It's old news now, but the current Hot Rod Magazine that I got in the mail yesterday (19 AUG 08) reported that A 1988 FORD THUNDERBIRD WITH A FORCED INDUCTION BIG BLOCK FORD (yes a Ford in a Ford) WON THE PUMP GAS DRAGS THIS YEAR!

Okay, it was a 1700+ h.p. centrifugal supercharged car with data logging. But it had a blow-through single four barrel CSU carb (and a photo of the owner clowning around with the carb hat on his head).

Surely this ought to inspire Car Craft to build the non-Chevy turbo big block project that the Doc and others have been clammoring for since . . . 2003.

It wouldn't have to make 1700 h.p. or win fastest street car to be a fun read.

Come on CC. Just do it!

http://speedzzter.blogspot.com  

I'd like to see a budget turbo project actually. It can be done. Use your head, not your wallet! A budget setup with a small turbo probably wouldn't be putting out pavement rippling power, but it would be different and interesting.  

what would be a good jy turbo setup 4 a 401 nailhead buick  

While the December 2008 issue of Car Craft wastes way too many pages on chicks in swimsuits and "baby tees" (pages 58, 72, 90-91), it was mostly redeemed by some decent TURBO content.

1. Page 12 -- Scott Gunderson's single blow-through turbo SBC Vega.

2. Page 76 -- Wild NMCA 2001 Corvette with trunk-mounted twin 88mm turbos!

3. Page 84 -- Chad Moskrey's primered 1967 Chevrolet Chevy II, featuring a 408-cube LS with LS6 heads and an intercooled 417 Motorsports-built twin Precision 64mm turbo system . . . and a Viperized T56 manual!  

(Sure, the Jeff Smith/GMPP-approved, belly-button-boring LS mill "$ux" but a streetable 1000 rwhp turbo system mostly makes up for that faux pas)

4. Page 92 -- A sad "Junkyard Crawl" showing what's left of a pair of America's first OEM turbocharged street cars (1962 Oldsmobile Jetfire).  Too bad CC hasn't found a complete and running one to show CC's younger readers.



None of these stories are an in-depth, non-Chevy, big-cube CC turbo project (which we've been asking for since 2003).  But they're better than nothing.  

yup...still waiting...

IF DF WAS STILL THERE...IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY.


but to quote dr511scj...'better than nothing'


later


al  

A TURBOCHARGED BIG BLOCK FORD WINS THE 2008 DYNOMAX "POWER TO THE WHEELS" competition.

Seehttp://blogs.carcraft.com/6306051/editorials/dynomax-power-to-the-wheels-final/index.html

Maybe Mr. Tyner's big "TURBO BBF" win will motivate CC to get started on the homespun BBF turbo project some of us have been asking for since 2003.

If CC could make 60% - 65% of the power that Mr. Tyner unleased from his BBF, it would be a tire-shredding success.

Instead, we'll probably get more boring, non-turbo LSx stories in "Camaro Craft."  

wow...i have to read the last three pages again...you guys just made my brain fart....


alan


ps: the SUMMERSET regal was a tiny FWD thing..they wre out in 86...by buddy had one...surprising quick POS IIRC...  

2008 may be a horrible year for Detroit, but with Fords winning HRM's Pump Gas Drags and the DynoMax "Power to the Wheels" challenge, grassroots Ford builders are having a pretty good year.

Now if CC can just find their way to turbocharging a Ford . . . .

http://speedzzter.blogspot.com  

Hey Speedzzter, while we're "Waiting for Godot" . . . I mean CC to turbocharge something other than a GM press release, have you seen that new Jay Miller Turbo book?

http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=Jay%20Miller&page=1

You did that review for Racecar Engineering for the Hartman turbo book.

Hartman Turbo Book review.  

cm_buick_guy:
what would be a good jy turbo setup 4 a 401 nailhead buick

Sorry Buick guy, I missed this one.

We probably need more info on what you want (Power expected, power range, how broad of a power band, boost threshold, how "built" is the short block, compression ratio, how good are the heads, etc).

But a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests the following would be in the ballpark (assuming iron heads, intercooling, pump gas, no or minimal water injection, decent fuel enrichment)

Single turbo -- Something in the range of the Garrett (Honeywell) GT42 through GT60

Twins -- T04E-50 or T04E-60 (old designs, not the latest aerodynamics, but cheaper), GT35 or GT37.  

JY T3s are too small for that many cubes unless the power output is going to be fairly low.  Some T3/T4 hybrids would work, though  (although a smallish T3 turbine could choke some high output combinations).

There are a lot of other similar turbos that might work.

But to really match one, you'd need someone to calculate the mass flow, pressure ratio and density ratios and plot it on some compressor maps. Most of the good turbo books explain how to do this.

I'd look at Turbonetics websitefor some good info if you're not wanting to buy/borrow any books. And there's always lots of opinons over at the Turbo Forums (formerly turbomustangs.com before they let in all the Chevy folks)

Just remember that there are a lot of ways to go turbo, from a $1,000 Mike Sitar-style JY build to a mega-buck best-of-everything pro build.  Don't get discouraged. Have fun!  

Check out the WICKED HOT turbo Ford Falcon in the current issue of Popular Hot Rodding . . . Four Cam Ford Indy V8 (Based on the Fairlane/Challenger SBF, not the Modular or the Cosworth DFV) . . . Holman-Moody style fastback conversion . . . inverted front bumper. . .

No, it's not duct-tape cheap, but it is dare-to-be-different bitchin!

And it's a far sight more interesting than another tired "Gen III" SBC yarn.  

