My car has 211,000 kms on the stock turbo and engine before I upgraded to a bigger unit. I’ve yet to blow a turbo. And this one is making slightly over 300hp on minimal mods on the stock small TD05H-14b on 18psi of boost.

The cyclone intakes are available on some models of the VR4, which my half cut came from.

The beauty of a turbo is that the maximum boost can be infinately variable either with electronic control of the wastegates or manual control. Superchargers come with only a fix max boost due to the pulley size.

When you force feed an engine, you raise the playing field. One needs to know the engine very well and how to tune it properly. Judging from the general tuning skills available locally and the dependence on 2nd hand half cuts, reliability will always be an issue. Not so much because of the technology, but because of the the know how and availability of good parts (as in the lack off).

Its quite telling that almost all manufacturers are going back to turbocharging thier petrol cars. Off boost, it operates like another N/A car, and at 1 bar of boost, you effectively double your displacement.

When you are on light throttle/load during cruising, the car runs on vacumm just like a normally aspirated car. There the single runners will help efficiency on lower rpm operation of the car. This increases power/response and/or fuel economy.
———————————–
thank u, 4g
i ve never come across dual runner intake of the cyclone manifold before,
thanks again

there is already campro turbocharging done in australia with reliable results.

you guys are all just sitting in your armchair and speculating what can and cannot be done, when its already been done for the last couple of years.

i cant imagine the vgt for a petrol engine like porsche 911 turbo, it must be hell of a material for its movable flaps, thats why probally sequential turbo is batter alternative,

my interest for supercharger is reliability simplicity as well, but i understand the boost is top end limited, but i do heard about 2 speed supercharger, probally second stage capable for higher boost,

so it means to correct the some turbo lag at lower rpm with its longer runner is logic since at low boost the engine runs at a bit of NA character, so torque improves even at lower boost,

thanks,

Not quite right there.

Care to explain why my turbo 4G63 has the cyclone dual runner manifold?

Now, If you have driven turbo cars you will know that turbo cars don’t always operate “on boost”.

When you are on light throttle/load during cruising, the car runs on vacumm just like a normally aspirated car. There the single runners will help efficiency on lower rpm operation of the car. This increases power/response and/or fuel economy.

Now, there is a reason why the call it (Turbo) lag. The turbo takes time to spool up, meaning it takes time for the turbo to presurize the intake manifold to the desired boost level.

Dont confuse flow rates and pressurization. They are not the same thing. The volume of air entering the engine is the same. In the turbo car, the volume of air is just more dense. My 4g63 is still a 2.0L, whether its turbo or N/A.

You can say bye bye to superchargers from mercedes. Turbos are cheaper, simpler, able to run higher and more variable boost (you can always vary the amount of boost easily), and more efficient than superchargers. With the new generation of VGT turbochargers, the one sole benefit of superchargers (lag …as in the lack off) is mitigated.

force induction principle is to reach the pressurised air as soon as possible to the clyinder without any restriction needed, no longer path needed and no reduced intake diameter needed, any lag is solve by turbo design itself,

for variable intake manifold, it the purpose to overcome the weaknesses of a modern normally aspirated 16 valves, too much too soon air at lower rpm doest exite the mixture for combustion, combustion suffer, loss of torque,
so..long path or reduced in diameter intake will increace the velocity of air entering the clyinder through valves creating tubulance for batter combustion batter torque,
or inother word, the atmospheric pressure as if its being lightly presured into the clyinder,

I don’t think turbos will be compatible with variable length intake manifolds right?

——————————————————

Turbos work fine with variable intake manifiolds. My 1991 4G63 turbo has the Cyclone intake system.

if soft turbo applies, like paul suggested, it make a meaty campro engine for certain purpose or model,
and one more alternative for force induction is supercharger,

and

i presume if supercharger applies, the intake manifold is totaly a new design,
because the space for supercharger unit will incorporate partly its intake for compactness, and belting is direct from other pulley auxilary,

so far we can see proton start to vary its engine spec,
and hope to see more variety of engine specs, according to purpose, and model development,

perhaps giving a birth of a ‘lotus junior’ is another step enhance the product of proton from existing proton model, hence, strengthern the image of proton brand,

if soft turbo applies, like paul suggested, low end is meaty enough,
or otherwise a supercharger alternative,

The variable length intake manifold would probably redesigned if Proton does decide to include a turbocharged engine in it’s lineup.

Even the Satria GTi Superchange until now haven come out… I think supercharging already consider very good for proton.