[ringoism]

Back to Ken's original, practical question, met another mechanic friend today who claims to have converted M&M N/A MDI's to turbo some years ago, says there's no issues - easy bolt-on using TC-version components, and considerably more power and just a tad more economy. Don't need a turbo IP (tech in Mandi had said the same, and the foreign VW diesel forums would concur, just a little adjusting of the "smoke screw" (on Bosch VE rotary pumps like mine, this is an internal pressure adjustment that richens/leans fueling across the entire range - it's located above the injector line outputs and consists of a single screw with a 10mm locknut).

Anyway, he had a disassembled turbo engine from a Bolero Camper sitting there in the shop today, and having also had my N/A MDI opened up just days ago, have to say that if there are differences in the basic structure (as was claimed by M&M), they do not seem terribly significant or obvious. Cylinder liners are the same thickness. Block webbing (supporting the crank, etc) doesn't appear greatly thicker (it is still "windowed"). Crank journal sizes the same. Etc. I might worry a little about my head gasket, since the TC uses a more robust MLS (Multi-Layer-Shim) type (which really needs quite perfect surfaces on both sides to seal reliably), but other than that, being that my engine is pretty fresh now and I'd only try and run low levels of boost, I suspect it'd handle it pretty easily and substantially improve driveability.

What really surprised me on visual comparison is that my old MDI actually has the turbo's oil supply & return passages already there, tapped and plugged, in the right side of the block. Only visual difference was that the canister-type oil filter screws directly onto the block horizontally on the turbo engine, whereas on the N/A MDI, there's a sort of additional elbow mounted there on the block, so the filter mounts vertically. Not sure if there'd be some clearance issues there, since the turbo and exhaust pipe run pretty nearby. Mechanic's saying a little jugaad has to be done there and nowhere else.

I'm going to wait till after I do the passing next year for the new registration, but this is seeming a more and more tempting proposition...

I'm figuring if I could find a good second-hand turbo unit with manifold and plumbing for under ten grand, it'd be worth a day's work to get it installed and try it out. I'm certainly not going to be stressing the engine the way that these overloaded pickup guys do every day here in the hills; and I know the turbo versions of the MDI just feel so much more willing and easy up here. The extra torque (though not off-idle) makes it possible to run gearing more suited to (non-hill) highways, also, which is one of the Marshal's weaker points.

Incidentally (since it's where the thread is at currently), I've never noted engine braking issues with the MDI-TC's in either the pickup or Camper I've driven in the hills. Almost certainly would depend on the particular design; most of the heavy trucks and all the state-run (HRTC) buses up here are turbocharged and these are vehicles heavily dependent on engine braking - and I am pretty sure that most of the Indian-market heavy vehicles do NOT run jake-brakes (the sound / effect is very distinctive, and I've not heard/felt it up here, as far as I remember).

-Eric

[KMT]

Can anyone help me with the following-
What is the bhp developed by a Thar/Bolero DI turbo engine at 1500-1800 rpm.

The max is 62 bhp @3200 rpm
Max torque us 1500-1800 rpm.

I ask because I want to use a DI turbo engine to run an agriculture irrigation pump that runs at 1500-1800 rpm.

I need to match input hp between the two.

[Sutripta]

^^^
1500 - 1800 is quite a spread considering that in a centrifugal (I assume) pump, power requirements are proportional to rpm**3.

Assuming that the pump will be running for say 8 hrs a day with constant load, you will have to derate from the automobile specs.

Today gensets have to be CPCB2 spec compliant. But you can check out the older Mahindra Powerol catalogues for guidance. I expect it will be around 25 KVA.

Regards
Sutripta

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by anjuna mark

Regarding engine durability;
if you double the rpm, the forces on the pistons, rods, and crank increase 16X.

It has to do with reciprocating mass, momentum, and velocity
.

Just to revisit this, as I have not seen any further comments yet. First, as long as an engine is operated within it design parameters the durability should not be affected by stress or RPM, no matter what the forces are. Bigger forces are not necessarily a problem, as long as they stay within the norms.

The forces are related to it has to do with reciprocating mass, momentum, and velocity, but also with compression, cobustion, 2 or 4 stroke, number of cilinders, engine design (inline versus V) and how the engine is balanced, just add a few.

Because of these different factors that ultemately create a certain force, you can't just say that higher RPM's or higher engine loading create higher forces. There is a common misconception that loading up an engine will increase wear and tear. In practive that is rarely the case. In fact most (car) engines are designed in such a way that they run, from a wear and tear point of view, best at 60-90% loading.

In another post I shared my own experience on severe engine damage on a medium speed marine diesel that was run for prolonged period at high RPM's with low loading. (near idling)

In this context, wear and tear, is mostly related to the bearings. Because in the end that is where you will find wear and tear. That is unless something snaps/breaks due to high stress. Or a material/manufacturing fault.

