70 dart swinger slant turbo build and mild restoration

-
Cool thanks the reason I was asking about the port size is to know whether or not I can fill the port on the flange with weld a little or just leave the flange the same size I'm gonna port the head later I have alot of experience porting mostly just port match and clean up with diesel stuff but it should make a difference even with the small valves.

I spent my long, and basically-uneventful life, playing with naturally aspirated engines and trying on several occasions, to squeeze the last iota of power out of whatever it was I was working on. I was racing NHRA, and was deeply entrenched in the protocol that preached that sweating the details was the path to glory and more power. I saw combustion chambers and ports that had been the recipients of hundreds of hours of polishing and tender loving care from owners who spent ALL of their spare time seeing to it that the output of their projects never suffered from a lack of attention. That was my education.

It went on for years and years...

Then, I discovered forced induction. For my money, the rules herein are different, at least, in some ways.

Having relied on air flow that comes from ambient pressure (14.7 psi?) for many, many, years, all of a sudden, the game had changed; no longer is one atmosphere ALL that's responsible for filling the cylinders, using all the tricks of the trade, such as matched ports, smooth port-walls, multi-angle valve jobs, tuned intake-lengths, smooth radai bends in the manifolding and research on ram-tuning, being of ultimate-importance...

YOU CAN BLOW IT IN! :D

Simply changing (increasing) the boost-level can do wonders for performance! DUH!!!!

We used to make incremental changes in camshaft positionong (advance/retard,) to gain a couple of hundredths of a second in e.t., but simply turning up the boost (within reason,) can give you performance increases that will blow your socks off.

It is a different mindset, but comes with its own group of caveats.

For instance...

I never worried about detonation on my naturally-aspirated motors.... if the thing was a little lean, or the timing a bit too "fast," I'd just hear it PING" and adust things, accordingly.

That attitude will get you a broken motor with a turbocharger, in short-order. You must be ever vigilant against detonation in all cases, and try your best to avoid it.

Religious adherence to the monitoring of air-fuel ratios is the first line of defense against ruining your motor through detonation resulting from too-lean of a mixture, under boost. Too much spark advance is almost as important. Fuel selection is critical, as sufficient octane for the circumstances is crucial. Having built the right compression ratio into the basic rotating infrastructure is also, highly-important. Riding herd on boost-levels is another important discipline to be followed constantly. Boost creep has destroyed many an engine...


So, the things to watch out for are quite different from those in our naturally-aspirated efforts, and some things that used to be very important, don't seem to be as much-so, with this new protocol.

For instance, the critical importance of flow as regards port-matching, may not have such a big effect, if you're running 20 pounds of boost. With higher (20-pounds and up) boost-levels, the air/gas mixture WILL get into the cylinders, because the turbo has created enough pressure to overcome the slight mis-match at the port-opening, regardless.

I think cylinder-filling is an area wherein forced induction has eased the fine points of flow-enhancement for us.

It's kind of like swatting flies, I think... a fly that is the recipient of a blow from a six-pound sledge-hammer, will be just as dead as one who got hit with a 12-pounder...

That's a poor metaphor, but the crux of the matter is, I think, boost can cover a mulititude of "sins." Mismatched (to a small-degree) ports is one of them.

Another is cam-selection, I think. Naturally-aspirated motors are pretty finicky when it comes to cam specs because they have to rely on ambient air-pressure for cylinder-filling, and it usually takes a cam that works well at high rpm to produce the needed power. This well may require a valvetrain that works well at 7,000-plus rpm. A lot of science and r & d needs to go into making that work well. Titanium retainers, stronger, thick-walled pushrods, lightweight valves, beehive springs and roller-rockers may be required.

Turbocharged slants. conversely, run out of breath at about 5,500 rpm and don't work well with much overlap, so the cam specs are mild and forgiving. A stock cam should work very well, in a low-boost application. High-tech valvetrains just are not needed for most turbo apps. Stock valvetrain pieces are usually all that's required.

The requirements for monitoring and maintaining a turbo motor are very different from a high horsepower naturally-aspirated motor, and, with lots of trade-offs.

You pays your money and, you takes your choice! :banghead:
 
Makes sense why bother with a bunch of time into small details when with the turn of a nob or change of a spring u can overcome that fault and it takes a hell-of-a lot less time and money
 
So I'm ditching the 3/8 header flange I think the thickness difference between the intake and exhaust flange at an 1/8 will just be a pita to deal with so im having him make me so 1/2 flanges then a t3 flange with extra meat the one on the right is what I'm talking about I can trim it later but will be nice to have the extra material
 

Attachments

  • 1229150856.jpg
    44.4 KB · Views: 350
Makes sense why bother with a bunch of time into small details when with the turn of a nob or change of a spring u can overcome that fault and it takes a hell-of-a lot less time and money

That was my whole point. Worrying about tiny details like port-matching makes sense in naturally-aspirated cars, but there are other considerations for boosted engines that don't exist in the N/A motors. You have a finite amount of time to correct errors in the build of all these engines. The ones that matter to a N/A engine may be easily overcome by (more) boost in a blown or turbo application.

That is not to say that an engine built with perfectly-matched ports, for example, wouldn't always run better, N/A OR with forced induction, but since we don't have unlimited time and resources, it makes sense to correct what we can and let more boost take care of the things we didn't have the time or opportunity to fix.

That was my contention.:blob:
 
Yep well spoken

And that's where I got my header flanges and those turbo flanges is there any reason to run a split flange?
 
Yep well spoken

And that's where I got my header flanges and those turbo flanges is there any reason to run a split flange?

if you are running a split housing on the hx you could split the the manifold. supposed to make it spool a little quicker. but you would have to run two wategates. one for each side.

i dont recall reading it, is your car an automatic?
 
That was my whole point. Worrying about tiny details like port-matching makes sense in naturally-aspirated cars, but there are other considerations for boosted engines that don't exist in the N/A motors. You have a finite amount of time to correct errors in the build of all these engines. The ones that matter to a N/A engine may be easily overcome by (more) boost in a blown or turbo application.

Thinking like this is why \6 cars with 28psi of boost are slower then the Tilley car at 17psi of boost or why a 2L Pinto was the terror of Pro Stock in the early '70s with 23psi of boost.

Turning the boost up, doesn't fix sloppiness in preparation. Details matter, and since you sweated them for so long, should know that.
 
if you are running a split housing on the hx you could split the the manifold. supposed to make it spool a little quicker. but you would have to run two wategates. one for each side.

i dont recall reading it, is your car an automatic?

It's an auto and that's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone has put together a set of compound turbos on one of these yet would be interesting.
 
Thinking like this is why \6 cars with 28psi of boost are slower then the Tilley car at 17psi of boost or why a 2L Pinto was the terror of Pro Stock in the early '70s with 23psi of boost.

Turning the boost up, doesn't fix sloppiness in preparation. Details matter, and since you sweated them for so long, should know that.

What you say is true, but it's a trade-off, as I see it.

Maybe you didn't see my post, in which I said, "That is not to say that an engine built with perfectly-matched ports, for example, wouldn't always run better, N/A OR with forced induction..."

The fact is, IF you have virtually-unlimited time and money to put into your turbo project, close analysis of things like matching ports and intake manifold design (and, carbs vs. fuel injection,) will always pay dividends in terms of performance increases, but, the fact is, not everyone HAS the time and money for the kind of perfection that comes with close scrutiny to details, and unlimited resources for "ultimate," scienced-out designs of engine-hardware. So, it is not necessarily a bad thing, if you're time-limited, or, poor, like me, to crank up the boost and reap the immediate benefits of "quick and dirty and boosted beyond what SHOULD be necessary." It's just a different discipline. Something for those among us, who will be happy with the kind of results that can be achieved with less-than-professional preparation standards. It will still, likely, be a whole lot quicker and faster than a N/A example. In a perfect world, everyone would be young, energetic, and have unlimited dollars to throw at these projects, but, unfortunately, that's not where we live... And boost gives us a chance to make a so-so prep into an impressive performer, sometimes.

Anyway, that's the way I see it, as a too-far-over-the-hill guy, trying to go fast on a budget... Boost is my friend! :cheers:

Now, the 2-liter Pintos you referred to were, indeed, F-A-S-T!

But. they never ran Pro Stock. The cars running Pro Stock (I'm assuming you meant NHRA, and not IHRA, because the IHRA's cars were even faster, because they had "mountain motors" in them, while the NHRA cars's engines were smaller V8's,) were running times down into the eights (and, maybe, faster,) when these AA/MC Pintos of Buddy Ingeroll, "OHIO" George Montgomery and Butch Ball, were doing all they could do, to run mid 9-second times, but, they were competetive in Modified Eliminator, before NHRA dropped the class. Those cars weighed 2,350-pounds with driver (the same as a Pro Stocker,) but were, as you said, only 2-liters. No way could they compete with the Pro Stockers of the day. Buddy Ingeroll did try to run NHRA Pro Stock, with a turbocharged V-6 (Buick Indy engine,) but the idea was short-lived when NHRA banned it. Forced induction has never been a part of NHRA's Pro Stock program for very long.

For 2016, they are finally abandoning the time-honored Holley Dominator 4bbl's for port injection, and we will finally see Pro Stockers without that huge hood scoop for the first time, at the Pomona Winternationals, early next year. They WILL look "different," for sure!
 
It's an auto and that's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone has put together a set of compound turbos on one of these yet would be interesting.

i wouldnt bother with splitting the manifold then. if it were a stick shift the spool would be a little more important.

i havent seen a compound setup yet but ive been thinking about doing it. i dont wanna lose the hyper pac to do it though. im out of room in my engine bay.
 
Can u move the small turbo down between the back of the power steering pump and starter and get your top turbo up as high as possible to make room but it wouldn't work if u had a long runner intake cause that takes up aloft of room
 
http://eugene.craigslist.org/pts/5381457240.html

Look at that think anything is worth messing with I won't pay anywhere near what he's asking but I guess it's a .50ar I have no idea about that stuff just inlet and exhaust housing sizes

I found out the turbo is a off Honda d series turbo, the bov is a ngr type s. The waste gate is a 38mm emusa.
that's what the guy said so a 1.5 or 1.6 thought maybe I could use it for something heck maybe use it as an upgrade on my turbo sonic lol
 
http://eugene.craigslist.org/pts/5381457240.html

Look at that think anything is worth messing with I won't pay anywhere near what he's asking but I guess it's a .50ar I have no idea about that stuff just inlet and exhaust housing sizes

I found out the turbo is a off Honda d series turbo, the bov is a ngr type s. The waste gate is a 38mm emusa.
that's what the guy said so a 1.5 or 1.6 thought maybe I could use it for something heck maybe use it as an upgrade on my turbo sonic lol

My advice; don't waste your money on stuff you can't use, and this little turbo is far too small for your 225. Other advice would include not trying to build complex systems such as compound forced induction for your first project. That sort of thing is for more experienced, knowledgeable people who have lots of time to kill.

A simple, one-turbo system will have enough problems to keep you busy putting out brush-fires, for a long time, I guarantee.

Ask me how I know... :banghead:
 
Oh I know. I do have experience with building turbo setups single and dual but in diesel applications so going to gas I know nothing and I was looking at that turbo cause I could use it as a mockup and the Wastegate and bov might be useful
 
Oh I know. I do have experience with building turbo setups single and dual but in diesel applications so going to gas I know nothing and I was looking at that turbo cause I could use it as a mockup and the Wastegate and bov might be useful

I have had such a long, drawn-out, harassing experience, putting this thing together (explaining the many problems I have had, [several, I brought on myself,]) it would take PAGES to explain... so, when I hear somebody bringing up any added-complexity at all, I have a knee-jerk reaction to it, because my own experience has been so lengthy.... sorry...

:eek:ops:
 
Well I got my 1/2 inch flanges coming from a guy off ebay Aaron from Washington. Got my door also gotta fix the mirror holes but paid $60 for that and it's pretty nice otherwise haven't done a whole lot with the car sold some parts of a 93 cummins truck I was parting out so been all over here's a few pics
 

Attachments

  • 0101161034.jpg
    30.1 KB · Views: 294
  • 0101161033.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 277
  • 0101161034a.jpg
    30 KB · Views: 309
  • 1450734157599.jpg
    37.4 KB · Views: 309
  • Door.jpg
    18.3 KB · Views: 293
  • 20160101_155455.jpg
    15.3 KB · Views: 271
Well I got my 1/2 inch flanges coming from a guy off ebay Aaron from Washington. Got my door also gotta fix the mirror holes but paid $60 for that and it's pretty nice otherwise haven't done a whole lot with the car sold some parts of a 93 cummins truck I was parting out so been all over here's a few pics

It's gratifying to see you making good progress.

