Re: Compressor bypass valve questions...

["Graydon D. Stuckey" <graydon@apollo.gmi.edu>]

On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 QSHIPQ@aol.com wrote:

> Running 2 or more would solve the problem me thinks.  Regardless on how fast
> you shift, you will eventually wish you had done the job, it only takes
> one...

Yeah, I agree - its right in concept for sure.   I just haven't been 
convinced that I need to spend the time to install it yet.

> full bore for instance.  Running high boost and closing throttles doesn't mix
> well.  I measured over 50psi pressure spike (Ned claims 70+ is realistic)

I believe that completely.   However, I also make a special point of not 
closing the throttle all the way when I shift, so I think that is partly 
why I get minimal lag between shifts.  I've even tried it a couple times 
where I kept the throttle WOT during shifting for maximum boost in the 
next gear.   I think I'd try it at the drag strip, but it really is too 
much of a risk on the street.

> than a non freewheeling turbo.  I personally don't see a bypass valve as a
> performance gain, only a preventive maintenance item.  Saving turbos and IC
> end caps is a good idea, especially as you approach and exceed 1 bar boost
> pressures (14psi +).

That's a more realistic approach to bypass valves I think.   Alot of people 
think that the addition of a bypass valve will let them spin tires in the 
first three gears of as 5KCSTQ - it ain't gonna happen!

> Late 87 44 chassis turbos use a delay shut diaphram on the t-body (on the WOT
> side), which is a big help, especially combined with the valve.  The bigger

Yep, I think that's a great idea.

Later,
Graydon D. Stuckey 
****Standard disclaimer.****
Nothing I have said should be construed to mean anything you think I 
might have said in any way whatsoever.