If you want to get some understanding of how these forces work/come together on a running engine, here is an interesting paper:

http://www.eng.utoledo.edu/mime/facu...07-01-0258.pdf

Looking at the bearing and its subsequent lubrication is a good way to understand the stresses or forces in the main engine components such as pistion rods, pistons, crankshaft etc.

Because the lubrication is ultemately what keeps moving parts under stress/force apart and thus is instrumental in engine durability.

Here is an interesting paper that gives some insight in the complexity of lubrication in the main engine bearing.

https://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/rev...91/e391016.pdf

To summarize:
Durability, has nothing to do with RPM or even the amount of stress on the mechanical parts. (as long as they dont break).
Increasing the RPM, might increase forces on the mechancial parts, how much is complex and as both articles show, depends on many other factors.

Jeroen

[ringoism]

Know this thread has just about lived out its life, but...

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

I would like to know how to install a turbo after market on the motors that are typically used in Indian off-roaders. I mean a turbo big enough to require an intercooler, not the little turbos some manufacturers include for emissions.

The idea is to provide usable low end power that will move a vehicle over difficult terrain. Ideas???

Many on TBhp have spoken dismissively of the M&M MDI's "little turbo" (granted, it is basically the same one used on much smaller VW 1.8TDI's), but even in stock, low-boost form (& without intercooler) it brings the 2.6L's torque up to 182.5 Nm from the earlier NA 152Nm. Substantial increase, helpful for 4x4's, especially as the MDI-TC's (at least with older versions, up to 2011?) still seem capable of idling up inclines. As noted elsewhere, get a bigger turbo, and the lag starts to be a killer... Think the ONLY turbo appropriate to off-road applications is going to be a smallish one.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

First, as long as an engine is operated within it design parameters the durability should not be affected by stress or RPM, no matter what the forces are. Bigger forces are not necessarily a problem, as long as they stay within the norms.

Because of these different factors that ultemately create a certain force, you can't just say that higher RPM's or higher engine loading create higher forces. There is a common misconception that loading up an engine will increase wear and tear. In practive that is rarely the case. In fact most (car) engines are designed in such a way that they run, from a wear and tear point of view, best at 60-90% loading.

That is unless something snaps/breaks due to high stress. Or a material/manufacturing fault.

Durability, has nothing to do with RPM or even the amount of stress on the mechanical parts. (as long as they dont break). Increasing the RPM, might increase forces on the mechancial parts, how much is complex and as both articles show, depends on many other factors. Jeroen

I think some of us here might be mixing up the issue of durability with that of reliability. Personally I'm not concerned about DURABILITY (lifespan); If the engine wears out in 1lakh km's vs. 1.4lakh, I could care less. What I'm concerned about is RELIABILITY - the aforequoted "if something snaps/breaks due to high stress". Don't want that happening halfway to Leh. Trouble is that we're not really within the original "design parameters" once we've bolted a turbo on a non-turbo engine design. Granted, in the MDI's case, 20-odd percent increases in torque might not be enough to make crankshafts/rods ready to snap. But having said that, in the last year of my limited workshop exposure, I've seen snapped cranks on a stock Force OM616(T)(fitted in a Traveller ambulance, broke at idle but the vehicle sees high speeds/loads regularly) and also a hill-driven local Swaraj Mazda minibus... so we may be running closer in some cases to design limits than we'd imagine.

Originally Posted by ringoism

...met another mechanic friend today who claims to have converted M&M N/A MDI's to turbo some years ago, says there's no issues - easy bolt-on using TC-version components... I'm figuring if I could find a good second-hand turbo unit with manifold and plumbing for under ten grand, it'd be worth a day's work to get it installed and try it out.

Indeed...




Was at the local scrapyard a couple days ago looking for treasures... Last time I'd found a clean early-model HeroHonda CBZ engine I'd thought to throw a Karizma crankshaft into (same cases, same cylinder/bore, i.e., 223cc with the ZMA crank) to perk up the Impulse a bit...

Sadly (did I really need another project?) it was gone - BUT in the same place I'd seen it, I found this original M&M turbo setup lying, just waiting for me to pick it up.



Bought it at scrap price - i.e., Rs270 (two seventy), and as you can see it's got the oil lines/wastegate actuator / manifolds all there intact, so seems well worth it. Plenty of shaft play but doesn't appear that the turbine wheels had yet touched the housing, so might be rebuildable (kits can be had for a few thousand rupees equivalent on e-bay U.S.). If not, can buy a cartridge here in India and have the thing back together quickly (If so inclined). Get a pipe for the turbo to intake manifold, and I'm done. Let's see...

-Eric

[DirtyDan]

Originally Posted by ringoism

Many on TBhp have spoken dismissively of the M&M MDI's "little turbo" (granted, it is basically the same one used on much smaller VW 1.8TDI's), but even in stock, low-boost form (& without intercooler) it brings the 2.6L's torque up to 182.5 Nm from the earlier NA 152Nm. Substantial increase, helpful for 4x4's, especially as the MDI-TC's (at least with older versions, up to 2011?) still seem capable of idling up inclines.

D.B. has said that this small turbo is only for emissions and adds nothing to power. Maybe he means "very little" which is something, not nothing. I can't find his post but I know he said it. I hope this works for you. Please let us know how it goes, 'ay?

By the way, I started out for Leh via Jammu/Srinagar last month. Before I left I took my Thar CRDe into the dealer for a complete check. Everything good, they said. I started the trip. Lost a wheel bearing at Srinagar, lots of noise from that. After installing the new wheel bearing I could now hear the rear universal disintegrating. Replaced that. Then heard this new universal disintegrating also. Replaced that. Limped back to Pathenkot and had them check my clutch. Replaced the guts of that. Then on my way back to Dharamsala, my clutch started acting up again....still have to sort that out. In the last two weeks my heater switch broke, my window crank lever broke and my door lock broke. While fixing that the mechs broke the inside door panel. I have that taped up. I have sent back to the States for my Barrett M107 and I am going to shoot this thing right in the engine block and end the suspense.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by ringoism

If the engine wears out in 1lakh km's vs. 1.4lakh, I could care less. What I'm concerned about is RELIABILITY - the aforequoted "if something snaps/breaks due to high stress". Don't want that happening halfway to Leh. Trouble is that we're not really within the original "design parameters" once we've bolted a turbo on a non-turbo engine design. Granted, in the MDI's case, 20-odd percent increases in torque might not be enough to make crankshafts/rods ready to snap. But having said that, in the last year of my limited workshop exposure, I've seen snapped cranks on a stock Force OM616(T)(fitted in a Traveller ambulance, broke at idle but the vehicle sees high speeds/loads regularly) and also a hill-driven local Swaraj Mazda minibus... so we may be running closer in some cases to design limits than we'd imagine.

True, bolting on stuff could take you way past the design parameters. For most of us the only way to find out is to experiment and see what holds or breaks. And as you found out, sometimes things could break under very little (idle) load and do fine under high load. Along the same line I tried to explain.

Durability and reliability are related though. Apart from stuff just snapping as discussed. There are plenty of examples where accelerated wear and tear can cripple an engine in a relative short time and or short mileage.

Jeroen

[shashanka]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

D.B. has said that this small turbo is only for emissions and adds nothing to power. Maybe he means "very little" which is something, not nothing. I can't find his post but I know he said it. I hope this works for you. Please let us know how it goes, 'ay?

By the way, I started out for Leh via Jammu/Srinagar last month. Before I left I took my Thar CRDe into the dealer for a complete check. Everything good, they said..........I have sent back to the States for my Barrett M107 and I am going to shoot this thing right in the engine block and end the suspense.

Perhaps you are right....shooting it in the family jewels after your horrendous experience is apt and you have all my sympathies!

There are experiences - and I have my own laundry basket of these - when one can only say that 'God moves in ways mysterious his wonders to perform'!

Otherwise why should a perfectly respectable, well-liked & well-developed model like the Thar, perform in this wretched way.

Perhaps there really is something to that old Detroit adage about avoiding all "Monday cars" or something - the inference being that cars off the assembly-line on Mondays should be avoided like the plague - because of post weekend hangover issues among the assembly-line workers !

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

Maybe he means "very little" which is something, not nothing.

If we're talking b.h.p., then I'd say "practically nothing", i.e., 63 vs. 58 (bhp) - maybe 8%; But as noted, torque is substantially more, and the resultant feel on-road is totally different - I've driven a Bolero (high GVW/large cargo box version) pickup here a bit, and a 4x4 Bolero LX, both TC, and find both much more willing, responsive, and capable of maintaining speeds on uphill sections than our 4x4 Marshal, which is N/A. Bolero gearing is 3.73:1, but with smaller diameter tyres, and the pickup has the same 4.27:1 as the Marshal, with bit taller 7.00-15's; Weight differences between the vehicles are probably negligible, and all three engines are fresh, so I'm going to conclude that apart from the torque numbers, the turbo actually has a great practical effect.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

For most of us the only way to find out is to experiment and see what holds or breaks.

The preferable way for 99% of us is to let someone else experiment and see what holds or breaks (but here in the subcontinent there seems to be far too few DIY'ers assuming that liability for me )!!!

Originally Posted by shashanka

There are experiences - and I have my own laundry basket of these - when one can only say that 'God moves in ways mysterious his wonders to perform'!

I can heartily affirm that statement... reminiscent of our journey from here to Delhi last winter... my most terrible road experience ever (recounted in our Marshal 4x4 thread), yet somehow it all worked out in the end.

