Hahn RaceCraft

And thank you too! We appreciate the appreciation, for we've put a lot of effort into this.

We will be shipping these in January, and can take orders now. PM me if you'd like to proceed.

I think sufficient material exists for porting to your throttle body, yes. Does it share the same mounting pattern as the stock 2.0 SC throttle body? How much larger is the throttle blade? Is it compatible with the stock control system and wiring harness?

Street Race Sheetmetal Manifold with injector ports, fuel rail and mounting hardware runs about $950. One can use just about any injector that fits a particular fuel requirement (the manifold uses the most common injector type), but our primary spec will be 48 lb/hr. I don't have pricing for those handy, but if you'd like, PM me and I can get you a detailed quote after Christmas. Thank you too!

See above...PM me if you'd like to get in the first production run!

See above.

Quite true, if not a bit close to the limit depending on just how hard one pushes the GT35R and the base fuel pressure used.

Joe's car as shown here will be a bit overkill on injectors, what with 4) main 60 lb/hr and 4) PortFueler 48 lb/hr. As he already had the 60's in place, and they do work well on these cars, and as many of our prospective customers for this GT35R turbosystem may well also have them, we decided to leave them in place.

articzap

How are you controlling the second rail?

06black

will be sending you a PM soon then!!

the LS4 unit is aprox 4in-4.25in over all.

i cant seem to dig up any specs on it, and its wicked cold out to measure mine.

so i'd say aprox 1in larger then stock.

06blackg85ss

iTrader: (1)

I also have an LS4 TB that's currently off the car, but is sitting waiting to go back in.
On a side note, built motor should be done quite soon.

Hahn RaceCraft

This is a particularly interesting challenge. We've used stock fuel pumps coupled in series with our inline upgrade pump for up to 500 HP safely on return-style fuel systems. Above that, the stock pump becomes a problem, and this one will definitely surpass that!

What with the more-than-ample potential fuel flow afforded by the combination of the 60's and 48's, we don't really need to reference fuel pressure to manifold pressure, nor employ a return-style system. On our SRT-4 versions of the PortFueler, we are in a similar situation with injector sizes, and do not use return-style systems on those cars with PortFueler.

The stock fuel line's .375" diameter is ample for 600HP, which is the target power level.

It's not on the car yet, but what I intend is a Bosch pump and Aeromotive regulator. The stock pump will stay in place, but it will not be forced to flow all of the fuel the engine demands, for even with a booster pump approach in series, it won't be enough. Nonetheless, the stock pump is a critical part of the function of the intank fuel delivery module, and just yanking it out of there is not the best course either. The way I integrate the Bosch pump and regulator into the stock pump/module/lines will be very unique, but I am confident it will work extremely well!

The PortFueler control module is in command of the four additional injectors (if you look further up the thread, you can see some info on this).

06blackg85ss

iTrader: (1)

hmm interesting. I was actually planning on a doing a return style setup on my car, but I will hold on til I see the outcome

Hahn RaceCraft

It sounds like a neat piece, but you may not need it in a blow-through application such as this. Keep in mind, it's only subjected to atmospheric pressure on a SC application, whereas with this Turbosystem it will see actual boost pressure, thus significantly increasing its flow potential. As a point of comparison, on our PortFueler manifold-equipped Cavalier-Sunfire setups, we've made over 400 WHP blowing through the stock cable-actuated throttle body, which is markedly smaller in diameter than the new ETC t/b's as used on Cobalt. Joe's car will retain the stock t/b, and I forsee no detriment.

spike

i bet this manifold (flow wise) Puts the stock ss\sc intercooler\manifold 2 shame........... but i wonder by how much........

Hahn RaceCraft

A point I'd like to make for clarity's sake: The return-style systems have their advantage, no doubt, and I'd like to state that our approach here is not intended to make them appear less effective than they are. With PortFueler, things are different: we have so much fuel injector capacity on board that we don't need one of the key features of a return-style system, which is its ability to add fuel pressure under boost. We can get the job done nicely with but 60 PSI of pressure at all times, not 60 PSI plus boost (80 PSI at 20 PSI boost, for instance).

In our PortFueler case, the advantages of not going return-style: simpler plumbing, and more fuel pump capacity / less stress on components due to the lower fuel pressures.

You can be sure it does, for the internal twists and turns of the stock manifold add up to significant restriction at higher flows. We are also confident that cylinder-to-cylinder air distribution is much improved with our manifold.

I also wonder just how much of a difference in pure HP there is...perhaps one of you enterprising Turbo converts out there who are running the stock manifold/intercooler setup can upgrade to our manifold and front-mount intercooler and provide some before/after results!

06blackg85ss

iTrader: (1)

that is no problem for me man. Sooner you get it to me, the sooner you get some dyno numbers.
One question, how far off the stock location will the TB be? (just for my current piping setup, if I need to change it)

Hahn RaceCraft

The new TB location is just slightly to the right of stock, an inch or two...you may be able to bridge the gap with a longer hose connection. Joe also notes that he foresees much better oil filter access with the new manifold and TB location, by the way.

Are you already running an air-to-air intercooler instead of the stock unit?

06blackg85ss

iTrader: (1)

actually running both right now, 1-2 inches isn't a big deal to make up. I was planning on redoing the pipe from the fmic to the tb in full 3" soon anyway (steps down to 2.5" after the maf, which I think is whats causing havoc on my tuning)

Hahn RaceCraft

Ah yes, that's something you'll want to rectify...3" from the MAF to the TB is superior to keep the MAF happy. Then you have a front-mount air to air intercooler...very good! You'll enjoy simplifying the car by stripping out the liquid-to-air pump, hoses, hardware and cooling core.

Report on The Car Itself:

Joe's out driving the infant beast around as we speak. He will be getting the break-in done, then it's back to our facility for the remainder of fuel system prep and subsequent dyno madness.

The car is deceptively smooth...you'd have no idea it's soon to be packing a 600 HP punch. Driveability is awesome, the engine is silky smooth and quiet. Granted, it's just the beginning, but a good beginning it is, as the project objectives include daily civility and no tradeoffs resulting from the ultimately obscene power potential.

I'd like to wish you all a Very Merry Holiday, and I am signing off now until afterwards. Merry Christmas, Joe! Hope you love your present! I know I do!!

spike

i cant wait 2 see the car in action!!!!

Hahn RaceCraft

There was one other thing too, lol...

Thanks to all of you for your interest. I know there's been disappointment that Twincharging setup we worked on never saw production. No one is more disappointed than me! I sank serious coin and time into it, and ultimately reached the conclusion that we could go pure turbo and make more power, with less complexity, and for less money, than twincharging.

While the Twincharging development phase did not directly result in viable product, it laid considerable groundwork for these pure turbosystems, so in a very real way, it was still seriously beneficial. What you see here is the ultimate result. If it all seems like a 'out-of-nowhere' rush of info, well...it is, at least in terms of public knowledge. What's gone on 'behind the scenes' for some time is, as you can see, most substantial! These new systems, combined with our wealth of development expertise with Ecotec in other vehicles, will provide some real options and excitement for you folks.

06noscobaltss

Well I got it back today and already put almost 300 miles on the car! Honestly, even with all the work done it drive like a stock Cobalt would. Very smooth throughout the powerband... Even though I havent gone over 1/4 throttle but everything sounds, looks, and of course performs amazing! I would recommend anyone with a Cobalt looking for a complete turbo system to wait for Hahn Racecraft!

Thanks again Bill, it was well worth the wait!

SSROMER

how much maybe i missed that post or something and can a person do it on his own?

articzap

What kind of exhaust are you running?

06noscobaltss

3" off the turbo all the way back!

IonNinja

I know this is somewhat talked about on this site but how does the MAF react with its placement?

shouldn't the MAF be placed on the intake pipe before the compressor so its not trying to read compressed air? someone feel free to educate me on this as I know the discussion has come up with MAF equipped turbo cars.

1gmfanatik

Very nice read indeed. Congrats on the ground-breaking turbo system...I can't wait to see some stunning numbers from that beast.

06black

with this extremely crammed set up, they were able to equip the car with an intake of sorts on the turbo (i never did) so they could place the MAF in that spot, however on all the past turbo project cars the maf has been placed in the charge pipe to solve fueling issues that we've all ran across.

when its pre-turbo theres a nasty delay from TPS input until fuel is applied, only once the maf was moved to a blow thru set up did these issues arise.

as of yet there have been no ill-effects of this placement, you only loose a AIT1 data(your reading the temp of compressed air, not ambient)

I tried it in both location on my personal car and i talked with a few guys who were doing it as well(venders and private people alike) and we all had the same reactions and issues until the maf was put in the charge pipe.

Hahn RaceCraft

I concur with all of the above (save for the 'crammed' part, LOL!). I prefer to call it a 'compact' installation . All kidding aside, though, it is a real packaging job to get these components in there, and I am particularly proud of this turbosystesm, for the overall layout ended up very tidy.

We've done blow-through MAF's for some time now with excellent results on all of our turbo applications. One must bear in mind that a MAF sensor reads Mass Air Flow, which is not affected by pressure (density) changes. That's one reason why they are so damned accurate, as they 'see' mass airflow changes that are caused by pressure variations.

There are a couple more advantages to this method:

1. No re-wiring needed, as we have left the MAF in the stock location.
2. As the intake air temp sensor in our MAF location is reading actual intake air temperature delivered to the engine's cylinders (as opposed to ambient temp), it can react accurately to subtle aspects of charge air temperature (which increases with boost pressure) and intercooler performance; changes that would be missed by an ambient sensor. As this reading is used to calculate ignition timing, this is a significant factor. An ambient-only temp sensor is 'blind' to these changes.

SSKobald

subscribed

06black

sorry bill, i'm still pissed at how hard it is to get a turbo like this back there (my 30r runs a .70ar comp cover like your 35r)