Author Topic: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion  (Read 29962 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online fabr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 91908
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #45 on: December 06, 2016, 10:09:27 AM »
Correct ! The only place all the porting and polishing and 4-5 angle seats will be improving performance is off boost. Once boost kicks in all that becomes nearly irrelevant.
"There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one
flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

-----------------------------------------------------------
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots" Albert Einstein  (IT'S OFFICIAL THAT DAY IS HERE NOW!)

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #46 on: December 06, 2016, 12:50:59 PM »
ok so now i'm lost......4 to 5 angle grind is bad for heat dissipation and full radius is best or vise a versa? and porting, sort of polishing and 4 to 5 angle grind are to get it off boost faster? or atleast that was my thought and reason for doing so that and a little more cfm capable flow from head.
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #47 on: December 06, 2016, 12:54:38 PM »
also been looking at these.....http://www.flowperformance.com/system.html
thoughts?   not looking for peak cfm just consistent cfm reading so i can flow match and was considering doing so with intake on?
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #48 on: December 06, 2016, 01:04:28 PM »
http://www.flowperformance.com/price.html    the $997 one or cheap one lol
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Online fabr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 91908
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #49 on: December 06, 2016, 07:28:07 PM »
ok so now i'm lost......4 to 5 angle grind is bad for heat dissipation and full radius is best or vise a versa? and porting, sort of polishing and 4 to 5 angle grind are to get it off boost faster? or atleast that was my thought and reason for doing so that and a little more cfm capable flow from head.
On a turbo engine the width of the 45* valve seat is crucial to cooling the head of the exhaust valve. IMO,it should be in the area of .100 and if running boatloads of boost a bit wider. If performance off boost or what is the equivalent of a normally aspirated engine is important to you then a radiusing of the 15*/30* angle top cuts and a radiusing of the 60*/75* bottom cuts will show slight gains usually but a quality 5 angle configuration is basically the same for all practical purposes. The 45* seat is left flat. On a pure drag engine some head builders will radius the 45* seat as well . The radius seat seals very well due to the high PSI load in the very narrow contact band but will transfer very little heat from the valve head which isn't much of a concern for the very short operating time of a drag engine. Endurance heads will never have fully radiused seats for that reason. The exhaust valve would be begging to fail. Pretty much the same applies to the intake valve.
"There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one
flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

-----------------------------------------------------------
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots" Albert Einstein  (IT'S OFFICIAL THAT DAY IS HERE NOW!)

Online fabr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 91908
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #50 on: December 06, 2016, 07:50:56 PM »
also been looking at these.....http://www.flowperformance.com/system.html
thoughts?   not looking for peak cfm just consistent cfm reading so i can flow match and was considering doing so with intake on?
NO! You need at the very least ton  be able to flow test the port shape at the same or more flow and pressure it will see in operation . Flowing at lower rates will give you bogus,useless info since as the flow increases the port shape requirements change as well. Remember that air is a fluid and it behaves similar to water in a port. Take the bare head or the one you have been working on and use a garden hose water stream at different flows and compare the big difference you will see in the pattern exiting the valve. Air behaves similarly. In other words,even though a port may flow the same as the next one at low flow rates ,due to small differences in your port work,they may flow quite differently at real life flow rates. I would look for a used superflow 600 or equivalent if looking into a flow bwnch. That 600 stands for 600 cfm @ approx. 30" pressure drop. It takes several shop vac blower motors to do that. It takes even more if you are flowing a turbo head since you need to maintain boost pressure and flow to test them. If I were you and were not interested in starting a whole new career including 5 axis machining center to duplicate whatever you hand grind developing a port shape I'd just do the best I could and call it good as you are doing.  FAST is right that under boost,port shape/efficiency/size/etc. becomes a bit irrelevant since air under pressure will flow will definitely get in the cylinder.
"There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one
flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

-----------------------------------------------------------
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots" Albert Einstein  (IT'S OFFICIAL THAT DAY IS HERE NOW!)