Keep up the good work! :cheers:
 
Thanks for the kind words I didn't get a whole lot done today the kids go back to school tomorrow so I spent the day with them and it didn't get above freezing today so I didn't get anything done. Yesterday I sold the bed off the old cummins I parted out and the guy was a big slant guy so he's gonna help me convert to electronic ignition and I'm gonna go get the 74 dart I have to use for mockup it's sitting at the neighbors house on blocks that's how I got it from them, but there's another FABO member that's gonna hook me up so I can get it moved over. I gotta get my old ford out of the barn so I can get the car in and coordinate it around moving the rv at the same time it's a cluster and my shop area is gravel for now so I might take it down to a buddy that has cement floor and a heater and a paint booth which will be nice cause when I get tired of doing fab work I can do some bodywork and paint it's kinda relaxing if I'm not being pushed to get it done. But I will get the door fixed and the jambs painted hopefully soon. I did have some thick ice on my pool so I got it drained before my daughter's figured it out and we're out there messing around with it. It's a few inches thick but doesn't look that way in the pics. But that's all I got for new stuff sorry fellas

I did think about putting my plates on ebay for sale cause it seems everyone wants the dang things so maybe that will be enough to fund something on the build lol
 

Attachments

  • 20160103_162800.jpg
    28 KB · Views: 267
You're a busy man! Reminds me of my own activities when I statred this current slant project, five or six years ago. But, I had a racing partner, then, and he actually ended up doing most of the cosmetic-work on the car, because it stayed at his place (he had a lot more room than I did.) The car was a MESS; it had sat under a tree, in an open field, for about 15 years and that tree had dropped pine needles into the doors to the point that the inner door panels were filled to the brim, with those pine needles... I can't imagine how they got in there, but they did, He got a pressure-washer and cleaned all that up, fixed a lot of the dings and scrapes on the body, put a whole new interior in the car, along with a roll bar, and built the header all by himself... and then sold his interest in the car to me for about fifty-cents on the dollar (for what he had invested in it,) so yes, I owe this guy, big time. He has several other MOPAR projects he wanted to woerk on, so he bowed out; it's my problem, now...:banghead:

I did make all the decisions RE: the engine and powertrain, and get all the machine-work done, and assemble it and drive it at the strip, so, I have SOME involvement.:cheers:

It's not easy, and it takes time and money, but it's well worth the effort, IF you don't take shortcuts, and you do it "right." Hang in there.... it'll put a big smile on your face, eventually!!! :blob:
 

Attachments

  • js640_IMG_0747[1].jpg
    64.1 KB · Views: 253
This might be a dumb question but why not run the weisco pistons with stock rods and just deck the block alot!!! Then get shorter pushrods?
 
This might be a dumb question but why not run the weisco pistons with stock rods and just deck the block alot!!! Then get shorter pushrods?

Bingo. I'd want custom pushrods anyway, for the thickness. I know you can mill .100 off the deck, and a fellow over on .org runs a angle milled head (.200 off spark plug side, .100 off manifold side) and if that don't get you to 8.1/8.5:1 SCR, you can overbore and bump compression by swept volume.

But, by the time you're all said and done, along with reconditioned rods (don't tell me you're gonna cheap on quality!) you're still nosing 1k. Fret not, still even more options. Unfortunately none cheaper.

Stock rods, custom piston
Molnar rods, custom piston (i've heard wiseco piston are thick enough to be machined for a 15-18cc dish)
Molnar/wiseco package, custom thick head gasket
Wiseco piston, stock rod, offset ground/welded stroker crank! (c'mon, don't build no cookie cutter slant!)
Some form of jerryrigging that ultimately leads to a time bomb which is bound to blow

I can't imagine any form of 7" rod paired with any of the forged 'slant' pistons on the market working together to form anything less than 9.5:1. Bill claims his is 9.1. Im NOT saying that he's lying, he seems about as honest as they get, but I'm in the middle of a light weight build (which consists of 7" rods and 2.2 pistons) and there never was a possibility of mine being below 9.8 (and this is with a 58cc head, which is on the larger spectrum of average) if Bill's is 9.1, that may work for him, but I would highly recommend against it on the street, especially with any 'respectable' boost level and the small, min overlap cams that tend to be used in similar builds.

