engine management/igntion control system, as the stock bosch EI and ignition setup just wont hack the pace.

and I'm afraid I totally disagree with the statement regarding relative cost/ cheaper than building a performance NA engine... it costs me absolutely nothing in dollars to port a head and gain Hp and make 105hp at the crank, stock valve siizes, stock euro cam, a lancia 4DMTR and stock twin out ehaust manifold with a 40/80 cam thats 99hp at the wheels, that is consideraby more power than a stock uno turbo engine, it will always cost something to buy a turbocharger and associated parts.... the turbocharger simply allows you to increase VE without the need for hand finishing like I do to my engines, but buying parts alone will only get you so far.



SteveC..

 

[Bjorn Nilson]

Actually it's more likely to be related to the size of the turbocharger exhaust housing.

Could the restriction be in the manifold? I made a cone shaped adaptor between the turbo and stock manifold to have the TD04 fitted. The manifold outlet diameter is approx 15-20mm smaller than the turbo. Would be interesting to see the result from a custom made manifold with a perfect fit to turbo that @Rob1400T is working on.
BTW this crazy 406hp UT doesn't have a problem with revving. Have a look at 3:15. Sounds and looks like 8000-9000 rpm.

 

[Rob1400T]

Could the restriction be in the manifold? I made a cone shaped adaptor between the turbo and stock manifold to have the TD04 fitted. The manifold outlet diameter is approx 15-20mm smaller than the turbo. Would be interesting to see the result from a custom made manifold with a perfect fit to turbo that @Rob1400T is working on.
BTW this crazy 406hp UT doesn't have a problem with revving. Have a look at 3:15. Sounds and looks like 8000-9000 rpm.

This is going on next week so I'll let you know

 

[Janis]

Could my 1.6 from Punto with IHI turbo from 1.3 uno achieve that both Yours achieved, or is my limited to ~1bar? My expectations was much less ~160hp, to don’t get disappointed