Online fabr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 91908
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #51 on: December 06, 2016, 08:02:23 PM »
I had a superflow110 and also a superflow 600 when I was doing this stuff for real. Both are very good machines and might be found used but the amount of calculations needed make them a dinosaur compared to the new digital SF260 and SF 750 benches. What used to take a few hours is done in minutes now.
"There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one
flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

-----------------------------------------------------------
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots" Albert Einstein  (IT'S OFFICIAL THAT DAY IS HERE NOW!)

Online fabr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 91908
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #52 on: December 06, 2016, 08:24:04 PM »
Here's a link to where I bought replacement blowers a couple times. 2 stage ones are best. Takes several to get a good bench built if thinking of DIY. Remember the cabinets will be under high vacumn and pressure. They need to be very,very stout.
"There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one
flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

-----------------------------------------------------------
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots" Albert Einstein  (IT'S OFFICIAL THAT DAY IS HERE NOW!)

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #53 on: December 06, 2016, 10:10:23 PM »
beyond what i was looking to spend on this head lol  ;D but it was a thought to get the cyl filment as equal as possible. for off boost and low boost efficency. the lower in the rpm i can get good usable power the better and that is the goal. i have been working on a n/a D port head. here is a chart of the diff styles being used. http://stinger-performance.proboards.com/thread/4125/2-head-flow-comparison-chart 

and just interesting info on this engine
"These are just general guidelines, it doesn't mean you are guaranteed not to blow something up well before these ratings. It also doesn't mean people haven't made more power than this with stock components. These are generally "safe" power ratings that should last quite a while at these power levels. These are for EFI Turbo engine components. Pre 91 cranks and rods are the same as turbo in n/a engines."

Rods: 420rwhp
Pistons: 450rwhp
Crank: 600+rwhp
Block: 750+rwhp





Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #54 on: December 06, 2016, 10:34:23 PM »
i understand and agree what fast and yourself are saying, under boost as in 20 to 35 psi the charge will find it's way in, and it will... but with a mild to wild port job the efficiency goes up allowing for more performance when properly done of course. that is all i am shooting for across the board on performance, but low to mid rather than high rpm. there is a point where trying to push high boost through to small of a port is just building heat.  there are many posts on the ford 2.3 forums like turbo ford with a mild clean up as i have attempted to do, based off of what i have read, have made very good to substantial differences in performance, given the fact these are sohc 8 valve heads. is a mild to wild port job needed to make 350 - 400 hp out of a stock head....no it can be done but can only help when properly done. the volvo dohc head in stock form flows the best for stock, but is an undertaking to adapt and not something i am going to do.  i am not going wild because i have to keep it more tame,costs down lol at $1900 from bo port and a stock motor would be capable of sustaining the power level i'm shooting for however, not knowing what kind of shape internals are in, i feel better rebuilding  with better forged pistons and rods to be safe. i would like to flow match the ports in the head. i found a shop in omaha i will have to call again and see what he can or will do. if not to much i will do it. may not yield much diff but can't hurt.
i know you two have quite a bit of experience with this and that is why i have asked and i appreciate the info!
« Last Edit: December 06, 2016, 10:40:58 PM by dsrace »
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #55 on: December 06, 2016, 10:37:57 PM »
On a turbo engine the width of the 45* valve seat is crucial to cooling the head of the exhaust valve. IMO,it should be in the area of .100 and if running boatloads of boost a bit wider. If performance off boost or what is the equivalent of a normally aspirated engine is important to you then a radiusing of the 15*/30* angle top cuts and a radiusing of the 60*/75* bottom cuts will show slight gains usually but a quality 5 angle configuration is basically the same for all practical purposes. The 45* seat is left flat. On a pure drag engine some head builders will radius the 45* seat as well . The radius seat seals very well due to the high PSI load in the very narrow contact band but will transfer very little heat from the valve head which isn't much of a concern for the very short operating time of a drag engine. Endurance heads will never have fully radiused seats for that reason. The exhaust valve would be begging to fail. Pretty much the same applies to the intake valve.

ok now that makes sense....learned something again and thanks for the good info!
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Offline Enemy

  • F*CK NA i lOvE BooST
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1195
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2016, 08:48:58 AM »
Posting up the new intake adapter that DS designed for this build to use a 4.9 intake elbow and 65mm throttle body from a Crown Vic (I think?) on a stock 2.3 lower.  DS will have the details..
Some take the factory 2.3 intake elbow, gut it, knife edge the lower, adapt a larger TB, then cut and rotate it to simplify plumbing to the the intercooler, which is what I did on mine except for the gutting part..








Stock for comparison..
"If the hate of men could be turned into electricity, it would light up the whole world."   ~Nikola Tesla

Offline Carlriddle

  • Another build? What are you thinking?
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4535
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2016, 10:05:48 AM »
Dang, shinny alum part adds hp!!  ee:

Come on ups, oh and lotto to speed it along.  I'm getting behind. gg:
You can keep your CHANGE, I'd like to keep my DOLLAR.

Offline Enemy

  • F*CK NA i lOvE BooST
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1195
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2016, 10:27:49 AM »
30hp, minimum!
Highly recommended lol
"If the hate of men could be turned into electricity, it would light up the whole world."   ~Nikola Tesla

Offline dsrace

  • VIP
  • *
  • Posts: 6863
  • my one true weakness
Re: turbo 1300 to turbo 2300 conversion
« Reply #59 on: December 07, 2016, 07:13:01 PM »
thanks for posting the pics enemy. if everyone could see the inside of the stock upper intake manifold you would see how restrictive it is and the n/a upper as seen in enemys pic is the same as the turbo model. not only are the small round runners but ford didn't do a good job lining them up. almost off 1/8" in a spot from lining up with the lower intake which stock has round small holes. what i did to open the lower they call knife edging and is one of the first mods they do on the turbo ford forum to improve performance on a few levels. this has been debated with an upper manifold or a adaptor like is being used on dougs to bolt the throttle body directly to a knife bladed lower intake manifold. many of them gut the stock upper so it's one hollow tube rather than hollow half way down and individual tubes through the last half. they also replace the factory throttle body with a larger 60m or 65mm one. i don't think that really helps to much under boost imo. there are mixed reviews on its effect but of course this is all based on the engines in cars or rangers. i really don't agree placing the throttle body directly on top of the lower intake ,because i believe it feeds 2 cyls more than the other until 3/4 to wot by the flow directed off the butterfly. this is my opinnion what do are other thoughts?? i do value everyone's opinions as these are easy mods to experiment with or modify now. 

 so i asked doug to make an adapter for the 90* upper off the v8 crown vic i found.
the base of the 90* crown vic intake is not round like the top it looks like two capital D's back to back like and oval with straight upper and lower walls. which in my opinion would squeeze the feed and help fill the lower equally. now the lower has to flow equal and this is also the reason i was wanting to flow match the intake with upper and lower intake on the head. not saying this will help aid in gaining higher horse power but if i can get the cyls to fill more equally it may make for my usable power in the low to mid range to help grunt over the dune tops at st a  ;D for those of us that like to drive slower lol doug did a fantastic job making these adapter as i asked!! now if you picture this pic with an adapter to contour it down to the knife edge which i like to refer to as a juicer cut lol then you can understand what my thought was to help insure a more equal feed. the stock upper as you  can see in enemy's pics is a long relaxed 90* like a giraffe neck. i'm hoping to maintain stock velocity  with a tight 90*and the larger double d outlet. i could be way off and was hoping enemy would bolt it on and try it  ;) ;) ;D but it will be tried. here is the base of the upper intake i chose.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2016, 07:24:54 PM by dsrace »
Don't never argue with an Idiot!
Because he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience