Turbo systems for X1/9's

I have a different opinion. I've modified the inside scoop and built a box to encapsulate the oil cooler to maximize the airflow. I also installed a small fan on top to suck the air if standing still or driving slowly. It works very well and I seldom see temps above 100⁰C.
View attachment 76674
View attachment 76671
View attachment 76672
View attachment 76673
That's a decent size fan for the enclosure. I wonder if that is why this arrangement is working as well as it is? I suspect it might not do so good without the fan. However if you also opened up the side scoop then that will help, particularly when the car is in motion. Either way, great information and glad it does the job. :)
 
@Dr.Jeff @Bjorn Nilson - thanks, guys - and I agree that the fan is necessary.

Bjorn, I really like how you integrated your cooler. Looks great. Maybe a bit more difficult to change the timing belt, but worth it in the end.
That's a nice little fan that you have!
 
The Mk1 and Mk2 manifolds are very different due to the different turbo set ups. My Mk2 manifold developed some minor cracking, but I found replacement Uno ones to be none existent. However, Fiat might have sussed that there were issues, as the early Punto GT manifolds are the same and have the addition of extra ribs running along the casting, I would imagine to make them stronger. They are also easier to obtain.
View attachment 38214
Thanks for the post I know this is a few years old would you have a part number for this? I think I've found one but want to be sure.

Thanks, DeLaun
 
The tubular turbo manifold is also available directly from China (where they are made):

Less expensive and ships to the USA.
However it is still for a T25 turbo mount flange.

Finding good Uno Turbo factory manifolds will be very difficult. Most have warped, cracked, and been discarded by now. One option might be to use a turbo mount adapter from the T25 to fit your style turbo (T3). Basically a bolt-on flange that has both the manifold's and the turbo's flange sizes:
 
Yes, maybe an adaptor is necessary. I made one myself to fit a Mitsubishi TD04HL-14T (Volvo) on a stock UT Mk1 manifold.
BTW, the Mk1 manifold has a rod connected to the block to prevent cracking.
 
Last edited:
BTW, the Mk1 manifold has a rod connected to the block to prevent cracking.
I don't remember a rod on mine. Where is it exactly? Maybe I am missing something?

I had to have my manifold repaired due to a crack. It was braised, the heat from this caused a warp so it wasn't flush to the head. It was then re-surfaced to make it flat again. Its has been good ever since.

If I was starting again I might try and get the flanges for both sides and have an exhaust or machine shop weld up one similar to the one on aliexpress but without the need for an adapter
 
I don't remember a rod on mine. Where is it exactly? Maybe I am missing something?

I had to have my manifold repaired due to a crack. It was braised, the heat from this caused a warp so it wasn't flush to the head. It was then re-surfaced to make it flat again. Its has been good ever since.

If I was starting again I might try and get the flanges for both sides and have an exhaust or machine shop weld up one similar to the one on aliexpress but without the need for an adapter
It appears to have been a metal plate bracket (two nuts on top and two bolts at the bottom), but it was replaced with a rod on my engine when I got it. However, I think the rod works just as well.
Having a machine shop welding up an SS manifold would be expensive? The cheapest way would be to modify a Chinese manifold with a flange that fits. If not on a budget, replace the tiny IHI turbo with a bigger T25 to gain power.

1711809445375.jpeg
 
Ahh I think I remember this now. Thanks for the photo.

I seem to remember on my donor engine the plate was there but unbolted from the block. Maybe the fact it wasn't bolted up contributed to the crack in the manifold.

On reassembly I bolted it back up again. But to be honest I need to double check.
 
One option might be to use a turbo mount adapter from the T25 to fit your style turbo (T3). Basically a bolt-on flange that has both the manifold's and the turbo's flange sizes:
Very interesting... I was thinking maybe I could modify the turbo flange somehow. Thanks for posting.
Yes, maybe an adaptor is necessary. I made one myself to fit a Mitsubishi TD04HL-14T (Volvo) on a stock UT Mk1 manifold.
BTW, the Mk1 manifold has a rod connected to the block to prevent cracking.
Love to see some pics if you have any.
It appears to have been a metal plate bracket (two nuts on top and two bolts at the bottom)
Here is a pic of the bracket. I could make a one of these for very little if you are interested.

