i would think you can do a bare bones ctsc installed for just under 10k? not just the bbsc? at least with the ctsc there's only minor twiddling, although there are certainly multiple stories in here of cars running weak, running lean, running rich, and blown motors with a ctsc..
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
The Cartek Turbo kit...... ??
- Thread starter NSXTASY_MD
- Start date
MiamieNeSeX said:
Really, and what has yours cost thus far?
peiserg said:
I have seen it for under $8K before. Maybe that was a special deal, but I have seen it and could have got it. I wouldn't call the CTSC barebones though. It comes with everything you need. Comptech has also proven to be very good with support when the installed results are not as they should be. It probably helps to deal with someone who has installed a lot of them. Most people seem pretty happy with the CTSC, but like you said, there are still those that have issues.
Speaking of twin turbo's...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4517628086&category=5337
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4517628086&category=5337
KGP said:
Wow. Looks great.
NetViper said:
well i suppose barebones is a misnomer, given that there's really nothing more to add to the ctsc. but you could add an FJO, and gauges, which would set most back about $2-3k... But by the same token the barebones bbsc is $6500, with realistically nothing more needed, if you are going to run a straight 6 psi. not what i would do, but my budget is fairly beefy. Yes there are those with issues.. i think vecsey has blown two motors with his ctsc..
NetViper said:
4500. for the Novi1000 kit
1200. for the Novi 2000
1250. for the AEM
245. for fuel pump
850. for tunning.
23.00 for clamps
Smoking you on the track............. Priceless
Do the math Einstein.
Armando
Yellow Rose
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 November 2001
- Messages
- 2,256
Deleted
where's andy vecsey when i need him to jump on someone?!
Armando asked where was I a few days ago, and I chimed in. Last night I chimed in again.....admittedly in a stern (but not ugly profane) manner against MD, and all of my posts in this thread have since been deleted. Not only does Dave need skin thickening cream (as was jokingly suggested by Armando) but so does someone else.
MD said that only MB can tune the SS to which I said poo poo. Post deleted.
MD said there is no power under 5000 RPM with the BBSC. I said poo poo. Post deleted.
where's andy vecsey when i need him to jump on someone?!
Armando asked where was I a few days ago, and I chimed in. Last night I chimed in again.....admittedly in a stern (but not ugly profane) manner against MD, and all of my posts in this thread have since been deleted. Not only does Dave need skin thickening cream (as was jokingly suggested by Armando) but so does someone else.
MD said that only MB can tune the SS to which I said poo poo. Post deleted.
MD said there is no power under 5000 RPM with the BBSC. I said poo poo. Post deleted.
Last edited:
Yellow Rose
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 November 2001
- Messages
- 2,256
I'll Be More Polite This Time
You obviously do not know the facts. Mark in Phoenix, Mark in Atlanta, Mike in Atlanta, Chris in Atlanta, Larry in New York, Nick in LA, Chris in San Antonio, and good ol' me can all tune the SS box.....correctly.
If you want to "slander" the BBSC, you need to have your smack-mouth working correctly.
NSXTASY_MD said:
You obviously do not know the facts. Mark in Phoenix, Mark in Atlanta, Mike in Atlanta, Chris in Atlanta, Larry in New York, Nick in LA, Chris in San Antonio, and good ol' me can all tune the SS box.....correctly.
If you want to "slander" the BBSC, you need to have your smack-mouth working correctly.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 February 2000
- Messages
- 2,677
Re: Deleted
You were hardly the only person who had posts deleted in this thread. Try staying at least remotely on topic instead of using this thread for personal banter and in-jokes and posts won't be deleted.
If you want to post random chitchat, do it in Off Topic. If you (or anyone) want to discuss further, take it to <a href="http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=13">NSX Prime Discussion</a>, or you'll find more posts deleted.
AndyVecsey said:
You were hardly the only person who had posts deleted in this thread. Try staying at least remotely on topic instead of using this thread for personal banter and in-jokes and posts won't be deleted.
