Water cooling has been popular for at least 10 years....
Our Buicks are OLD tech!!
Charlie....In general, from what I understand turbo sizing is rpm related. In other words, a larger turbo will make more power at a higher rpm, at the expense of losing some low rpm power.
However, having different exhaust/intake 'sides' throws other variables into the equation!
The exhaust side is more rpm sensitive... smaller= better response, larger= better hi rpm breathing.
But is the intake side less rpm sensitive... I can see how larger intake sizing will move more air without any downsides (other than inertia and load losses).
And I can see how the '86 turbine/exducer design is more efficient. And how the larger 301 TTA compressor side will compress the air more. But I wonder why Buick didn't incorporate this in their original design.
What are the downsides to your setup, if any?
I'm basically doing the same design as the 86-87 turbo but it's for us alone. The intake will be the biggest issue. I can't do anything until the parts get back so I'm stuck in limbo at the moment. Aj's got one of the 301 turbos now and is looking for an alternative to the odd sized wheel. From reading the turbo maps you should get better flow and faster boost if you do the same thing as the IC cars. Bigger down pipe ect for the cars. These cars will respond the same but you need to know what you're doing. they aren't for the usual "bolt it on and go" guys.
The only reason I can Think that Buick didn't do it was detonation issues. They had H-ll with the 301 and the V6's to keep them alive before they developed SFI and this would keep the CAFE average to satisify the government and hopefully satisy the the public with power.:biggrin: