Forced Induction Superchargers | Turbochargers | Intercoolers

My DIY C6 mani turbo kit

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-30-2008, 06:16 PM
  #41  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

curious to why you didnt use a truck manafold or fbody manafold on the driver side to avoid clearance issues?
Good point. The reason I didn't is becuase I compared the truck manifold to the C6 and it looked like it would flow a lot more air than the truck manifold. The only drawback to the C6 manifolds are the two bolt design. However, you can use a coper gasket on it from the factory. Never the less, the C6 manifolds should easily out flow the truck manifolds, but I am only going by looks on that.

MUSTANGBRKR02

I haven't been under the car in a couple of weeks, so once I get back to it and the kit bolted back together, I will look at addressing the brake line issue.

Thanks everyone for the suggestions.

Glenn
Old 05-31-2008, 09:37 AM
  #42  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (63)
 
VIPRETR2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 757
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

If you would have used the truck manifolds the alternator would need to be relocated. My guess is you would have a hell of a time finding room for your mechanical scavenge pump in that scenario unless you ditched power steering or A/C. Oh, and the kit looks outstanding!
Old 05-31-2008, 11:43 AM
  #43  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

VIPRETR2, you are right and seeing that my DP's run in between the rack and alternator, there was no way I could run a truck manifold forward facing.

WS6HUMMER, something else I forgot to mention. The truck manifold 3 bolt flange is farther down and farther back compared to the C6 manifolds. So another reason I went with both C6's is because they made it possible to make the bend into the fender well area so I could run the piping to the T4 flange at the turbo.

I hope the system work good, I have spent a lot of time on it.

Although I said it before, there are a couple of areas I would run differently already, but I am going to run the system and check for flaws and than make some changes.

The system is capable of haveing twin TC78's on it with S covers on the turbos. Even though I doubt I will ever get anything bigger than the 66's

Glenn
Old 06-06-2008, 03:09 PM
  #44  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
 
SP Motorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

ken.....get it done allready,so we can go to the track..
Old 06-06-2008, 03:12 PM
  #45  
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
DrTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,966
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by W8N2SQZ
The system is capable of haveing twin TC78's on it with S covers on the turbos. Even though I doubt I will ever get anything bigger than the 66's

Glenn
BOOOO...you need twin 76's at least. It will break 400rwhp with them
Old 06-06-2008, 04:19 PM
  #46  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (17)
 
fenix999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

So um, what about clearance around the steering shaft(drivers side situation)?? I have two C6 manifolds and mounted them up facing forwards and backwards and looked like the driver side was a major PITA with the stock steering shaft in stock location. Did it get moved at all with the new k-member, or did it move or get modified by moving the steering rack mounts lower than stock? Im curious on this info. Also more info on the copper gasket for the C6 manifolds would be cool too...they look like they're gonna be quite some "fun" in getting them to seal correctly since its that 2 bolt design.
And yes i got these manifolds a long time ago and thats the first thing i noticed>>C6 manifolds have HUGE mandingo ports on them, they look killer!
Old 06-06-2008, 04:19 PM
  #47  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (17)
 
fenix999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by DrTurbo
BOOOO...you need twin 76's at least. It will break 400rwhp with them
yea, 400rw each lol
Old 06-06-2008, 05:08 PM
  #48  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Hey Rob@ SP, its Glenn not ken.

I guess I haven't spent enough money at Strictly performance yet for you to get my name right.

Glenn
Old 06-06-2008, 05:10 PM
  #49  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

BOOOO...you need twin 76's at least. It will break 400rwhp with them
HAHA. Thanks for the peer pressure Dr. Turbo.

Hmm, I wonder how much of a difference spool time would be going from 66's to 76's on my 347.

Guess I should start thinking about a 427.

Glenn
Old 06-06-2008, 05:14 PM
  #50  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

fenix999
Yeah it will be interesting to see how well the two bolt flanges seal. There is a guy on here named Rice ETR and he is using one C6 manifold and one truck manifold. He said he picked up spool time when he put the C6 manifold on. So I think they will definitely flow better.

Hmm, interesting. I did not have any issues with the steering shaft at all.

I hope to have the kit coated by next weekend with some new pictures to show.

I will keep everyone updated as I go.

Glenn
Old 10-11-2008, 12:15 PM
  #51  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (127)
 
NemeSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Houston,TX
Posts: 6,888
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts

Default


no updates in a while
how did the finished setup workout, any clips of car running?
Old 10-11-2008, 02:22 PM
  #52  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (17)
 
Mean Green z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

wow, didn't see this until you bumped it up, NICE SETUP! Yeah, wanna see more pics!!!
Old 10-15-2008, 12:53 AM
  #53  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I finished the car and got it running almost two months ago. I had stock 317 heads and an LS7 cam in the car. With the twin 66's running two .68ar F1 p-trim wheels, the car was a little laggy. However I bought the turbos for a 427 set up.

1st gear yielded 4psi by 5000rpm, 2nd was around 7psi @ 500rpm, 3rd gave me around 11psi and 4th gave me 14psi. All of this was done running the car off of the twin 10lbs springs in the gates. Also keep in mind that this is a 6 speed car. 4th gear pulled really good

Long story short, got the car running on a Friday and lost a rod bearing the next day. I will tear it apart soon to see if I starved the rod bearing of oil or my 7 year old scat I beam rods gave up the ghost @ 14psi, which is probably around 700 @ the tire I believe these rods are rated at 500 horse @ the fly.

I plan to order up an LSX 427 shortblock very soon and get it running again. I am on a budget and I want to pick up a set of 6 bolt heads as well so time will tell.

I have a bunch of pictures. The car ran great, but I did not get to run it in traffic with the AC on. I lost the rod driving out to get the AC charged so I could log ECT's. I did log ECT's during an 85+ degree day and it never went above 200 and I was on it pretty hard for a good hour to get the tune changed for the new turbos.

I will try and post the pictures soon or build and F-Quick site to house all of the pictures.

Thanks,
Glenn
Old 10-15-2008, 01:34 AM
  #54  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
 
cracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ATX©
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

The only thing I dont like is the WG position. I understand clearance, but it's less than optimal.

http://www.turbosmartonline.com/inde...ownload&id=201
Old 10-15-2008, 05:48 PM
  #55  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
W8N2SQZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Cracker, I understand your point of view. I spoke with two different turbo fabricators out here and while it is not optimum, it works.

I have a feeling that is why I saw more boost than what the springs are rated at, plus the fact that the turbos are large for that setup.

After getting it all together I wanted to tear it apart and re-do it because I saw areas for improvement, but I wanted it to run so I coated everything and ran it.

I plan to build another system down the road when this one shows signs of wear or I come accross something major as I get the new motor in it.

Glenn
Old 12-17-2008, 02:04 AM
  #56  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (17)
 
Mean Green z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Hows the clearances with the wheels/tires at full lock? More pics!!!!



Quick Reply: My DIY C6 mani turbo kit



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 PM.