If you want to post random chitchat, do it in Off Topic. If you (or anyone) want to discuss further, take it to <a href="http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=13">NSX Prime Discussion</a>, or you'll find more posts deleted.
- Joined
- 7 February 2001
- Messages
- 1,452
Jasil said:
Your post stated that you were blown away by the prices of FI for NSX's and other exotics, and then claimed to be able to simply change the compressors on the T-28's in the Cartek kit (the kit being discussed in this thread)to make over 650hp(not likely in an NSX even with a well built motor).Now you say it should have been taken at "face value" and you did not mean that you could do the compressor swap without other mods, including UPGRADING THE INTERCOOLERS???
I have a question for you Pep Boy, how many NSX's have you seen that have 650hp? how about 500hp? Better yet how many have you experienced period, not at a car show, but how many have you driven or even riden in? My guess is somewhere around your best friend's cousin's boyfriend knows a guy with one.
Your assumption that I know nothing about engines, turbos or how they function and your trollish bragging on the cars that you have owned show your maturity level. I could care less about any of those cars as I too have owned and sold many of them. Stick with your Cobra, it suits you better.
Back to the subject at hand, I am currently working on a single turbo setup for myself and 01blackS4. Without going into specifics, I think that a single turbo kit can be made with an intercooler and AEM for around $5000 taking into account for custom piping. That is with doing the install yourself, but taking the car to a reputable dyno for tuning. We should see how close my estimate is by mid summer with any luck. The Cartek kit seems to be a reasonably priced system being that it comes with two turbos, two intercoolers and AEM. If they have solved the oil feed issue then I cant see why it wouldn't be just as good or better than the comparably priced Comptech sc even if it only made the same hp.
Side Note:
I just upgraded the turbo on my H1 along with a cpu swap and whoa what a difference. I went from 3lbs to 13lbs, it added 120hp and 200ft lbs torque. It actually gets out of its own way now :biggrin:
- Joined
- 7 February 2001
- Messages
- 1,452
Being Devils Advocate--MiamieNeSeX said:4500. for the Novi1000 kit
1200. for the Novi 2000
1250. for the AEM
245. for fuel pump
850. for tunning.
23.00 for clamps
Smoking you on the track............. Priceless
Do the math Einstein.
Armando
is it $850 for tuning or $1000??
From your previous post in this thread:
"The 1500.00 for the installation was quoted from their site, the 1000.00 for tuning is from experience. How much did you spend last time you tuned your FI AEM car?"
And didnt you by yours used?? Its late, but I am sure that you just got yours over 400hp recently after almost 2 years and several changes. Thats a great value if someone did two years worth of tuning for only $850!!
I'll be your Huckleberry :wink:
SNDSOUL said:
First time I answered it I was giving a rough estimate. The car has been tuned twice, the first when we installed the AEM (about $500.00), the second when we changed to the Novi 2000 ($350.00)
Yes
Shows the diversity and untapped capablities of the kit, dosen't it?
If you mean I had someone on my payroll for 2 years following me around tuning the car, you are funnier then than I. :biggrin:
Your wish is my command
Hey Rob, is this the lastest kit ?? (the one advertised on turbokits.com with all the refinements) ....you made 450RWHP with the original kits' weak VATN turbo's !?!? If so, that's actually STRONG...for T28's flow **A LOT** more than those variable vane tech turbos. On the 93' 300ZX TT I used to own my T28 upgrades where good for 650+BHP....and that was an 8.0-to-1 comp. 3.0L V-6.nsxlover said:
...You may do A LOT better than 500RWHP *IF* VATN's netted 450 on your motor/set-up...that's all I'm saying. (T28's are good for 300-350HP a piece...thought other components of the system *may* not be, the turbos wouldn't be a bottleneck like the VATN's, thats for sure)
NSXTASY_MD said:
Still typing without a clue? The most common configuration for the Bell kit came with the smaller Aerodynes for the reasons I already stated. However, larger ones were built that could support 300hp each and would blow away your precious T28s for spool-up rate and therefore area under the power curve. But don't let facts get in the way of your attempts to sound like you know something.
Troll on.Who's the troll here...I've tried to avoid you already becuase I respectfully DON'T agree with your *opinions* of how wonderful the VATN (which never made it in the BIZ/industry for good reason) turbos are but its obvious you're trying to provoke me...I would think your age and "seniority" on this forum would have served you more than personal insults. I never directly insulted you...so stop posting in an immature manner.sjs said:Still typing without a clue? The most common configuration for the Bell kit came with the smaller Aerodynes for the reasons I already stated. However, larger ones were built that could support 300hp each and would blow away your precious T28s for spool-up rate and therefore area under the power curve. But don't let facts get in the way of your attempts to sound like you know something.
After researching old threads and speaking with the Cartek kit owners personally, they almost all had issues relating specifically to the *turbocharger*-(VATN) of that system. Furthermore, after installing a VATN turbo in a 1994 MR2 turbo (my buddies road racing project car) that turbo *failed* on him during race conditions....our boost never spiked past 1.1bar (well below what that spec VATN turbo was rated to do on our 2liter motor) this was only two weeks after installing it on the car.....so we just junked the idea...(after speaking with THREE other MR2 owners which experienced the same problems) and went for a good ol', run-of-the-mill Greddy TD06 20G unit...guess what, he NEVER had a problem with a failed turbo again** (He ran that turbo MUCH harder on the same set-up too) Those turbos (as you admittedly mentioned) are seriously fragile and would not recommend them to anyone short of a guy just looking to give it the "once a week four second blast on a public highway" (-a geezer in short) Our vane actuator failed on turbocharger, perhaps it was a faulty example, perhaps it's a flaw in the design, perhaps the rigors of road racing where extreme on boost off boost modulations would test/stress the rod actuator on that design where at fault...alls that is certain, this "promising" design never made it into the world of motor racing of any form in a major way becuase of how fickle they are....remember, the best designs are those that are simplest (K.I.S.S...Keep It Simple & Stupid) ..particularly a component that will be under 150,000rpms and extreme heat***
...sjs, don't jump to ASSume noone here except you understands anything.
NSXTASY_MD, I wasn't insulting you, just stating that your posts were inaccurate and at the time unsupported. My posts may have lacked tact, but they were anything but immature. Furthermore, most of what I said was fact, not opinion. When you repeated your opinions without any additional facts I pointed that out more strongly. My "assumptions" were based on what you said, and if you chose to "avoid" me rather than support your claims then you have only yourself to blame for my conclusions.
There was indeed a problem with the specific exhaust pulses from some 4-cylinder engines, which unfortunately they learned too late for many people like you. Shame on them. Many others failed because people just can't resist turning up the wick beyond their design limits. Shame on them. As for your 1.1 bar max, if you kept trying to get the PSI you thought they should produce then yours may have been the latter, and if it happened as quickly as you say then I‘d bet on it unless the unit was defective. Don't confuse the amount of boost you see on a gauge with CFM or how many HP a turbo can support. There's a lot going on with a turbo engine and the more efficient your entire intake path, the more air-fuel mixture you will be stuffing into the cylinder at a given manifold pressure, and that's just part of it. For example, what were your EGTs and AFR during that time? I don’t know what trim your turbos had (there were dozens of combinations) or who made what claims about them, but they published their compressor maps and I have seen nothing to contradict their accuracy. If they weren’t used (correctly) as the primary factor in system design then all bets are off.
In terms of a pure race engine, I probably wouldn't use a VATN design either. Unless you are a drone or spend a lot of time pulling back on the track after a spin, they offer little performance advantage on the track in true race conditions. But we aren't talking race cars here, and even the most aggressive sport-motoring on back roads is enhanced by the VATN design.