Bill, would you mind digging out some measurements for us? Deck height, head cc? I think wisecos have 5cc dish, and I'm pretty sure you've said .045 over. Piston compression height for the wisecos is out on the web somewhere, and I'll try and dig up to compare to my kb pistons tomorrow. I also remember Fel-Pros being in the vicinity of .038-.039 I think...

Something that *may* be worth looking into is srt4 pistons on 7" rods (i don't remember if there is/was a forged offering for those motors)
 
Bingo. I'd want custom pushrods anyway, for the thickness. I know you can mill .100 off the deck, and a fellow over on .org runs a angle milled head (.200 off spark plug side, .100 off manifold side) and if that don't get you to 8.1/8.5:1 SCR, you can overbore and bump compression by swept volume.

But, by the time you're all said and done, along with reconditioned rods (don't tell me you're gonna cheap on quality!) you're still nosing 1k. Fret not, still even more options. Unfortunately none cheaper.

Stock rods, custom piston
Molnar rods, custom piston (i've heard wiseco piston are thick enough to be machined for a 15-18cc dish)
Molnar/wiseco package, custom thick head gasket
Wiseco piston, stock rod, offset ground/welded stroker crank! (c'mon, don't build no cookie cutter slant!)
Some form of jerryrigging that ultimately leads to a time bomb which is bound to blow

I can't imagine any form of 7" rod paired with any of the forged 'slant' pistons on the market working together to form anything less than 9.5:1. Bill claims his is 9.1. Im NOT saying that he's lying, he seems about as honest as they get, but I'm in the middle of a light weight build (which consists of 7" rods and 2.2 pistons) and there never was a possibility of mine being below 9.8 (and this is with a 58cc head, which is on the larger spectrum of average) if Bill's is 9.1, that may work for him, but I would highly recommend against it on the street, especially with any 'respectable' boost level and the small, min overlap cams that tend to be used in similar builds.

Bill, would you mind digging out some measurements for us? Deck height, head cc? I think wisecos have 5cc dish, and I'm pretty sure you've said .045 over. Piston compression height for the wisecos is out on the web somewhere, and I'll try and dig up to compare to my kb pistons tomorrow. I also remember Fel-Pros being in the vicinity of .038-.039 I think...

Something that *may* be worth looking into is srt4 pistons on 7" rods (i don't remember if there is/was a forged offering for those motors)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Brandon, I share your concerns about the compression ratio in my motor, but I was very careful when I measured it, in view of the fact that anything over 9:1 could shoot my whole program in the foot. With that in mind, I took special precautions when I broke out the Vaseline, the clear 1/4” plate, the burettte and the colored alcohol.

I measured everything not twice, but, three times.

The Fel-Pro gasket was .024”, compressed. I don’t remember having actually measured the piston deck height, but I carefully cc’d the amount of volume with the piston at TDC.

Added all together, it came out exactly 9:1, and I breathed a sigh of relief.

The head was ported and had big valves, but, was never milled.

The block was given to me by its second owner and was known to have never been milled.

I get away with this because:

1. This car is a race car only; never driven on the street.
2. It is fed a diet of $10.00 a gallon, high-octane racing gas (unleaded.)
3. It is intercooled twice; once with a front-mounted, air-to-air unit and, once, chemically.
4. I use 18 degrees of spark advance, locked plate, maximum. Never sees more.
5. Boost has never been more than 15 pounds.
6. The A/F ratio is 11.4:1 during boost.

So, when I go to 20 pounds of boost, I MAY have problems (detonation-related,) I dunno... and, if not then, even later when I get serious and go to 25 (and, I WILL, if it still hasn't blown-up, by then...)

So, that’s about all I can do to verify my compression ratio, short of tearing it down and measuring everything, again... I’m too old and lazy for that....:banghead:

But, I can tell you this: I did my dead-level best to verify my engine’s compression ratio, using the tools I had learned how to use in Chemistry class and in blueprinting other race cars; I don’t think I made a mistake. If I did, shame on me...

You know, turbo slants use very mild cams (and basically weak valve springs, since that’s all they need, because they only turn 5,500 rpm,) and really have no use for thick walled push-rods. Stock ones work fine with the shimmed 340 springs employed.

And, why in the world would you want to spend the money to stroke a 225 crank; don’t you think four and an eighth-inches is long enough? Boost is available to make well-over 500 horsepower with a stock-stroke 225, and maybe I’m gettin’ old, but, that’s enough for me (in an A-body.)
 
-
Back
Top