I had to have my manifold repaired due to a crack. It was braised, the heat from this caused a warp so it wasn't flush to the head. It was then re-surfaced to make it flat again. Its has been good ever since.
Probably the most realistic option for me also. All I could find for sale were welded also.
 

Attachments

  • 006.JPG
    006.JPG
    279 KB · Views: 19
  • 007.JPG
    007.JPG
    501.4 KB · Views: 20
  • 023.JPG
    023.JPG
    453 KB · Views: 19
Last edited:
Following several of the comments in posts #507 through 511:

The UT manifold I got was reported to still have the factory support bracket/plate (correctly pictured by @HeavyD above) installed when the manifold was removed. However there were several cracks in the manifold despite the bracket. Some of them seemed pretty severe. Therefore I suspect the cast iron manifold may be prone to cracking anyway (even with the bracket). Perhaps due to extreme heat cycles, or maybe some sort of internal vibrations/harmonics, or perhaps the exhaust manifold gasket allows too much movement of the manifold at the top but the rigid support bracket does not at the bottom?? Or maybe mine had been severely abused by a prior owner before the seller I got it from. But these are old cast iron manifolds with a extremely hot turbo mounted to them, so cracking isn't surprising.

The cracks on mine were also repaired (welded) which resulted in quite a bit of warpage and even twisting. It took a lot of resurfacing to make it true at the head mating surface. In fact, the warpage and resurfacing resulted in some of the mounting holes (especially towards the ends of the manifold) to not align properly with the mounting studs on the head. So I enlarged those holes. But I also had to do some "port matching" because the manifold's ports no longer aligned with the head's - due to the twisting. Not ideal but I found the same limited options that @HeavyD has.

Something to keep in mind is tubular turbo manifolds (in general) are also prone to cracking. Mainly due to their thinner walled construction not able to support the turbo's weight or excessive heat. So buying one may not be the total solution as we might hope.

If I were to build another turbo engine for the X (mine utilizes the original 1500 X engine) I would start fresh. First I'd get one of the tubular manifolds and then modify it with additional supports or braces to try and prevent cracking. Second I go with a new T25 turbo. Not only due to the mounting flange issue, but also for its more modern design features (much more efficient than the original IHI), and to gain the added power potential (over the original turbo) as @Bjorn Nilson described. Honestly if you look at the prices for the tubular manifold and some of the affordable new turbos it isn't that bad. But it could also get very expensive depending on what components you choose.

That being said, if you already have a UT manifold and turbo then it doesn't make sense (financially) to throw it away and buy all new stuff. I'd have the cracks repaired and the mating flange resurfaced and keep what you have. In the end that was my decision anyway.
 
A further thought regarding the support bracket for the turbo.

In my case a new 'custom' bracket needed to be fabricated. Mainly due to my use of the original X 1500 engine vs a UT engine.
The X block does not have the casting for the support bracket to bolt to (red arrow in pic below). But mine did have the cast flange for the EGR system (see note below*) - (blue arrow). So I used that casting and bolts with a bracket that reaches over to the manifold's flange (where the stock bracket bolts - yellow arrows).
1711809445375.jpg


* NOTE: On the UT block, I believe that casting and nipple (blue arrow) is for the coolant supply to the turbo? Since the US spec X block obviously does not have a turbo, that is where they mounted one of the US required emissions controls (if I recall correctly I think it was a EGR component), which also has a small water feed from the block to keep it cool. Since I removed all of the emissions stuff, this casting and hole were no longer needed. Therefore I drilled the hole larger and tapped it for a nipple to feed coolant to my turbo. Then the custom turbo support flange (described above) bolts to the two threaded holes on either side of it.

