Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
All - am I correct that no one is currently producing a turbo kit for a Nord or TS?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
Nope. There used to be a kit made 20+ years ago and there are a few manifolds floating around. But your best bet is to fabricate one that is up to modern standards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
It’s an option to a piece of the puzzle, which is engine management. You really want programmable fuel injection with a turbo, so you’ll need a throttle body.
Yes, I want programmable fuel injection; need something to manage the A/F ratio.

I think it would be difficult to fabricate a blow-through system that would work with the fuel injection that mimics the look of dual carburetors. Would be easier to use a manifold with a common plenum.

If there's not a kit out there, what I really need is an intake manifold that will work. An exhaust manifold would be nice, too, but that's easier to fabricate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #11

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
Doesn't look like a bad option. The TS is a better forced induction platform too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,138 Posts
A turbo install in a 105 chasis invites all manner of unpleasant compromises due to the location of hydraulics so close to a turbo. Driving such a car in Texas in Ausust will surely prove to be a hard field test for any turbo install.

From the Extreme Tuning site (they are in Bulgaria for cryin' out loud!!!!):


Wrapping of tubular manifolds with heat wrap is extremely useful because of number of factors.

The most important thing is to keep the temperature of the exhaust gasses and their velocity. With tubular manifolds, the walls of the runners exchange heat very fast and if they are not thermically isolated, micro vortices will appear around and the exhaust gasses will decrease the velocity (their kinetic energy) when overcoming these vortices.

The faster heat exchange leads to greater fluctuations in the walls temperature for short periods which causes the material to shrink and expand multiple times. In the time, bending causes mechanical stress and very small cracks that can result in a visible crack in the manifold. Expand/shrink frequency decreases thanks to the thermal isolation. This leads to smooth transition between the temperature amplitudes.

Another important effect of using the heat wrap is keeping the heat in the engine bay under control. For tuned cars and especially these having a turbocharger, the manifold is often exposed to temperatures of approximately 700 degrees Celsium which makes it potentially dangerous for the surrounding components. The heat wrap will also prevent melting of tubes and cables.

Extreme Tuning team suggests that you always use a heat wrap for a tubular manifold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
A turbo install in a 105 chasis invites all manner of unpleasant compromises due to the location of hydraulics so close to a turbo. Driving such a car in Texas in Ausust will surely prove to be a hard field test for any turbo install.

From the Extreme Tuning site (they are in Bulgaria for cryin' out loud!!!!):
My turbo install didn't really invite any unpleasant compromises on the hydraulics. You'll want a heat shield, and some insulation on the brake lines, but that's about it. Since I've switched to a boosterless setup, there's now quite a bit of room between the hydraulics and the turbo. It's had no trouble heat-wise during the Texas summers, but it does have an upgraded radiator. Honestly, the only limitation on the heat front is my own heat tolerance.

The extreme tuning site is just repeating something that applies to any tubular turbo manifold (or even a header for that matter, but to a lesser degree). A tubular manifold will flow better than a log. Ceramic coating is usually better than a wrap, however as you don't have moisture trap problems.

Biggest weakness is really just the head gaskets, but mine took a pretty decent amount of abuse (many track days, auto X, bouncing off the rev limiter, etc.) before giving up. For anything over 7-8 PSI, you will want to bump down the compression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,138 Posts
This company makes copper head gaskets for Alfas. They come in thicknesses up to .125. I've seen one of their 2 liter Alfa copper head gaskets and found it to be of excellent quality. They have designs for normally aspireated Alfa engines and, also, for turbo-charged Alfa engines. Be sure to use Hylomar M as a gasket sealer. Definitely sticky stuff.


Gasket Works - Products
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
This company makes copper head gaskets for Alfas. They come in thicknesses up to .125. I've seen one of their 2 liter Alfa copper head gaskets and found it to be of excellent quality. They have designs for normally aspireated Alfa engines and, also, for turbo-charged Alfa engines. Be sure to use Hylomar M as a gasket sealer. Definitely sticky stuff.


Gasket Works - Products
I'm personally not sold on copper head gaskets. They tend to seal fluids rather poorly from what I understand. My solution for the current motor is an o-ringed liner. Will have to have the head back from the machine shop and the car back together before I can vouch for it.

Besides copper, Jim K. has reccomended MLS (multi-layer steel) gaskets as solution for turbo Nords. The advantage is they can compensate for head lift under very high cylinder pressures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
A turbo install in a 105 chasis invites all manner of unpleasant compromises due to the location of hydraulics so close to a turbo. Driving such a car in Texas in Ausust will surely prove to be a hard field test for any turbo install.

From the Extreme Tuning site (they are in Bulgaria for cryin' out loud!!!!):
Building a high performance engine that's going to spend some time on the street is always going to be about compromises. My most radical street-driven car was a 796 hp 514" big block in a '67 Fairlane. It had 13.5:1 compression (necessitating 100% racing fuel), a monster solid roller camshaft, a Holley Dominator carburetor, 4" bullet mufflers, and a very loose converter. It was way too radical for anything other than short trips.

Frankly, I think a turbo has the potential to make significantly more horsepower than an NA engine in a more reliable and more streetable package. Here's why -- I think a mild-ish turbo 2L can hit 300 hp at the crank. But to hit more than 200 hp at the crank with an NA motor requires a lot of effort and expense. To hit 220 hp NA, you need something fairly exotic, in my opinion.

With a turbo, you have the downsides of plumbing, heat, and complexity, but you have the upside of substantially more hp to be had. I think the juice is worth the squeeze.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
My turbo install didn't really invite any unpleasant compromises on the hydraulics. You'll want a heat shield, and some insulation on the brake lines, but that's about it. Since I've switched to a boosterless setup, there's now quite a bit of room between the hydraulics and the turbo. It's had no trouble heat-wise during the Texas summers, but it does have an upgraded radiator. Honestly, the only limitation on the heat front is my own heat tolerance.

The extreme tuning site is just repeating something that applies to any tubular turbo manifold (or even a header for that matter, but to a lesser degree). A tubular manifold will flow better than a log. Ceramic coating is usually better than a wrap, however as you don't have moisture trap problems.

Biggest weakness is really just the head gaskets, but mine took a pretty decent amount of abuse (many track days, auto X, bouncing off the rev limiter, etc.) before giving up. For anything over 7-8 PSI, you will want to bump down the compression.
Good info. I don't mind running without a booster.

Have done a bit of reading and looks like the o-ringed liners are the hot ticket.

If I do build a boosted motor (and I'm leaning heavily that way), I'll build the motor with that in mind. Figure some MaxSpeeding rods, prepped stock crank, forged pistons (8:1 or so, I'm thinking), o-ringed liners, fair amount of work on the exhaust side of the head, etc. That should mitigate some of the potential issues.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
Good info. I don't mind running without a booster.
To be clear, running without a booster isn't required. I even did a few track days when I was running with a booster. The catalyst for a boosterless setup was to get a dual master setup with a balance bar so I could adjust brake bias on the fly and have a bit more redundancy in my system.

I never did get around to dynoing my 1.0 setup (100% stock motor at 7psi), but I'm guessing it was around 170-200 ish. It was enough to break the tires loose at will in second gear (more torque than just about any NA nord build). Goal for 2.0 is 300 with the built motor, which should make the car a handful- I will probably run it on lower boost most of the time for reliability and driveability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
To be clear, running without a booster isn't required. I even did a few track days when I was running with a booster. The catalyst for a boosterless setup was to get a dual master setup with a balance bar so I could adjust brake bias on the fly and have a bit more redundancy in my system.

I never did get around to dynoing my 1.0 setup (100% stock motor at 7psi), but I'm guessing it was around 170-200 ish. It was enough to break the tires loose at will in second gear (more torque than just about any NA nord build). Goal for 2.0 is 300 with the built motor, which should make the car a handful- I will probably run it on lower boost most of the time for reliability and driveability.
What are the specs for your built motor? Any head porting? Can you remind us what turbo you're running and your induction?
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top