BTW, it's "Keep it simple, stupid", not "Keep It Simple & Stupid" which would have quite a different meaning. But one of the nice things about the Aerodynes is that they make the rest of the system very simple. They don't need all the oil and coolant plumbing, scavenge pumps, etc, and they don't cook your engine oil or add heat to the coolant (other than from the obvious increase in power by burning more fuel.) Fewer failure points outside the turbo and less heat to the fluids.
Of course for now that's all irrelevant since they are no longer available, but the original patent holders (not Aerodyne) are trying to revive the concept and I hope to continue owning them for years to come.
One more thing, feel free to ask people who know me if I'm a "geezer" who is "just looking to give it the once a week four second blast on a public highway".
There was indeed a problem with the specific exhaust pulses from some 4-cylinder engines, which unfortunately they learned too late for many people like you. Shame on them. Many others failed because people just can't resist turning up the wick beyond their design limits. Shame on them. As for your 1.1 bar max, if you kept trying to get the PSI you thought they should produce then yours may have been the latter, and if it happened as quickly as you say then I‘d bet on it unless the unit was defective. Don't confuse the amount of boost you see on a gauge with CFM or how many HP a turbo can support. There's a lot going on with a turbo engine and the more efficient your entire intake path, the more air-fuel mixture you will be stuffing into the cylinder at a given manifold pressure, and that's just part of it. For example, what were your EGTs and AFR during that time? I don’t know what trim your turbos had (there were dozens of combinations) or who made what claims about them, but they published their compressor maps and I have seen nothing to contradict their accuracy. If they weren’t used (correctly) as the primary factor in system design then all bets are off.
In terms of a pure race engine, I probably wouldn't use a VATN design either. Unless you are a drone or spend a lot of time pulling back on the track after a spin, they offer little performance advantage on the track in true race conditions. But we aren't talking race cars here, and even the most aggressive sport-motoring on back roads is enhanced by the VATN design.
BTW, it's "Keep it simple, stupid", not "Keep It Simple & Stupid" which would have quite a different meaning. But one of the nice things about the Aerodynes is that they make the rest of the system very simple. They don't need all the oil and coolant plumbing, scavenge pumps, etc, and they don't cook your engine oil or add heat to the coolant (other than from the obvious increase in power by burning more fuel.) Fewer failure points outside the turbo and less heat to the fluids.
Of course for now that's all irrelevant since they are no longer available, but the original patent holders (not Aerodyne) are trying to revive the concept and I hope to continue owning them for years to come.
One more thing, feel free to ask people who know me if I'm a "geezer" who is "just looking to give it the once a week four second blast on a public highway".
Last edited:
C'mon, that's not called for.NSXTASY_MD said:...sjs, don't jump to ASSume noone here except you understands anything.
So after all this chatter, fighting, bashing and uncalled for comments, what have we learned about this system? Is it any good?
I forgot something. You mentioned speaking with the guys at Cartech. They bought the name and rights to the system from Bell Engineering after Aerodyne stopped production. No doubt they've had owners of the original system come to them for repairs and retro-fit kits, but their real experience with the Aerodynes is limited.
Just got a response to the old NSX Cartech thread on the RX7 Forum. Here's a snippit:
"The Engine blew while it was being tuned. The stock motor/pistons weren't able to sustain compression at 8psi boost. My boss is having an engine built and should arrive soon. There were other unexpected oil pressure issues that may have played a part in the engine's demise.
Complete Twin Turbo kit w/ New Hi-Perf Engine costs have exceeded $19K."
More here.
"The Engine blew while it was being tuned. The stock motor/pistons weren't able to sustain compression at 8psi boost. My boss is having an engine built and should arrive soon. There were other unexpected oil pressure issues that may have played a part in the engine's demise.
Complete Twin Turbo kit w/ New Hi-Perf Engine costs have exceeded $19K."
More here.
I pulled 450 with the aerodynes, however, I had the larger aerodynes with larger intercoolers. I am not sure what I will get from the T-28's.
nsxlover said:
Arent the t-28s more "proven" than the aerodynes in general? i have heard good things about the t-28s as long as they arent overboosted.
