Yet another question for you Turbo Experts.

[Todd Phenneger]

Joel,

  Read below for replies.  Some good ideas but lets look a little closer.



  Stetina <stetina at easy-pages.com> wrote: 
This is something that I cannot quite come to grips with : The K26 can
support enough airflow to feed 300 hp. The K24 can make a purported 285,
but has a quicker spool up (all things being equal). When the stock CIS
airflow meter "tops out", its "maximum measurable" airflow can be matched
with only enough fuel to support around what, 230 ? 240 ? 223.89647 ?!!?
Any more airflow then this cannot be used. Since each of these turbos can
support ALLOT more air then the car's fuel system can match, why would
anyone want to use the K26 ? Since you cannot use near the potential of
either unit, I don't see how "hi rpm performance" can be affected at all...
its just a matter of delivery. Slow or fast. I certainly vote for fast.
    You just brought up the Age old arguement.  On the low compression MC there is no question, the k24 is a dream.  On the 20vt its a dream.  But on a 10v its not as efficient as the 20v.  Better Intercooler, or EM drives it better, not sure why.  BUt on the high compression 10vt motors many have found that the k24 poops out around 12 - 14psi.  I'm not sure why as it takes 26psi just fine in the 20v's.  So basically, on your 5ktq the k24 is definately the way to go.  On an ur-q its VERY the way to go.  On an MC-2 maybe not, depending on the person.  
Scott Mockry's site that the fuel distributor in the old CIS cars is really
a 6 cylinder piece with one line plugged... (haven't had that part of my car
apart yet).
There seems to me to be 20% more fuel available pretty easily. Can 20% more
fuel feed 20% more boost ? I think so. Lets see, 230 x .20 = another 46.
230+46= 276. The impressive part would be the torque increase. Not bad, now
your starting to use that K24 (or almost a K26). Could that line be
controlled with a solenoid that is activated only a pre -set elevated boost
pressure and/or WOT ? Everything in essence would still be controlled by
the already modded computer. Sounds sorta straight forward ? Certainly not
perfect, but I'd be willing to bet that the initial rich spike caused as the
line is triggered to open (and maybe before max boost is reached) wouldn't
adversely affect the car's performance. Turbos like a little extra fuel
when they're really working...Could that line be split into several / many
smaller injectors so proper fuel distribution could be achieved ? ?
Well its an idea anyway...     Good theory, BUT, in actuality its not that easy.  First, all our CIS modules I'm pretty sure dont have a capped off output.  Maybe some early Mech CIS units did.  BUT,  putting one of these on the car wouldn't do much. as the correlation between the Mass Air Flow Plate and the funnel sides would be different causing a lean condition.  YOu need a CIS module designed for a turbo or go Javad's route and add more injectors with a controller.    If we could do this you could split the line but would lose the pressure that opens the injectors so they wouldn't work right.  Make sense, I wish it were this easy.I still want a rear swaybar but Addco and Suspension Techniques don't offer
one. Oh,one of these firms shows one that will fit an 83-85 5000. Anybody
know the difference between those and the 86 - 90 type 44s ?    Or you can put coil-overs just on the back to balance it better.   l8r

Todd Phenneger
    83' ur-q (awaiting a 20vt)
    84' 4ktq  fun but I'm sick of CIS.


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.audifans.com/pipermail/quattro/attachments/20000827/d7517d82/attachment.htm