Something I found was the warped manifold (following repairs and machining) resulted in the lower support bracket mounting studs (yellow arrows above) to be in a slightly different location than original. Therefore the stock support bracket would not have aligned correctly with the two mounting bolts on the block (red arrow). This could place a load (stress) on the manifold as the bracket is tightened onto the block. That stress will further promote cracking. Perhaps something for you guys to check on your UT engines. It may require a little shimming to make everything bolt up without any strain.

@Bjorn Nilson , I kind of wonder if it would benefit you to replace that single tube support strut (green arrow) with a more substantial bracket....more like the stock one that @HeavyD pictured?
 
Found a good pic of the stock turbo support bracket in place:

UT engine 5.jpg


Below is another pic of it, also showing the water feed on the block to cool the turbo. Not certain exactly what engine this is, but as you see the block does not have the large casted area and bolt-on hose-nipple flange shown in the pic from Bjorn (green arrow in my post above, #513). This one has a hose nipple pressed directly into the block in a smaller circular casting. It might be the angle of the pic, but it also appears to be located slightly different - maybe higher and further rearward? Anyone know more about this one?

UT engine 1 - Copy.jpg
 
In a previous post I talked about a couple of engines that applied the same concept I have for my current X build (project "Turbo X"); take a stock engine and add a small turbo with low boost and conservative tune. Today I came across yet another such example. All of these were with very different engines (not the SOHC Fiat) and all sounded very successful to me. This latest is a 6 cylinder, bone stock in good mechanical condition. They dynoed it without the turbo and again with it...no other changes. With less than 10psi boost it increased torque and HP by more than 60% over NA. But what I especially like is those improved (boosted) numbers were at the same RPMs as the NA. In other words the engine still performs best at a safe, stock level RPM range. No need to rev the hell out of it like a built NA engine requires. And it had a strong flat curve starting low in the range as well. So a very drivable street engine, unlike a high strung ("peaky") built NA. Encouraging for me to get back on my turbo build again. :)


Later EDIT: I intended to include more detail about the third engine example but had to go take care of another obligation. So I'll add this now:

It was a large displacement V6 from the early 80's with a single turbo added. The stock cast iron NA exhaust manifolds were retained. He made a exhaust crossover pipe from one side to the other to mount the sole turbo. The turbo's wheels dimensions were given but I don't recall now (the AR was not noted). However it did not appear to be a large unit. The fact that the boosted power curve peaked pretty much at the same RPM as the NA curve would seem to indicate the turbo ran out of 'puff' at about the engine's RPM limit (not a high revving unit to start with). It was noted this engine was very restrictive, not generating a lot of HP NA for such a big displacement. And with no modifications to be made, that meant it could not handle a lot of boost. So the relatively small turbo allowed the boost to come on early resulting in no noticeable lag. In it's NA form this was a high torque engine, with significantly more torque than HP. And that followed through to the boosted numbers; at less than 10 psi it generated well over 700 ft lb. This is one aspect of a boosted engine that I really like over a highly modified NA one - it makes LOTS of torque starting early in the curve and never stopping.

A intercooler was added. The engine management was just a modified (retuned) stock unit and the ignition was the stock distributor (maximum advance was locked out). As mentioned everything else was bone stock (although the piston ring gap was increased). Not exactly high tech and definitely a low budget build, doing all of the work himself in his garage. The dyno shop reported no signs of detonation. They played with a couple different boost levels and ignition settings. Interestingly once the boost got to around 7-7.5 psi the gains in power output gradually diminished, reaching the max at 9.5. This was felt to be a function of the highly restrictive engine design. Likewise, bumping up the ignition timing did little after a certain point. Going further would only increase the risk of detonation without noticeable power gains.

I like the simplicity and low cost of this build. And the results were impressive considering. With the Fiat SOHC's highly limited (and restrictive) head design, but stout bottom end, adding boost seems to be a good alternative for increasing the power output on the X.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top