Tur bo applications make a huge difference in power, I am gonna guess that they require more research than a naturally apsirated engine does. I think the reason we see so many GM craft articles, is simply because on average, GM's are generally cheaper to build. You know what I would really like to see out of turbo builds? A few things. A maxed out build on the turbo Pont 301, how about the Buick 3.8L V-6 fully maxed out? A Chrysler 2.5L K-car build, or how about a turbocharged 302 Ford? I have heard that SAAB 2.3L turbos and exhaust manifolds will bolt to a Quad 4, build one of those little bastards for full race. I hated that engines durability, but they were a high RPM screamer. Just some food for thought. Something tells me though, we'll see some more LSx builds, since Ford stopped producing FAST V-8's in 1998. Coincidently that was when the production on the 302 and 351W were nixed, for the 4.6L cast pop can engine. As far as a MOPARTS build, let's twin-turbo the famous Dodge 440. How about an old 318 or 360, with low comp, boosted to hell. 318's were rock solid engines. It is the only Chyrsler engine I would ever buy.

Yes I do know that Aluminum is more thermally efficient, btw. This is where they will produce more HP, than a cast iron engine. They lose less power from heat losses. I am not a big fan of cast aluminum engines however.  

dr511scj_1:
Check out the WICKED HOT turbo Ford Falcon in the current issue of Popular Hot Rodding . . . Four Cam Ford Indy V8 (Based on the Fairlane/Challenger SBF, not the Modular or the Cosworth DFV) . . . Holman-Moody style fastback conversion . . . inverted front bumper. . .

No, it's not duct-tape cheap, but it is dare-to-be-different bitchin!

And it's a far sight more interesting than another tired "Gen III" SBC yarn.

December 2008 PHR.

Man that Falcon is freakin' SICK!   The all-pro NASCAR fabricator that built it WIDENED THE FALCON BODY FOUR INCHES TO FIT A 2000 SCCA TRANS-AM SPEC CHASSIS. HOLY COW!

The '60s Indy-Ford Four-cammer is vintage A.J. Foyt!

A turbocharged Indy 'plant in an SCCA-based Falcon (that doesn't appear to have even one stock body panel remaining),  built by a pro that cut his fabricating teeth at Holman-Moody and on Earnhart's championship teams . . . .

I doubt that guy even allows any duct tape in his shop!  

FieroGTFormula: "Ford stopped producing FAST V-8's in 1998."

Okay, I'm mad at FoMoCo (See the 2010 Mustang thread), but your claim is totally bogus.

Ever heard of the 2003-2004 SVT Cobra?  

The Shelby GT500?

The second-gen Lightning truck?  

Even the less-than-overwhelming 2005 & up SOHC 3V Mustang GT.

(Read carefully): EACH OF THESE VEHICLES BUILT AFTER 1998 had a "FAST V-8."  

Power-adder Fords based on post-1998 V8s routinely make MASSIVE HORSEPOWER. 600 h.p. is becoming routine with bolt-ons (Even factory bolt-ons for the Shelby).  800-900 h.p. is possible for street cars.  All-out competition cars can hit 1600 h.p.

You need to get your facts straight about the Modular.  Sure, Ford could do better (see the 2010 Mustang thread), but to say that Ford's post-1998 V8s are not "fast" and devoid of SERIOUS potential is just ridiculous.  

TurboTed:
FieroGTFormula: "Ford stopped producing FAST V-8's in 1998."

Okay, I'm mad at FoMoCo (See the 2010 Mustang thread), but your claim is totally bogus.

Ever heard of the 2003-2004 SVT Cobra?  

The Shelby GT500?

The second-gen Lightning truck?  

Even the less-than-overwhelming 2005 & up SOHC 3V Mustang GT.

(Read carefully): EACH OF THESE VEHICLES BUILT AFTER 1998 had a "FAST V-8."  

Power-adder Fords based on post-1998 V8s routinely make MASSIVE HORSEPOWER. 600 h.p. is becoming routine with bolt-ons (Even factory bolt-ons for the Shelby).  800-900 h.p. is possible for street cars.  All-out competition cars can hit 1600 h.p.

You need to get your facts straight about the Modular.  Sure, Ford could do better (see the 2010 Mustang thread), but to say that Ford's post-1998 V8s are not "fast" and devoid of SERIOUS potential is just ridiculous.

My statement reflects an opinion. I'll take OHV pushrod engines over the OHC junk of today. OHC engines are physically larger, a larger engine=more wight. By the way turbo Ted, I responded to the 2010 Mustang thread. Also why don't you check out You-tube where they have the Banshee ATV outrunning the V-6 models in a qtr mile? Oh and yeah how about the day I was at Quaker city raceway in Salem, OH. Yeah a 4.6L OHC scrap heap, err I mean Ford Mustang GT, with 5 Speed, got blown away by over 3/10's of a second in the qtr mile, by a Pontiac Grand Prix with a FWD supercharged V-6!!!! Hey look the GM had a less efficient drivetrain, two less cylinders, and old-tech OHV pushrods. Both car were completely STOCK. Oh well then again, the GP, didn't have 8 catylitic converters colgging the exhuast. That probably made a difference. One catylist from the factory, as opposed to 8, will probably flow better. When Ford produces a STOCK PRODUCTION V-8 that can beat something, other than a FWD GM 4 banger, then I'll call it fast. Heck the Ram-Air V-6 Grand Ams, run a 15.4 qtr mile stock, that is just as fast as the GT Crustang. Oh they are FWD, and automatic overdrive as well. Both the GP, and the Grand Am, lose more power through  the drivetrain, from center of gravity shifting to the rear tires, and from converter slippage. Just some food for thought Ted. You tell me to do research, I have seen results at a track first hand. 800-900 HP is possible for street cars???? With what maybe 1 million bucks(Bugatti's Veyron), or a Ferrai, or even the cost friendly LPE Vette for only 165000 bones. Speed costs money, and bolt-ons alone will not get any engine to 800-900 horsepower.