Twin turbo TR Dyno

Ive already listed the information as to why Norwood creations are overrated, underperforming and unreliable. Do i need to go through every single article over the past 15 years that has tried to test a Norwood creation that has never, ever run right? Why not look at Car and Driver that tried to test 3 of his cars, AND EVERY SINGLE ONE WOULD NOT RUN. Or the 288 GTO that supposedly would run 250mph that could not break 200mph, with a Can AM motor. Or his dragster that never ran. Or his twin turbo f50 that cant run as good as a stock f50. IS THAT ENOUGH FOR YOU? Or do you want article scans also?

 

Norwood built a 288GTO replica in black. The car was sold to a local collector here. The NWRFCA's going to tour his collection early February. I could get more information and post photos then. Preliminary information I got was that this car required a lot of reworking after it was acquired.

 

"The curve on my F40 raises quickly to 420RWHP at 4000rpm and runs flat until over 7000 rpm. I don't see why a blower would be better?"

That's the way a turbo graph should look, and for the track , I agree 100% that it is the way to go. A blower motor's torque curve goes up from idle and runs nearly as flat as a naturally aspirated engine, and there is absolutley no lag. I think it is a nicer set-up for street use, but again, at the track, boost at idle and no lag don't mean a thing. The "best" set-up really depends on how and where you drive as well as preference. I like turbos and I don't mean to say anything bad about them in general, but on street cars I perfer blowers.

 

I prefer properly setup turbos.

 

was this Carmack's old TR??

 

You cant blame allan for NOT LYING! The cars tested by the car rags DID NOT run as they would have been expected to. Would you pay ridiculous amountsd of $$ for a turbo F50 that was slower than a stock one ( Car and Driver may '99)?

 

Tim, some people are blinded by sponsorship money.

 

I know we've had this discussion before, but you really need to be careful about what you read. The graph for this particular TR looks very peaky, but the only think I see wrong is that the boost has been turned up after the turbos were spec'd and that is why it looks the way it does. Re-setting would make the graph much flatter, but clearly the owner prefers the extra HP to smooth power. His call, but certainly nothing to blast norwood for. I haven't seen the f50 article, but again, without knowing anything about what the car was build to do or what instructions the ower gave Norwood, I don't see how you can condem them for it. Any time you modify a car, you are second guessing the factory enginneers. That means you are going to give up something they gave you to get more or something else, normally you trade both reliability and drivability for hp. I've found most people don't ask the right questions when they set out to modify their cars and end up with something they do want. Usually it starts with "How much boost can the engine handle?" when the right question was "How much boost do you recomend for the street?" I notice that the 2 guys who regularly post here with Norwood turbo cars were both send here with less boost than they asked for because the guys at Norwood have learned that 15 psi is about it if you want to actually drive it on the street. In fact, I'm doing a blower for a guy right now that just flat told me to build him a system after I told him will not work very well, but it's what he wants and it's his money. It will work fine on 100+ octane and he says he's fine with that. Should I tell him no because he might give the car to a maganize to test who'll find out that it doesn't run worth a damm on pump gas and the knock sensor will pull the timing so far back that it will probably loose to a stock car???

 

I look at things differently. A properly setup, mild turbo system, running approx 5 psi, should yield approx 100hp on 12 cyl car. Norwoods systems, boost more, and run worse. And from other articles tht ive read, when he has gotten a car to run, it ran, then blew up.

On a sadder tuner note, John Lingenfelter passed away yesterday.

 

Here you go Allan, how about this car:

http://www.koenig-specials.com/showroom/showroom_08_02.html

1000HP 512TR, 0-60 in 3.4, top speed 370KPH.

 

For $100k USD, Koenig will do a faster than stock F-50 and costs less than the Norwood, and it had been tested:

0-100 km/h 3,0 sec.
0-200 km/h 8,4 sec.
standing 1/4 mile 8,0 sec.
top speed 380 km/h

http://www.racecar.co.uk/roadtest/f50.html

 

How is this car going to run 8 seconds in the 1/4? Never happen unless dropped from a cliff.

 

............. the some idiot assclown will say YOUR CARS suck! Ha!

 

In my opinion, unless peak power on that engine comes at 9000+ rpm, or that combo is designed for top speed blasts down the salt flats, those turbos are too big.

 

Gotta be a typo?

1/4 is 8.0 seconds would yield a trap speed much much much higher than 200 km/hr, yet it takes 8.4 seconds to reach that speed.

 

Since I own Norwood Performance, which I bought from Bob in Feb. 1999, and share in history as well as business name with Bob Norwood I thougth I should add some information to this thread. I have know Bob for 20 plus years and have been involved in most of the projects he has put together, the good and not so good. I don't know why Allen has an apparent vendetta againts Bob but that is his prerogative, if Bob has done work for him in the past that was unsatisfactory and he wants to inform the users of this fourm what his experince was - that is one of the things I think Ferrari Chat is all about. However, I do not think that is the case. Everthing he has brought up has been talked about in the past. What ever the reason, he is correct that the artilcles he cites all achieved less than the results we hoped for. The F-50 and the TR in the Car & Driver test where not properly preped for the test. The F-50 was rushed to meet the magazine's time table and the TR had no preperation. The article is on BobNowood.com for anyone how wants to read it. The 288 GTO with the can am motor did not run 200 at the shoot-out, I think only in the 190's. It later did get a cover shot for Road & Track none the less. And the dragster was just Bob's personal toy.
But there have been dozens of articles about Bob over the past 30 years and a number of outstanding accomplishments as well. Here are some of the things Bob has succeeded in since I started working for Bob.
-1984 Can Am champion: It was a weak series so this might not sound so glorious but on the way to doing this they set 7 track records on several of the same tracks Indy cars ran on. Also when the Can am cars where a support race at Dallas for the F1 cars Roe's fastest race lap was quicker than the fastest F1 race lap. Bob was part owner of the team, got them the whole VDS Cam am effort, found Micheal Roe, Found Don Sneaters and was vital in the development of the car.
-1985 Bonneville: Bob takes a normally aspirated 308 and sets two records, one still stands today in FGT at 168 mph. Getting a record at the Saltflats is not automatic and keeping one for 15 plus years is not bad.
-1992 Oldsmobile Aerotech: GM hired CJ Batten and Bob to revamp the Olds Aerotech with a production based Aurora V-8. I was a mechanic and driver for this, we set 47 FIA and USAC records, and achieved the goal of beating the Mecedes held 25,000 kilometer speed endurance record.
-2000 Bonneville: The 288 GTO that could not break 200 years earlier sets a record of 245 mph, it's best pass ever was 267 mph (it has a 511 in. Chevy now).You can read about it in Forza #30. That same year we set two records with a Toyota MR-2 with a 1.5 liter turbocharged engine H/BGT @ 198 mph and H/BGMS @ 205 mph.
-2001 Bonneville: Back with the MR-2 with a 1 liter turbo and get two more records, I/BGT @ 151 mph and I/BGMS @ 146 mph. That was our last trip to the flats.
These are just some of the highlights, there are a number of good Ferrari related articles including the current issue of Forza. It would be a lie to say we have not had some bad ideas or things that did not go as planned but you will be hard pressed to find anyone who we have done work for that does not feel we handeled thier project in a professional manner.
As a side note the only 288 GTO we have ever put on the road is the chevy powered car, Bob sold all his GTO conversion parts to a guy in Florida. The only black GTO is in my shop unfinished. The car that Willis is probably refering to is a Jim Carpenter short wheelbase car in red that I did motor repair on. It was a mess but after a lot of work we where able to get it sorted out to the owners satisfaction. It has changed hands a coulple of times and was on Ebay as a 'Norwood' GTO but we did not build it. It is currently in Austin and the owner is a customer and friend.
I realize this is a long reply but I felt it was only fair to give 'the other side of the story'.
As far as the dyno sheet goes- here is some info that may be of interest. The car is set-up as follows: 2 Garret/Turbonetics T-4 non ballbearing turbos, 60-1 HiFi compressors, P/.96 tang. on the hot side.9.2 to 1 compression, ported heads, stock cams, Motec M8 manegment. It is a crappy looking pull because it was clicked off at 6000 rpm. The brake on the dyno was not turned on when the throttle was lifted,I'm guessing, so it almost looks like the clutch was slipping which is why there is not the usually straight line drop on the end of the curve. The car was set-up for alchohol and 8500 rpm. We backed it down when the current owner purchased it. I have dyno sheets at NorwoodPerformance.com for most all our TR turbo packages, look at the top dyno sheet under the TR stage 4 page for comparison. We size the turbos pretty lose on the exhaust side or it tends to be a bit brutal on the driveline. The compressor is at the upper end of the map. They are dogs out of the hole - mid to hi 11 sec qtr mile but 140 mph out the back. We have done 16 and no one has ever complainded about lack of performance, but needless to say this is not everyones cup of tea.
All the cars in the articles cited eventually got ironed out and all the owners are still good customers and friends. Carmack put about 30,000 miles on his TR before selling it to the current owner who loves the car, crappy dyno sheet and all. The F-50 turned out ok as well, we have never had the engine out which is a testomony to the quality Ferrari puts in these cars. Carmack has put a lot of miles on it but has not played with it much lately, it still runs.
For me it is not all about performance, integrity and customer satisfaction are the real name of the game.

 

James, i do not have anything personal against you, nor Bob Norwood. Im strictly going by what ive read, and heard about Bob Norwood. Every single article that i have read about a Norwood car, has promised the sky, and delivered..... thin air. I have spoken to a few people, who have had dealings with Norwood, and would not do so again. Holding a 168 mph naturally asp record in Ferrari 308, is not really all that impresive to me, as the car can clock in the 150's stock, and easily pick up a few mph, by just deleting windshield wipers, mirrors, taping ducts, etc. This holds true for Al Burtoni also, who shot his mouth off in the late 80's about making a Countach go faster than the 211mph Ruf Porsche. He came up with undriveable, non street car, that clocked 201mph. A joke, inmo. Making a car last for a record setting run is one thing, but making a car reliable over a period of time is another. TR's running on alcohol, etc, are not impresive. There are many tuners out there, that have a fantastic reputation, many do not. I also think that some people like the 350rwhp 348 owner, are more easily impressed than others. I mean come on, 350rwhp out of a turbo 8, is childs play. If he had say 600rwhp reliable, than id be impressed.

 

Well, I must say, Allen, you've set a new record. You've managed to pull the OWNER of Norwoods away from his busy schedule to defend himself and his business which he has spared no effort to build. He has done so over many years of hard work and making good on his word, (I know this as a fact, from personal experience). I think the number of people who are members of this board who have had dealings with him will universally agree. I've never spoken with a single customer who feels they've been shorted by Norwoods. Where are all of these people?
Now, as for my 348 with 350 whp. It was MY CHOICE to have it tuned to this level. "Making a car last for a record setting run is one thing, but making a car reliable over a period of time is another" The car has been quite reliable, and a daily driver for me. The reliability, I'd be happy to compare to any factory 348, as I watch him disappear in my rear view mirror every time I want. The car just runs great. You say you'd be impressed by 600 hp, it is tuneable to that level, but why?
I find it odd that you claim anyone else is "shooting his mouth off"
Why don't you give it up, and let the professionals, such as Mr. Patterson, concentrate on his work. My guess is, he has better things to do........................
so

 

lol! Im glad your impressed that your 350rwhp 8 cyl is reliable. Its really hard to make 350rwhp reliable. lol

WOOOOOWWWWWWPTEEEEEDOOOOOOOO! Little Honda rice rockets run 350rwhp on a tiny 4 banger all day long.

Your car should be detuned to be running 600rwhp daily, reliably. Then id be impressed. I had a Porsche that made over 700rwhp, that i drove daily, for years, with the a/c on.

 

"A properly setup, mild turbo system, running approx 5 psi, should yield approx 100hp on 12 cyl car"

OR

"Your car should be detuned to be running 600rwhp "

....it seems like you might be conflicted...... again......

 

"It is a crappy looking pull because it was clicked off at 6000 rpm. The brake on the dyno was not turned on when the throttle was lifted,I'm guessing, so it almost looks like the clutch was slipping which is why there is not the usually straight line drop on the end of the curve"

I wouldn't have guessed broken dyno....shows what I know

...and explains why the owner is so happy with it, if the power actually carries out to 8500 it must be a rocket.

 

Well pointed out Mark.

As a relatively new member, I have a question; does anyone else think allanlambo is a complete dick head?

 

If you’re not badmouthing Ferraris, you’re badmouthing Ferrari performance Specialists or anything else that has to do with any car that is not a Lambo. Lets face it, there are guys here in Australia, so I’m sure they’re in the US as well, who have Jap cars that out perform any street Ferrari and some race prepared ones as well, not to mention a Diablo, in fact I’m sure I could build an extremely quick Jap car myself if I wanted to spend a lot of money on that sort of a car, but simply put, I’d rather a Ferrari!

 

From the link posted above, here is the possibly more appropriate dyno sheet showing the full shape of the power and torque curves.

 

In the states, we spell what you've called "think" as k-n-o-w.
In either case - a resounding "yes," mate, The Ugly American is alive and kicking and soon to be a feature film - though this time around, it'll be a comedy out in spring - or in your case, fall of '04. As you may have guessed, rudeboy allanlambo is impressed by 4 things - money, horsepower, gory images and X-rated pics. In short - a classic case of arrested development at the age of 12.

Whoooooooooopdeeeeeedoooooooooooooooo

Edit: Hey, 4sfed4; nice curves...