|
|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
|||||||
| Forced Induction Discuss topics relating to turbochargers, superchargers, and nitrous oxide systems. |
![]() |
Show Printable Version |
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Blow through
Can you put a blow though set up on a carbureted car? I know the Corvair had the draw style what was the point of that?
__________________
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blow through
Draw through is harder to plump, but is said to be better for the fact that you dont have to pressurize any of the fittings on the carb for boost. But everyone has there own opinions on what is best, i would say Blow through would be the easiest to assemble, but the draw through would also work well..
__________________
1988 conquest TSI -Lots of mods, finally finished WOOT!! ![]() Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races! |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Re: Blow through
Now is there any risk with draw though? I mean you are packing a fuel mist into a hot turbo right? I am more attracted to the blow through design, it seems to be far more popular by a vast amount, hopefully lead by the fact that it produces better results.
__________________
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
This doesnt specifically apply to carb. cars, but here is why people prefer a draw through instead of blow through.
A draw through is easier to tune. Youll lose about 20-30% resolution on a blow through setup. It also leaves more room for power since its pulling through colder air (i.e. wont peg 5 volts) as opposed to being on the hot side of FI. The hotter the intake charge the less airflow the MAF read. The less airflow the MAF reads the less fuel. (load & airflow readings) The less fuel the leaner it gets. That's the exact opposite you want to happen as the intake charge temperature rises. You'll also take the chance of coating the MAF in oil which will really screw up your tuning, since no turbo on this planet is absolutely 100% totally oil sealed.
__________________
![]() "The CEG Nazi" www.contour.org 1996 Ford Contour SE - Sold 3.0L V6 and Arizona Dyno Chip Turbo Kit 364 whp, 410 wtq @ 16 psi and only 4,700 rpms. 1999 Tropic Green SVT Contour - Bone stock and MINT |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blow through
One reason that blow through on a carb would be beneficial is that it is easier to set up a blow off valve. On a draw through, when you vent to atmosphere, you would be venting fuel out as well.
__________________
-Cory 1992 Nissan 240sx KA24DE-Turbo: The Showcar Stock internals. Daily driven. 12.6@122mph 496whp/436wtq at 25psi |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Suspect that the Corvair had a draw-thru because they could use an exsisting carb (Carter YF?) without modifying it for shaft seals, float, etc. Also, there was no thought at the time it appears, to intercool the engine or to worry about emissions. I had a 2V carb on mine (draw-thru) with a Rajay E-flow turbo, custom made manifold with a central plenum and 6 runner tubes going down to the milled off heads. And I must say, the drivability totally sucked in the winter. Starting it was a beast! Would hate to see what the emissions were.
You pretty much have to use a bypass valve on a blow-thru-carb version. If you don't, you'll prolly blow fuel out the throttle shaft seals and more fuel thru the idle circuits when you lift the throttle to shift. Big ball of fire out the tailpipe. Old UK Lotus Turbo Esprits with carbs (blow-thru) do that at times even with a bypass valve. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Re: Blow through
Quote:
__________________
1988 conquest TSI -Lots of mods, finally finished WOOT!! ![]() Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races! |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yea I'm not crazy about blowing a nice fuely mist about it my Nova's engine compartment. I could hear it now "rrraaaaaaawwwwwwww--psstt--frrrrwwwooooooosh"..."So explain again how you lit you car on fire?" LOL
__________________
|
|
![]() |
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
![]() |
|
|