Backfire Effects from exhaust?
- Thread starter WhiteSW20
- 169 comments
- 13,548 views
JNasty, we're way off topic and im tired of arguing anyway. one more thing though that your engine is famous for is crank walk although it is quite rare. and another thing. i know plenty of cars that run 11's and then go to the mall or movie afterwards. its called a boost controller. especially twin turbo cars like 300zx's, 3000gt's, etc...its common to see. one small turbo, one big turbo and youre ready to go for anything. anyway though, i'd rather read about gt4 so im done.
- 1,264
Been there, done that. My car now has a 6-bolt, so no worrys. And, its not very rare.jr93alty
I wasn't saying my car is the only one to do that. I'm was mearly saying that its not an easy task. Yes, with those big engined cars its easy. They run low 13s or high 12s to start, so 11s are not hard. But, a stock 2G DSM runs a mid to high 14 stock, so getting to LOW 11s and almost 130mph is pretty good. Thats all. Not the best, but its not as easy as you seem to think.
Yea, defferent sized turbos on a V6 engine, thats a good one. That would make for fun engine management issues. HA HA HA Thats just something you don't do. Inline engine, sure, because the manifolds both come together before the turbos, but not with a V. And, even then, if you have a fast Supra or RX7, you almost ALWAYS go single turbo to go real fast. Out of all the fast Supras and RX7s that I've ever seen, I can't remember one that was still twin.
So, anyway. I can't say its been informative having this 'discussion' with you, but its been fun. Have a nice day.
Hilg
ok....wow, maybe im not done. twin turbos was brought up to discuss running at the track and then taking the car out for everyday driving. not hardcore racing. of course you'd rather have one big turbo but that allows for gobs of lag and your car wouldnt be very streetable. also, twin turbos arent hard to manage. many people run a small and large turbo...one after the other underneath the car. then the discharge air meets in the fender or wherever u want it to...right before the intercooler or whatever...if u have one...then, the larger turbo overrides the low boost of the small turbo after it spools up and its like magic...hardly any turbo lag and incredibly quiet exhaust. maybe i havent been informative...its alright though. most people never claim to learn anything about cars anyway...especially online. youve taught me that u run 11's and are "a much better driver than me"....u assume i couldnt run those times in the same car...also, u see me spitting out stuff that disputes what youre saying so u think im stupid and neither of us get anywhere. either way though, back on topic....more fuel = more power (theoretically) = more heat....the more fuel may quench the cc for a moment and for one stroke...but in the end, the science still holds up. and until someone can at least explain why they "think" or know its different, arguing doesnt matter. everyone could use the same tiny radiator if more fuel equalled a cooler all around running engine. people need to read further past the "being rich cools the cc" and realize that its only for that one stroke and it pertains to detonation prevention, nothing else. if it cooled it, then u could run high rpms forever with it running rich and never heat the inside of an engine up. as a matter of fact, since youd have more frequent rotations, the engine would run much cooler than it would running lean at idle. yes i know there is friction but that isnt what accounts for melted pistons...its the constant explosions of RICH mixtures along with the lack of escaping gas thru the piston rings to reduce heat. but all that has to do with the fuel burning. wow, that was long. im done.
- 1,264
Yea, many cars have that stock on an INLINE engine. I didn't say that was hard to manage. I said that running different sized turbos on a 'V' engine would be hard to manage. Thats what I said. You show me one example of a car with a 'V' engine that runs different sized turbos on each side of the engine, and I will gladdly say you were right. I have never, EVER seen that. Maybe you have. More power to you, show me. Until then, I call shinnanigans.jr93alty
Until you can show me some actual proof of the things you talk about, by some reputabe source, I'll stick to what I know. Thats all. I'm not saying I can't learn, never did. I just don't agree with what your saying. I learn things everyday on here. In one of the other threads I learned that BTCC cars actually run a wing just for looks. I didn't know that and argued the point. I was proven wrong, and admitted it. You actually prove these things you talk about, and I'd be more than happy to say you 'taught' me something.
No, I never said any of that. I merely said that its not easy, not that nobody but me can do it. Hell, I don't even know you, how would I know what you can do behind the wheel??? Hell, maybe you could drive my car to a 10, who knows. You just make it sound like everyone and their mom has a car that runs 11s. I'm not saying its impossible, but just that it isn't that common. Sure, there are plenty of cars out there that run those #'s, but the closer you get to 10s, the less the cars are usually driven on the street.
Again, I never once said you were stupid. You need to learn that there is a difference between a common, simple argument, and me making fun of you and calling you names. I never once did the latter, just simply disagreed. If you can't take disagreement any better than that, then I guess there is nothing I can do.
OK, now I'm NOT calling you stupid, but explain to me why I've never seen one piston get melted from running rich, only lean???? Again, I'm not trying to be a dick, get over all that. I really want to know this. Show me some site, or a source that proves that. But, until then, I'll stick to what I know. And what I know is that I've never, EVER seen a car that ran too rich and burned a piston, only from running lean. So, like I said, I'm just having a discussion here. I'd like you to prove me wrong, and teach me something. No name calling, just info. Stop assuming that because I disagree with your info on here means that I think you are of lesser knowledge. You know what they say happens when you assume things, don't you???
Hilg
youve never heard of a common everyday car burning a piston when running around with high rpms for a long time? that means they were at wot which means they were running rich. of course a lot of these cars also have a wet sump oil system and run dry when idiots run them around like this without modifying the oil pickup and delivery system. but still, i know my car is running properly yet i could easily melt a piston in my car while running rich. also, i need no proof. i dont consider websites as evidence most of the time cuz anyone can make a website. turn to the books. fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, heat transfer, etc... and u can learn a lot. also, all V engines dont have seperate banks and piping for intakes. ever seen an LS series motor by GM before. all 8 runners go towards the middle of the motor. this is quite common as a matter of fact. u must have tuned a lot of japanese cars because its VERY common to have one manifold one a V engine. its also more efficient for engine height. the intake on LS motors isnt even taller than the top of the valve covers on each bank and the throttle body faces the front of the car. therefore, its easy to make ram air ws6's and whatnot and have zero intake piping which slows intake velocity, increasing pressure, and creates more high rpm horsepower...since the motor already has gobs of torque...anyway, im just babbling now.
- 1,264
Then tell me some that you have read. Thats all. I'm not saying that you're making stuff up, it just goes against everything I've seen. If you have some specific books or what not, let me know. I'd love to understand the logic behind your comments.jr93alty
Well, of course the intake on a 'V' engine goes to the middle. Thats obvious. But, turbos don't attach to the intake manifold. They attach to the exhaust manifold. And, like I said, I've never seen a 'V' engined car with different sized turbos on each bank of EXHAUST MANIFOLDs. Every 'V' engined car that I've ever seen stock, has the exact same size turbos. Thats what I was talking about with the engine management issues. If you had different sized turbos, you would have all sorts of odd boost and fuel issues to deal with, it just wouldn't make sense.
So, again, if you have some specific books to reference what your talking about, I'd be glad to know. I'm an automotive fan, and anything I can read is good. Just let me know.
Hilg
all books contain the same information, just explained differently by different authors. most are college textbooks and can be bough anywhere... amazon, etc... but are very expensive. im not gonna explain anything on here because this is the internet and those classes are taught for 4 months so explaining or trying to explain on here would be pointless. if no one wants to believe me, its fine, but im not gonna become an internet professor to prove a point. also, i said in earlier posts that the turbos arent on the manifolds, they are under the car after the y pipe and inline with each other and the intake piping runs back up to the car. its not hard to make a flange at the end of a y pipe. its a custom job but still very common and keeps things under the hood much cooler. many cars with crammed engine compartments dont have room for turbos on the manifold anyway. as a matter of fact, people have tried having remote turbos put on cars (and maybe its been done already, havent been following) where the exhaust just powers a small motor that takes little room and then runs power to a remotely located turbo so that there would be less bends in the intake piping, therefore keep boost pressures high cuz every corner that air takes reduces its pressure (thermodynamics again) and therefore its oxygen density which drops power.
- 1,264
Some names, or titles??? Thats all I want. You have some books you've read, so tell me the titles so I might check them out myself.jr93alty
I don't need you to give lessons. Just tell me some books or actual sources that you've got information from. I'm a golf pro here in Omaha. If you came up to me and asked me for some good golf books to read, do you think I would just say "go to B&N and pick anything, they're all the same" No, I would give examples of books that I've read that have helped me. I'm not trying to be a dick here, but you're so damn defensive, I don't know what to do. Like I said, I just want to learn about this stuff your talking about. You don't have to teach me, just tell me some books that might help.
Hilg
ok...if it makes a difference. here are the books i used to use.
Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach by Cengel
Heat Transfer: A Practical Approach by Cengel
Mechanical Engineering Design by Shigley
here's the big difference. a golf swing book is based on opinions of authors. this stuff is based on unchangeable theorems and the formulas, etc... dont change. its all about how this person feels they can explain it best and in what order. also, these books will be completely not understandable for someone to just pick up and learn. they are meant for 300 level classes at the worst. if anyone wants to read these books feel free but to tell u the truth, i didnt literally sit down and read them. ive just gone thru a 20 year learning process from the day i was about 3 all the way thru these books to now.
Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach by Cengel
Heat Transfer: A Practical Approach by Cengel
Mechanical Engineering Design by Shigley
here's the big difference. a golf swing book is based on opinions of authors. this stuff is based on unchangeable theorems and the formulas, etc... dont change. its all about how this person feels they can explain it best and in what order. also, these books will be completely not understandable for someone to just pick up and learn. they are meant for 300 level classes at the worst. if anyone wants to read these books feel free but to tell u the truth, i didnt literally sit down and read them. ive just gone thru a 20 year learning process from the day i was about 3 all the way thru these books to now.
- 1,264
Thank you, was that so hard???jr93alty
That wasn't my point. I kept just asking for some actual info, and you just kept saying 'its thermodynamics, or its heat transfer' and not actually citing sources. Thats all I wanted. Thank you for finally expanding on this.
To use your arguement earlier, why do you call me stupid and assume I can't learn this??? You know, I'm not some 14yr old kid who is learning calc and trig for the first time. You just give sources and I'll determine the outcome of me learning the information.
HA HA, reading therm books when your three, thats a funny one. No one believes that. When your three, I don't care who it is, your concerned with cartoons an toys, not engineering. I can undestand that you've studied this for some time, but seriously, not 3 years old.
Hilg
- 88
I disagree, I find this quite interesting. Best thread on here at the moment. 
- 1,264
/\
|
|
|
|
|
WORD!! 👍
And, last I checked, this was a discussion forum. The thread started talking about backfires, which then turned to how they were generated and why some cars would have them or not. Its actually a pretty viable arguement. So, I think I'll stick to talking on here, thanks.
Hilg
i agree with JNasty. its not like its a hostile argument or anything...also, no big news about gt4 has come out in quite some time now so we have to talk about something. also, i wasnt interested in engineering at 3, ive just been associated with cars since i was about 3. and understanding calc is just a small part of it. for example, the mechanical engineering design book came as the conclusion to a 4 tier group of classes on materials which means two years along with calc 1,2, and 3. also, the later chapters in the book are used for a graduate machine design II course usually. im not saying no one can learn it...obviously, thousands of people learn it every year. but its just not something someone would pick up and read.
- 1,264
Well, I did call you stupid once or twicejr93alty
Just kidding.
And, wait, did you say you AGREE with me as well?????
👍 Just kidding again.
And, yea, the discussion is pretty relevant. I mean, if people want cars to have backfire effects, we might as well have them on cars that would actually have them. Like we discussed, not every car would shoot a flame, mildly or heavily modified. I think it would be a neat effect, but only if done correctly. Like I said earlier, I like how some of the race cars in GT3 spark when you set the ride height too low. Thats what we're talking about. Not all cars spark, only the ones that go REAL low. Same with flames. Not all cars, race or street would shoot a flame. But, if they did implement it in the game properly some how, it would be a cool effect.
Hilg
- 30
i hope they do gt 4 more realistic than gt3 .......... whith exhust flames and real sound in the tire,, in the old gt the sound of the tire where not a realistic sound..
and hope they make more smoke effects when drifting......................
and hope they make more smoke effects when drifting......................
- 1,238
- RocketPunch1221
- RRoD? no thanks.
JNasty4G63
Is there ANY performance gain at all by doing that?? If not, is there a point besides "trying" to look "cool" like that "2 something, 2 whatever" movie?? If that will make your car go faster, please tell me how. I really really want to know.
- 230
i don't know if this has been mentioned earlier because i didn't read all six pages so bear with me.
in Rally and several other sports, the Backfiring is most definately there for a purpose on Turbocharged vehicles. its a computer controlled System known a TALS(Turbo Anti-Lag System), also known as a "bang bang" system .
we all know that when you shift, your blowoff releases the pressure created by the turbo, meaning that in the next gear your Turbo starts off at negative boost again, known as Turbo Lag. what a TALS does is prevent the turbo from expelling the excess pressure, therefore when you get into your next gear you maintain your boost level and have your power when you need it, its also resposible for 2 quick explosions from the exhaust(ie. flames shooting out of the exhaust).
a much better explaination can be found here: http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/bangbang.html
in Rally and several other sports, the Backfiring is most definately there for a purpose on Turbocharged vehicles. its a computer controlled System known a TALS(Turbo Anti-Lag System), also known as a "bang bang" system .
we all know that when you shift, your blowoff releases the pressure created by the turbo, meaning that in the next gear your Turbo starts off at negative boost again, known as Turbo Lag. what a TALS does is prevent the turbo from expelling the excess pressure, therefore when you get into your next gear you maintain your boost level and have your power when you need it, its also resposible for 2 quick explosions from the exhaust(ie. flames shooting out of the exhaust).
a much better explaination can be found here: http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/bangbang.html
- 656
...but we´ll (perhaps) not see such awesome effects in GT4,he? 
...i´m so unhappy about this detail which won´t be included!
but no one really knows "IF FIRE COMING OUT OF THE EXHAUSTES" will be in GT4!
...i´m so unhappy about this detail which won´t be included!
but no one really knows "IF FIRE COMING OUT OF THE EXHAUSTES" will be in GT4!
