Rethinking the whole Turbo idea - JKowners.com : Jeep Wrangler JK Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 17 Old 07-11-2015, 05:03 PM Thread Starter
Granite Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Louisiana
Age: 48
Posts: 115
Feedback: 0 reviews
Rethinking the whole Turbo idea

I recently spent 19 hours on a road trip in my buddy's turbo ecoboosted Ford 150 Platinum. Holy crap. I teased him for buying a little turbo 6 instead of a hairy balled V-8 like all "real" trucks should have under the hood. I shut up half way thru our trip when it was my turn to drive. Wow. It didnt have quite the pin you in the seat torque of an old big block muscle car but for a little v-6 i was shocked. And we were getting between 18-19 mpg at 80+ mph in West Texas Hill Country. It would get from 65 to 80 real fast. And all that gave it away was the slightest hint of tiny turbo whine.

I fully realize our mini van motors have horrible oiling and bottom ends (my crank and mains have already been replaced under warranty last year) and Jeep chose state of the art circa 1985 speed density air to fuel management systems that suck ass for boosted applications. I also understand the JK has a drag coefficient of near 1.0 so 19 mpg at 80 is a pipe dream. My questions is now does a turbo sound like a better option than a super charger?

Ripp has been around a while and we all know what to expect from a super charger. Banks new turbo option with the intercooler really has me thinking. Soon my 6spd '09 Rubi on 35" MTRs will need to pull a 2,500# boat. Besides regearing to 5:13's i will want some type of power adder. After feeling what Ford could do with their little v6 turbo i'm 99% sold for one on the shitty JK 3.8. Can anyone who has a turbo pass on the good, the bad, and the ugly of which turbo system you ran and why?

And if i ever meet the pencil neck bean counter geek that thought putting a Hemi into an SRT Rubicon from the factory was a bad idea, i will kick him square in the nuts.
earfixr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 07-11-2015, 05:31 PM
Rock God
 
Guruman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thompson Falls, Montana
Age: 48
Posts: 1,217
Garage
Feedback: 0 reviews

https://www.jkowners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=165402

_
'76 CJ-7, '43 CJ-2a, '78 Bronco,'78 CJ-7, '75 CJ-5, '78 CJ-7, '80 CJ-7, '78 SJ, '79 SJ, '78 and a '76 FJ-40 , '90 XJ, '91 XJ, '86 CJ-7, '95 ZJ, '68 CJ-101 Commando, '00 TJ, '68 M-715, 2 '86 Military Blazers, '96 LR Discovery, '86 CJ-7, '91 YJ, '99 TJ, 07' JKU Rubi, 1988 YJ, 1973 Commando, 3 Diesel Excursions....
Now back to a 2013 JKU Rubicon with "stuff", planning 37's with minimal lift.

I've tried them all... Jeeps are still the best. (0||||0)
Guruman is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 07-11-2015, 05:53 PM Thread Starter
Granite Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Louisiana
Age: 48
Posts: 115
Feedback: 0 reviews

Yep, read that thread too Guruman. But who has actually bolted a turbo on their jeep? My only turbo stories come from adding a Flying Miata turbo system to a track car i built up on a '97 STO 15 years ago. Quite different from the tank i'm driving today. I've heard of the Prodigy system but never seen or heard one in captivity. Seen an STS sytem on a neighbors GTO and on another vette, very impressive, cheap and simple. NOT the route i'd take on a jeep that sees the water levels mine does. That leaves only real world examples of who has actually hung a turbo on their Heep? Anyone?
earfixr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 17 Old 07-11-2015, 07:17 PM
Granite Guru
 
Diesel Jeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 493
Feedback: 0 reviews

Hey Ear,

I've only got a 4 cyl in my JKU, but it does have a rather large turbo, and makes a shit ton of torque. It's all about pushing air and fuel into the cylinders that you have to make power!

