Pheonix

its nothing to do with that.
i simply loath people talking psi when its the least important thing to know about FI
pick a turbo and call some psi it *begins* to mean something. but in any reasonable conversation without specific information, psi is useless.
and just to point it out. it seems long ago i calculated most of the v6s we're delt to play with come out around 9.2'ish bhp per lb/m of flow into the engine. most people/sites will tell you every lb/m is good for 10bhp, but that's always a pretty big over-estimaion hehe. anyways... It was in the low 9's for what I remember.

same thing goes for guessing an engine is good at 5 to 10psi. yeah, no. that's not how it works. an engine is good until you can not win the pre-ignition battle or generally the bearings or rods pins can no longer take the raw force. (the latter generally is not the case with any of these engines.)

pet peeves

llcoolpass

I got into a debate that lasted at least 2 weeks, and made several pages on a forum over the same thing in the year 2004. I do not need to do it again because I have less time now that I used to, and because you and I are not wrong. You just prefer people learn that superchargers [this includes turbochargers since they are a subset of superchargers] can get an engine to produce torque at different RPM, making the supercharger's PSI output sometimes but not always a predictor for the horsepower value [calculated from the the torque value and RPM value].
You have a pet peeve. And I like my quick and easy calculator since it applies to most street cars acceptably well, for me.
I will disagree that pressure means nothing, that gets on my nerves. Plenty of cars have an air pressure sensor that is used to determine the fuel, similarly to what you were saying about the mass of the air.

Pheonix

What in the hell dude? You're spouting off random wierd things simply to try to "be right".
Do whatever you want, but it makes you look stupid to believe that the manifold pressure of a turbocharged engine has anything to do with the power it makes.
That is a stupid thing to say. This has absolutely nothing to do with the outlet psi of a compressor equating to any amount of power in a gneral conversation.

You don't use a MAP sensor to pick a turbocharger. A MAP sensor only works by GUESSING the amount of air entering an engine after it is refferanced. They are ONLY useful for metering a ALREADY KNOWN amount of air to the ECU.
For that matter do MAP sensors wok well for ANY kind of heavy upgrade on a stock management. No. Why? Because when you get a small amount outside of the pre-calculated formula you have lost your accuracy in GUESSING the amount of air entering an engine.
If MAP sensors and all the pre-calculated ideal gas law stored in factory ECU's actually worked worth a damn in the first place:
1) A MAP sensored N/A vehicle would be able to use long duration camshafts. WHICH THEY DO NOT. When you CAM a map sensored engine, they go haywire trying to figure out the fueling. And we're talking SINGLE DIGIT AND BELOW changes to manifold and pre-throttlebody intake psi readings. SINGLE DIGITS.
2) N/A Vehicles that have been equipped with forced induction, which HAVE the fuel capability to use a mild amount of boost would meter the correct amount of fuel. WHICH THEY DO NOT.

Which is why most engines that can move a descent amount of air from a factory read the ACTUAL mass of the incoming airflow. Not take the manifold pressure, the air temperature, and then GUESS at it. The problem isn't whatever math you learned isnt correct. Nor is the prbem that it is't useful. The problem is you obviously have not been taught how or where to apply your learning.

I digress. You've changed the subject from me proving PSI is meaningless to how a stock engine meters the air in a last sliver of hope of "being right".








You want to see what it takes for the 3.0L v6s???
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...ighlight=turbo

3vz-fe
280bhp @ 12 A/F ratio - RED
280*12.5*0.01=
WA = 33.6lb/m
33.6*639.6*600 = 12894336
/
95%*2400*181 = 412680
MAPreq = 31.24 psia
P2c = 33.54 psia
pIIc = 2.42

320bhp @ 12 A/F ratio - PINK
320*12*.01=
WA = 38.4 lb/m
38.4*639.6*600 = 14736384
/
95%*2400*181 = 412680
MAPreq = 35.7 psia
P2c = 37.7 psia
pIIc = 2.75

350bhp @ 12 A/F ratio - BLUE
350*12*0.01 =
WA = 42lb/m
42*639.6*600 = 16117920
/
95%*2400*181 = 412680
MAPreq = 39.05 psia
P2c = 41.05 psia
pIIc = 2.99 psia





















Based on "psi meaning something". The way you "calculate" your "quick math" on the basic 3.0L class Toyota v6's:
10psi of ANY compressr outlet would = 276bhp'ish (14.7/10 = 1.47. 1.47x power gain times188bhp stock = 276bhp)





Gee. You have a CT-26a turbo @ 10psi on a fully stock engine with a stock exhaust and you get 334BHP (260whp) NOT 275BHP.
Think fast! Quick question! How many lb/m is the ct-26a moving based on its compressor map? 34-37lb/m...





Mass counts. Not pressure. Let's change it up COMPLETELY. Take a 3.0L Maxima v6 and a t3 63 / t04E 60-trim hybrid @ 10psi.
They make 190bhp stock. 14.7/10 1.47*190 = 280bhp by "pressure meaning something".



It's making about 330bhp @ 10psi. How many lb/m is it's compressor flowing???



Oh my god! It's at 33-34lb/m!?
ITS MUST BE VOODOO MAGIC!?!?!?!?!?


Mass counts. It's not pressure.


How about a 3.0L maxima (AT) @ 7psi with the same t3 63 turbine, but a huge T4 60-1 compressor?


My god it's 380bhp when the all-meaning prssure is 7psi out of th compressor above ambient!














The mass of the air is what counts. Not the manifold pressure... Manifold pressure is useless to simly randomly talk about, or use assome quick shot guesstimate. How do you make it useful??? By carrying a gigantic book of compressor maps around. Who does that???

llcoolpass

I wasn't spurting, but I am feeling like you are attacking me. You keep it up, bubba. You keep it up. You're only trying to prove something. I'm not the 17 year old who spouts stuff he doesn't really know. I'm not trying to confuse, lie, or otherwise hurt anyone. In fact, I help people on a lot of car sites. And in return, I am often helped. I suppose you want me to say I give up, well, here you go, "I give up." I surrender. Just please no more lifted graphs -- they're almost worse than the genital-shock devices you have lined up for me next.

1fastgst

LOL

Thats why 3/4 of you rich dumbass jersey people come over the bridge to Philly to see me to get your car runnng right.

Pheonix

i was enlightning, not bashng him.

chill man or ya wont be around here too long.

llcoolpass

1fastgst ,
are you against me now , geesh
I'm sorry I am rich, and from New Jersey. But, can you do me a favor,
Can you make me a movie star, cause I'm not that either, but with your words,
it will be so. I guess you can never know enough about automotive repair,
but I think I know something

Shot of engine transplant I did 2 years ago on 626ES


Shot of recent work on my ES 300



Peace out yall, I needz a break from this site for a while.

1fastgst

I have a tendency to be real mean.

I guess turboing the es is not too bad of an idea. Im reading on the maxima forums right now where a guy is making over 500 whp and running 12s on a turbo maxima.

IMO maximas/es300s are hardly a platform that would be easy and optimal to work with (especially since they are fwd). However, people are doing this stuff.

Weather or not its pressure or volume making the power, we are heavily skewed off topic.

Check this out:

http://www.lexusownersclub.co.uk/for...howtopic=18616
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/688660