auszookers.com
https://auszookers.com/forum/

suzuki j20 turbo
https://auszookers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=24523		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  bazook [ Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:54 pm ]
Post subject:  suzuki j20 turbo
oh god flame suit on :lol: has anyone thought of turboing a j20, I know suzuki were looking a making a sx4 turbo(sxforce)but has anyone done it before, apparently these motors can take 7psi without after market computers but would the internals be strong enough to cope with that day in day out or would you need to source j23 (forged if possible) pistons, forged crank and so on

And no this idea is just an idea its not an offroad car just a daily car idea i thought about

suzuki kizashi turbo concept 8) 8) 8) comes to mind would be the go
Author:  Fatzook [ Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
I think its a great idea. But what vehicle are we talking about here?

On the ECU comment, Perhaps the J20 can be set up to run 7psi on factoy ECU. But its fa from best practice, and only invites failure.
Author:  atari4x4 [ Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
i toy with this idea day in day out... found this the other day, basic turbo mods, bodgy manifold but still pretty impressive for the pos that it is.

http://www.nissansilvia.com/forums/inde ... pic=495024

Quote:
Hey guys. Just thought I'd post some pics of my car.
Yes I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but it's an exercise in being different, I think it works :)

My pb is a 13.2 @ 167km/h down the 1/4 mile, that was without any suspension mods, and bout 30hp less than current, looking to have another crack at 12s.

mods:

I've done everything myself except the exhaust and the first tune...

All up it makes about 270-280hp. last dyno was without external gate, smaller dump and .64 housing and only 8psi, made 255.3hp.

GT2860rs .86 ar
Godspeed manifold and custom adapter
3" exhaust, 3.5" cat
FMIC
GFB plumb back BOV
NA SR20 cable throttle conversion (was fly-by-wire before)
custom idle motor
EMS Stinger ECU tuned by me (with 1st tune from Hyperdrive motorsport)
440cc WRX injectors
x-treme HD clutch and lightweight fly
few gauges
turbo timer

coming soon:

slotted rotors
S15 coilovers (they fit believe it or not!)

pics:


Image

Image

Image

Image

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuyAV5Nz ... r_embedded
Author:  Mistaria81 [ Thu Aug 04, 2011 7:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
really depends on the engine. with turbos ur better of running an ecu for saftey, that said it's been done without a ecu so yea. talk to your local turbo enginerring person and they can steer you in the right direction...
Author:  bazook [ Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
maybe a grand vitara j20 model
Author:  neofitou [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
The Road Race Motorsport turbo kit makes 205kw on a j20, but it's $5k
I'm thinking of doing it to an sx4 when we get back to au.
My wife is under the impression (somehow) that turbo charged cars are more fuel efficient ... :P
Author:  bazook [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 11:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
:D :D hell yea way more efficient just tell her its totally true 8)
Author:  Vits93 [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
neofitou wrote:
The Road Race Motorsport turbo kit makes 205kw on a j20, but it's $5k
I'm thinking of doing it to an sx4 when we get back to au.
My wife is under the impression (somehow) that turbo charged cars are more fuel efficient ... :P


Well your wife i right just not in the way you were thinking, a turbo car is more efficient because its uses the wasted energy from the exhaust gas to produce more power and it also increases volumetric efficiency of the engine as well.
Author:  neofitou [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
Vits93 wrote:

Well your wife i right just not in the way you were thinking, a turbo car is more efficient because its uses the wasted energy from the exhaust gas to produce more power and it also increases volumetric efficiency of the engine as well.


Actually this is almost the exact description I gave her..
But then went on to show her all the super efficient cars on the market are all turbo.

Problem is she is a lead foot.
Author:  harvs [ Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
I'm currently playing with this idea, well, kind of working towards it as apposed to playing with it.

I've datalogged the ECU to get the standard injector pulse widths to make it an easy task of converting to a Megasquit. I've attached the results if anyone is interested.

Next is an engine rebuild when I get back from NZ in about a month.

Then I'll start fabing up the manifold, changing ecu etc.

This isn't the first time I've done a totally DIY turbo conversion though, so I pretty well know what I'm in for. 8O

Personally I think with the release of the megasquirt years ago, I believe the only reason people tend to try and stick with standard ECUs is due to lack of knowledge. Cost is now well within the budget of anyone serious about doing a proper conversion.

I'm yet to do a pressure vs flow test on the stock fuel pump, but the injectors at least should be good for a 30-40% increase in power without increasing fuel pressure.

I'm not going radical though. Totally to increase mid range torque for off-road (particuarly sand) driving.
Author:  JrZook [ Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
So I assume you are going to use these observed pulse widths and IAT temperatures to try back calculate a VE table for use in the MS?
Author:  harvs [ Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: suzuki j20 turbo
Yeah pretty much. I already know the injector flow rates (since they're standard and that's in the manual), so I'll just punch figures into the VE table until it gives me the same pulse widths...

I can see why the MS guys set up the calculations the way they did, but at times I'd prefer the good old approach of just putting the pulse width's into a table.

BTW, it's all pulse width vs manifold pressure. IAT was the same throughout all the measurements (well close enough anyway.) I guess that's probably what you meant anyway...
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/