It's more about torque than horsepower in a Jeep crawler!
Diesel Jeep is offline  
post #5 of 17 Old 07-12-2015, 07:53 AM
Granite Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Age: 55
Posts: 136
Feedback: 0 reviews

Thanks for the spam and annoyingly huge pictures. The OP has a 2009 Jeep, not a 2015. Reading is hard.
tslewisz is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 07-12-2015, 11:53 AM
Rock God
 
ndtguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 679
Garage
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by earfixr View Post
I fully realize our mini van motors have horrible oiling and bottom ends (my crank and mains have already been replaced under warranty last year) and Jeep chose state of the art circa 1985 speed density air to fuel management systems that suck ass for boosted applications.
It's called a 3 bar MAP sensor. Most big time racers and high powered turbo cars use the 3 bar MAP and speed density.

I even had a 3 bar MAP in my 98 LS1 Trans Am with a built 347, custom cam, 70mm turbo, intercooled, alky-water injection, 60# injectors with twin intank fuel pumps. Street legal and a blast to drive. Couldn't keep the tires from spinning on the dyno and still put down 561rwhp/611rwtq at 5k rpms. Red line was 6500. Most fun daily driver ever.

NDTguy

2017 JKU Sport S
ndtguy is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 07-12-2015, 12:21 PM
JKowners Vendor
 
MoTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,251
Feedback: 2 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndtguy View Post
It's called a 3 bar MAP sensor. Most big time racers and high powered turbo cars use the 3 bar MAP and speed density.

I even had a 3 bar MAP in my 98 LS1 Trans Am with a built 347, custom cam, 70mm turbo, intercooled, alky-water injection, 60# injectors with twin intank fuel pumps. Street legal and a blast to drive. Couldn't keep the tires from spinning on the dyno and still put down 561rwhp/611rwtq at 5k rpms. Red line was 6500. Most fun daily driver ever.
MAP only speed density works well for racing and high performance applications; but for daily driven street vehicles adding a MAF and using actual vs calculated airflow can offer better drivability and more precise fuel control when changing altitude or wide ambient temperature changes.

MoTech
725-502-8507

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
MoTech is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 07-12-2015, 12:43 PM
JKowners Vendor
 
MoTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,251
Feedback: 2 reviews

Turbo's will become more prevalent in the future, using smaller displacement engine's with high compression, direct injection, CVVT, IVT and turbo's will allow manufacturers to meet emission and mpg standards coming in the future. These small engines will never drive like a throaty V8 but will offer decent power and economy.

The critical factor here is development. A proper supercharged engine (technically turbos are superchargers) requires a ground up design. Piston design, compression ratio, oiling, cooling system, component strength, the ability to withstand intake and internal heat(IVT intake valve temp), etc, are critical.

But by far the most important variable IMO is the calibration, a proper 2 or 3 bar OS. What separates an Eco-boost from a slap on turbo is countless hours and millions of dollars in software development. Drivability with no surge or hesitation, proper cruise control function, protection modes so you don't melt your engine, and much more.

The aftermarket will never reach this level of drivability and longevity by bolting on a huffer, they will get power but to say drivability including transmission control will rival the OE vehicle and the vehicle will run for 200,000 trouble free miles, run efficient and meet emission standards is a deception. OE drivability and longevity will remain the realm of the OE vehicle configuration. That's why we stock with OE cals.

The Europeans have been been putting turbos on small engines for decades with this goal in mind.

I must say modern turbos have come a long way. I installed Airflow Research turbos on SBC's back in the 70's, they had great power but the way boost came in was crude, it was fun but crude. Todays turbos are almost seamless but they still annoy me a little, even the best Audi's have a little bit of that rubber band effect to the power delivery.

MoTech
725-502-8507

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
MoTech is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 07-12-2015, 01:43 PM
JKO Addict!
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 3,851
Garage
Feedback: 0 reviews

I'd be afraid of dunking a red hot turbine housing in cold water with it in a Jeep.

Kevin
gt1guy is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 07-13-2015, 07:56 AM
JKO Addict!
 
ALASHA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 8,227
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Jeep View Post
Hey Ear,

I've only got a 4 cyl in my JKU, but it does have a rather large turbo, and makes a shit ton of torque. It's all about pushing air and fuel into the cylinders that you have to make power!

It's more about torque than horsepower in a Jeep crawler!
Are you just taking this opportunity to let people know you have a diesel because I dont see how a turbo diesel can in any way be compared to slapping a turbo on a 3.8

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndtguy View Post
It's called a 3 bar MAP sensor. Most big time racers and high powered turbo cars use the 3 bar MAP and speed density.
No need for a 3 bar on an application that probably wont even see double digit boost. 2 Bar is more than enough.


On road, turbo is the most efficient power adder since it has the least amount of parasitic loss. Offroad is a different story as it will be somewhat unpredictable as to when the power kicks in or not so if you wheel alot, this is something to consider.


And as Motech mentioned, tuning is going to be key to whether this performs as desired or if its a waste of money. This bit is true regardless of which power adder you choose.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ALASHA is offline  
post #11 of 17 Old 07-13-2015, 05:55 PM
Rock God
 
ndtguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 679
Garage
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALASHA View Post

No need for a 3 bar on an application that probably wont even see double digit boost. 2 Bar is more than enough.
Trust me when I say he will want more powar. We all want more...boost is addicting. Ask me how I know.

NDTguy

2017 JKU Sport S
ndtguy is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 07-13-2015, 09:38 PM
Rock God
 
bluewave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Houston/ San Antonio TX
Posts: 1,058
Feedback: 0 reviews

I'm wondering if mmsam, has a crossover pipe to make all 6 cyl feed the turbo or if they are just running it off 3 cylinders

Texas Complete Truck Center
5670 S Interstate 35
New Braunfels, Texas
(210) 412-6379

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bluewave is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 07-14-2015, 07:44 AM
JKO Addict!
 
ALASHA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 8,227
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndtguy View Post
Trust me when I say he will want more powar. We all want more...boost is addicting. Ask me how I know.
Trust me when I say that a 2 Bar is more than enough for any 3.8 or 3.6. Ask me how I know

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewave View Post
I'm wondering if mmsam, has a crossover pipe to make all 6 cyl feed the turbo or if they are just running it off 3 cylinders
Has to be a cross over. You cant run a turbo off half an engine. Unequal back pressure and all


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ALASHA is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 07-14-2015, 02:57 PM Thread Starter
Granite Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Louisiana
Age: 48
Posts: 115
Feedback: 0 reviews

Motech summed it up well. Turbo JK will never reach prime time level of the new Ford. Might be easier to borrow the LQ9 and tranny out of the wife's Escalade and drag it all to MoTech?
earfixr is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 07-14-2015, 10:07 PM
Rock God
 
ndtguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 679
Garage
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALASHA View Post
Trust me when I say that a 2 Bar is more than enough for any 3.8 or 3.6. Ask me how I know
I'm afraid to ask. Head Gasket?

NDTguy

2017 JKU Sport S
ndtguy is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 07-15-2015, 07:53 AM
JKO Addict!
 
ALASHA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 8,227
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndtguy View Post
I'm afraid to ask. Head Gasket?
No my motor is fine but I am pretty sure I run more boost on a 3.8 than anyone else out there. I make it a point to not tell people how much because I dont want to hear "your motor is going to blow up".

I have been running for years without issue but with how much the 3.8's quality varies from owner to owner I could see how another 3.8 might not last as well.

Point is a 2 bar is good for 14.7 pounds of boost. Do you really want to throw more than that at a 3.8/3.6?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ALASHA is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 07-15-2015, 09:17 PM
Granite Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 32
Posts: 346
Feedback: 0 reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
I'd be afraid of dunking a red hot turbine housing in cold water with it in a Jeep.

Kevin
How hard are you driving it to get the turbo red hot while wheeling?


Having had a turbocharged diesel JK (factory) and now a 3.8, the turbo diesel was way more fun to drive. Heaps more grunt down low, around town and on the highway. Neither the 3.6 or 3.8 have quite as much grunt available in practical driving conditions. Only the 3.6 gets a lead once its singing past 4000rpm (the diesel has to find another gear at 4000rpm)

Realistically the naturally aspirated V6 will have a lower cost of ownership though.

I think with the options given to you americans, if you want more grunt in your JK the V8 and transmission transplant make better sense than massaging more ponies from either chrysler V6. Unless someone starts figuring out how to put the new generation turbocharged V6 and their transmissions into the JK....

ex: RHD JK 2dr CRD auto
now: RHD JK 2dr Rubicon 3.8 6spd

Last edited by CRDTom; 07-15-2015 at 09:26 PM.
CRDTom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JKowners.com : Jeep Wrangler JK Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome