General Turbocharger Thread (formerly "Turbo Charging A Tundra!")

Here to follow this build thread

 

More progress! We received our production samples in for the water meth mounting bracket. As mentioned in a previous post. We were able to make a compact, bed mounted bracket which does not require ANY cutting into the bed. Simple Nutsert into a factory hole on the inside driver side of the bed and you do not have to cut the bed to run the level sensor wire and hose. It's a super clean install

 

Looks great this is next on my list of items to add. The AEM kit is sweet

 

Absolutely, we have used the AEM Water Meth systems in our turbo kits going on almost 15 years now. They are awesome. Keeps charge air cool, adds to the detonation protection, is equivalent to running 100oct, but ONLY when you need it (in boost), among other benefits. Cheap insurance if you ask us!

 

Based on post #378 it looks like you could fit both. https://www.tundras.com/threads/turbo-charging-a-tundra.115951/page-13#post-3114927
Depending on use, rear or mid mount is another option.

 

Tuners have said you'd need a standalone ECU like Motek to make that work, tuning wise

 

Quick update guys. We just got our production sample charge piping for the 2007-2013s in and will be testing that on our 2008 shop mule in the next week or so. In regards to the Stage 1 kit, it runs great, sounds awesome, feels super healthy, the issue we are running into is that we are limited to 3.4" ID for the MAF, since with the custom coupler, a mandrel is used to wind the coupler, the size of the ID can only be as large as one side of the coupler (ie: throttle body side). So even though the truck runs great, we are riding the top line of the maps in the tune, since we are right at MAX MAF Volts. Even thoough we don't care and are willing to take the risks, the tuner advises against this being something released at the moment. The good news, we believe we have a solution and are working on getting a custom 100% drop in (with proper tuning) MAF sensor that will allow more flow from the stage 1 MAF ID. Think about it like when tuning speed density and running a 2bar MAP sensor and upgrading to a 3bar. Same sensor, same location, more top side before voltage maxes out. Not only should this make the Stage 1 viable and give more definition in the tuning, but it will pretty much create an option for ANY Tundra owner pushing the limits of power, to do so without changing their MAF sample tube size!! We are pumped for this and will report back as soon as we make progress. In the meantime, we have swapped our 2014 shop mule to the stage 2 intercooled set up and are tuning that now... We'll report back as soon as we have more information. Thanks for the support!

 

interested....as I am using a stock inlet on my Harrop - and am Maxing the MAF.

this would cure a lot of ills.

good on y'all.

 

Yeah, the issue with running on the top line (MAXING THE MAF OUT) is that it gives no room in the tune. Cold night, slightly higher boost, more fuel needed, can't fuel it, hot day, lower boost, less fuel needed, can't adjust for it. So essentially, you're either always changing the tune for different conditions, or staying somewhere in the middle, not ideal for either scenario. But yes, agreed, this would be a game changer for the Tundra market.

 

I believe Gale banks as an inline adapter harness for this wonder if they have one for the Toyota platform. Basically voltage trickery

 

He doesn't have one for Tundra last I checked.

 

From our research and it's been thorough, there isn't anything that will work. There are plenty of voltage clamps, but the issue isn't going over voltage, as we can just turn off the CEL for the MAF code and then ride the top volt max in the mapping. The issue is you can't go over 5v. Once you are at 5v, you're taking a xx by xx map and basically only using the 1 top line to tune. The sensor we are working on, will give us way more upside before we hit 5v. It looks, mounts and connects exactly like the stock sensor, but has more head room for the same MAF tube size. So instead of hitting 5v at 500HP, we'll hit 5v at 650HP. So when tuning for 500 or 600HP, we are able to use the full X & Y axis of the mapping to adjust for all variables.

Here is a (crude) visual representation of the issue:

Stock MAF, hitting 5v MAX *this is how much adjustability you have in the tune once you hit 5v. Since you are at the MAX

Upgraded MAF, which doesn't hit 5v until higher air flow, now you gain all of this mapping capability above your old MAX.

 

consider me waiting in line for this.

+ a sticker.

 

Thanks for sharing your insights on this. Following your development work.

 

You are welcome! To be clear, this does not stop the progress on the stage 2 intercooled kit as we have many MAF housing options that plug right in! So we are still making progress on multiple fronts

 

I can't speak for the boost bros but the supercharged folks would likely be interested in such a device.

 

Yes, 100%, we agree and I think it will not only solve our dilemma, but many many tundra owners in their search for more power and flow

 

What’s the upside of this compared to just installing a larger intake at MAF housing? Like in the old days.

 

On a supercharger you'll probably leave some HP on the table if you don't increase the intake diameter; referencing the ProSpeed articles and Holdener vids posted regarding the supercharger intake restrictions. Caveat if the intake is smaller than the blower snout after which it is diminishing returns.

 

This!

 

I corrected a small issue with the statement.

 

So, would installing a SC along with turbo "solve" this problem?
EDIT: not trying to be an ass here, was reading up some stuff about comparing SC and turbo, each has its own advantages and dis-advantages, also both can be installed for racing type of vehicles. If cost is not an issue (it is, but pretend it is not for a second), would this take care of the lower RPM boost along with higher RPM boost range? I would assume that the whole drive-train would need a very decent upgrade or it would just be a train wreak....

 

No the supercharger then becomes a restriction. We explored this heavily back in the cobra days. Better to have one or the other.

 

I like where your head is at.
@TurboKits.com can best answer since it is their specialty but bigger isn't always better for turbos from what I've read.

I think if you plan on twin charging matching the SC intake is probably as big as I would go. It doesn't appear turbos are restricted the same way from my reading.

 

I mean, long gone the days where you just pick the biggest hammer and drop it in the engine bay and slam the hood to call it a day.
I agree, it needs to match both ends to max the output, but that's all just theory at this point.
Race cars are built entirely different than a consumer vehicle, so that much difference has to be taken into account when considering dual charging the engine.

 

I reckon this MAF improvement would net me only a few HP.

see, you could look at my dyno graphs and compare those to other trucks that have larger intakes...you can see my HP starts to lay over after 5k or so, y'all's do not. I relate that directly to all that restriction.

can a tuner make up for that, and bring me ~20hp or so, if I ...say...put on a slightly smaller pulley?

let's see.

 

I don't see how your question comes off like an ass. No need to excuse yourself in my eyes. Also depends on if you go serial or parallel.

First limit seems to be rods, pistons and rings followed by the transmission. From what others have said fueling and general engine management is the next issue. @ViktorG has pushed the platform to the limits and can probably best answer the more technical questions.

 

For sure. Interested to hear what the response to this is. I've not seen much on twin-charging but this has been a great source in my research: https://www.eng-tips.com

I'm sure the intake can be too small or too big with the biggest limitation being what you can physically pipe through your bay. Exhaust side is usually the biggest turbo performance killer.

 

Correct, the MAF we are working on, isn't really to get more HP on the same set up, its to make the HP at the current setup infinitely better to tune. Which in the end, yes could net some more HP. But safety, reliability and adjustability are our goal here.

We don't think the juice would be worth the squeeze for a twincharged system. Unless someone wants to see how red hot their AMEX black card could glow before they got a call... LOL