LOl. Actually i call it as i see it. Im not blind sided by the Ferrari name, in anyway. I agree that there are Jap cars out there that will put a hurting on most Ferraris and Lambos. There are also Porsches that will do this. Thats not the topic here. The topic here is Ferrari performance. Which in this instance, is not good. I like how now we are posting POSSIBLE dyno sheets. lol
Thats the Stage 4 sheet off their website. I have no idea if the car this thread has focused on is even remotely similar. Thus the comment and the use of the word "possibly".
ndanger, tight car! I love the dyno numbers. There's another guy I know in the Dallas area with a TT TR, one of the test mules from the late '80s I believe with all the (now) uneccesary Ti engine bits. I saw it and a TT 512BBi that were in for service when I was sorting out some parts for mine a few years ago. He used to say that his favorite diet was of sportbikes. Sounds like fun... LS
Yeah I saw the 512bbi there for service, (actually two of them). I love these Norwood cars too. Unfortunately, if this guy thought he was going to eat sportbikes, he's in for a disappointment. My R1 performance crushes most anything on four wheels. 0-60 times way under 3 seconds, (about 2.4), and 0-100 times that are pure warp drive!
Indeed! I've had a mess of Jap bikes, but as you prob know most don't know how to ride and are certainly not going to be in the right gear or even halfway expecting to use all rev ranges against a car... The surprise would keep it even I'd guess. I had a 'Stang that could really "shock and awe" most R6s from 10-90mph...they were shocked at how hard they had to try and I'm sure they pissed their pants when they heard the exhaust too! Tell me about the 348 Turbo...sounds pretty impressive. LS
Thanks. The car 348 really has been fun to own and drive. It is a Norwood ceation that has been built as a turbo motor from the block out. He'd be able to tell you all of the details. It currently makes 350 whp. This is due to it's state of tune only. It is Motec controlled and could be tuned to make more, but as it sits, it is pure joy to drive and I've really loved the car.
There are lots of tuned supercars that will easily dust many a bike. Its not the 0-60 race you want with them, its the 60mph- on race you want. In my Porsche, all id look for to race were bikes, never lost, and the look on their faces was priceless. In my Lambo against a Hayabusa, from about 70-150mph, pretty much even, and then the car starts to pull, this is on nitrous though. Bikes are at a huge disadvantage, once aerodynamics kick in.
Not defending Norwoods by any means, but just posting facts and being balanced... Bob Norwood has nothing to do with Norwood Performance anymore and hasn't for several years. Norwood Performance is owned and operated by James Patterson who has been the topic of the several Forza articles on 308 engine rebuilding and the latest TR turbos. Bob Norwood as everyone knows is a legend. He's a mad scientist and was willing to take risks and explore areas that had never been explored before. The very nature of what he loved to do created many lessons learned back in the 80's and early 90's. Through all their experience James and Norwood Performance are now offering several stages of turbo kits and they stand behind their work. James and Norwood Performance are class acts. You won't find anyone that can say anything bad about their real life experiences with James and the Norwood Performance since James took over.
Actually, if you do any research, all sources will show, it's not even close. Bikes are so much faster, there would be no contest, if the drivers are of equal abilities.
We know allanlambo is a complete dick head, absolutely no bones about it, and no way for him to contest his level of dick headedness.
and from another post... A properly setup, mild turbo system, running approx 5 psi, should yield approx 100hp on 12 cyl car You keep referring to the number of cylinders these motors have and using the word "approximately". It is very clear to me that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to forced induction.(among other things) It is the displacement of the motor that matters, and how much air the compressor wheels move; not that it runs '5 psi' of boost. How about you do some reading on the subject so you can muster some real words to argue your point with Allan. Because at this point, you look like you are approximately an Idiot.
First off buttmunch, i dont need to do research, as ive witnessed it hundreds of times for myself. Against plenty capable riders. There are plenty of videos out that will show you what a real car, can do against a bike. Check Racing Flix, there is a vid of a Supercharged Viper racing a modified R1, from a dead stop. Obviously, if your used to a 350rwhp 348, then yes, there is NOOOO comparison to any bike. But, if you compare a modded Supercar, like a Supercharged Viper, or a Diablo on spray that will leave your little weenie mobile like you hit the brakes and threw it in reverse, then yes there is.
Buddy, ive had enough experience with turbo'd cars to make your head spin. By approximate, i mean, if you took lets say a Diablo, and didnt change the compression, just bolted on a small twin turbo system, that would run max 5 psi of boost safely, you would yield approx 100hp, could be 90, could be 110, thats why i say approx. Id love to hear your experience on the subject. Especially real world experience.
Well Allan, even after your rebuttle i'm still not impressed with your knowledge of turbos.... "small turbo system"? What compressor wheel would you suggest for a diablo with stock a stock c/r. (what is stock compression out of curiousity). For such a small goal, what turbine trim would you reccomend. What is your opinion on a appropriate turbine housing for this application? Could you suggest some a/r ratios. Now that Mr. Patterson has been nice enough to share some technical information about the car we are talking about. Why dont you tell us how you would remmedy the situation, instead of saying, "you suck... your car sucks" I wouldn't waste my time trying to impress you with my real world expirience, but if you like; I would be happy to mail you a copy of Corky Bells' 'Maximum Boost'.
Sorry Allan, I edited my post to keep things simple. I did not expect such a quick response from you. I hope you have better things to do with your time too.
Mr. Patterson - Thanks for visiting the site - I always enjoy hearing from people who have respect and know what they are talking about rather than what someone read in a magazine or what their "friends" told them.
Boost is a measurement of airflow restriction. Non chemical forced induction, by definition, has to have some "boost" or it wouldnt be forced induction. Knowing that compressor efficiency (within reason) has very little to do with power output, general statements like "5 psi boost = X hp" can easily be made if one has certain experience with a given engine configuration. I know little about a Diablo engine, but 100 hp out of 5 psi boost seems very reasonable to me and maybe even conservative. Engines like I am familiar with (2.2L 16V 4 cylinders) have been shown gain roughly 15 whp per psi of boost by my dyno tests. So, for a much larger V12 to pick up 20 crank hp per psi of boost seems exceedingly likely and conservative.
I was poking fun at Allan's 'general statements'. How much air is moved is what develops power, not how much pressure their is in the manifold. 5psi from a small t3 will not produce the same gains as 5 psi from a 60-1 hifi And there is alot more at play than the compressor wheel. It doesn't matter which motor you are familular with. They are all air pumps. They are all subject to the same sciences. Now please explain to everybody why compressor efficiency has 'little to do with power output'.
I agree with you on the mass of air and not pressure being what makes power, but one must understand that for a given configuration, more boost will almost always equal more mass flow. Ive played with (on the dyno) exactly what you are talking about (T3's and 60-1's) and it makes alot less difference than youd think in power especially when the intercooler is properly sized. At low boost levels like 5 psi, its going to be hardly worth mentioning. The gains come from the exhaust side. Exhaust backpressure is what kills power. Compressor selection plays into this as well (since the turbine must spin at the speed required by the compressor to meet the boost/airflow target), but unless the compressor is just way out of its league, the turbine wheel and housing are going to be the biggest dictators of power.
It doens't matter how big of a turbine you throw on a small t3, you can't move more than 30lbs or air a minute. Yes, of course. Until you start blowing hot air. But that's not what this disscussion was about. this is a different disscussion all together. If you look back I never said that a diablo or testarossa couldn't pick up 100 hp w/ some set up that was limited to 5psi. What I had said is that Allan's general statements show how rude he had been and he sounded uneducated. I can't think of a reason why a 5liter motor would have any problem with that goal. I myself have some issues with norwood's work. I can't understand why that turbo 348 car is running around with only ONE weak little Bosch compressor bypass valve. Those are only good for moving 200 hp worth of air. And he is trying to vent of twice as much through it. I am sure that is a huge limitation; and am willing to bet that it has, at the very least, a torn seal. But to pay for that kind of a job and get a $30 bov, just seems silly to me. But I dont post threads to make fun of Norwood's projects. I dont make fun of people's car. ALthough Diablo SV are for girls ..... ( jk ). I just thought he should know he looks like a complete donkey.
For low boost, like 5psi, the mass flow change is almost equal to the pressure change, 19.7/14,7= 1.34. So figure on about a 34% hp increase, on any engine with any number of cylinders, turbo or blower.