Sorry Ken, for what seems a thoroughly bad trip. Incidentally, a Kinnauri friend who has a Thar has also had to have his cross-joints done prematurely, and it wasn't cheap, either (think the ASC replaced the whole driveshaft). The door locks / window cranks are a given - such low-quality - his had broken within the first several months. Clutches are not always easy to gauge the wear on (lining thickness), so ASC probably not at fault there (though for the wheel bearings they would be), but still... how many km's have you got on it?

But what I really want to know: is a Pajero / 4wd Fortuner starting to look more appealing yet?

-Eric

[KMT]

Sutripta
Thank you for responding to my query but I need a bit more help for the following 4 queries.

1)Pardon my ignorance but can you please elaborate on the rpm**3.

2)I should have clarified, I can run the engine either at 1500 rpm or at 1800 rpm.

The pump spec will depend on what rpm I run it at.

3) What do you mean by de-rating the engine. I have rebuilt it and was just planning to lock the accelerator at the desired rpm.

4) My mechanic says I can remove the Turbo ad it does not sure any purpose. What do you say?

Thanks again
KMT

Originally Posted by Sutripta

^^^
1500 - 1800 is quite a spread considering that in a centrifugal (I assume) pump, power requirements are proportional to rpm**3.

Assuming that the pump will be running for say 8 hrs a day with constant load, you will have to derate from the automobile specs.

Today gensets have to be CPCB2 spec compliant. But you can check out the older Mahindra Powerol catalogues for guidance. I expect it will be around 25 KVA.

Regards
Sutripta

[ringoism]

Will just throw this out there for the sake of general knowledge re: OEM Indian turbos (M&M in this case). We've got a bit of a fleet out here, so got under the bonnets of each and found the original turbo's part numbers for common M&M's, all KKK units:

Bolero, Bolero pickup (older models): K03-0095
Scorpio 2.6 turbo: K04-0027
(Scorpio) CRDe: K03-0088
(Scorpio) mHawk: BV43-001

Interestingly, the original Scorpio has a larger K04 turbo but seems to have less lag than the CRDe's smaller K03. The mHawk lags more than either, despite having a VGT (variable geometry turbo) which in theory should be capable of minimizing it. Just goes to show how much real-world performance depends on the "setup" - i.e., the engineer's choice of vane geometry (high flow vs. quick spooling, etc) of the wheels, intercooler and plumbing sizes, etc. I remember way back when I'd ordered the turbo for my old Nissan 280ZX, the custom builder asked what sort of wheels I wanted on my T3/T4 (compressor side) upgrade. I really had no idea (kind of pre-internet days), but being that the rest of the vehicle was stock (well, besides double the boost and adding an intercooler), we decided that quick-spooling geometry (vs. max flow/high rpm) would help midrange and compensate for the larger T4 compressor wheel's weight (i.e., minimize lag), while still providing more flow potential than stock. It worked well. Still some extra lag, mainly due to the intercooler volume it seems (had run both with and without it).

The K03-0095 that I got from the scrapyard spools pretty much instantly on the M&M vehicles I've driven, to where you hardly know you've got a turbo under the hood. Of course, in this case lag is also helped by NOT having an intercooler and its associated volume, that has to be pressurized before combustion chamber filling can be positively affected.

I still want to check the numbers on my friend's new Bolero Camper, to see if there's been any changes - people say the late model doesn't pull nearly as well as the old one did on steep grades, and it did struggle a bit at points on our trip to Spiti (Chandra-Tal/Baralacha-La switchbacks); but whether that is due to changes in gearing or in the turbo or something else, remains to be discovered.

-Eric

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by KMT

Sutripta
Thank you for responding to my query but I need a bit more help for the following 4 queries.

1)Pardon my ignorance but can you please elaborate on the rpm**3.

2)I should have clarified, I can run the engine either at 1500 rpm or at 1800 rpm.

The pump spec will depend on what rpm I run it at.

3) What do you mean by de-rating the engine. I have rebuilt it and was just planning to lock the accelerator at the desired rpm.

4) My mechanic says I can remove the Turbo ad it does not sure any purpose. What do you say?

Thanks again
KMT

Centrifugal pump power requirements vary as the cube of the speed.

Assume constant torque (for ballpark figure). Then 62 HP at 3200 rpm => 62*1500/3200 = 29 HP@1500 rpm.

In automotive use peak power is only required in very short bursts. The HP. figures reflect that. For constant prolonged load, significant derating has to be done. Once again, check the MM Powerol catalogue.

If you are operating at any significant elevation, keep the turbo.

Regards
Sutripta

[MB4DI]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

I am going to revive this thread because the MDi (MDI3200tc) is about to be reicarnated once again into the new Thar MDi. This same motor owes its roots to a tractor motor of some years back. It is robust with a particularly strong crankcase. It can be found in many Mahindra pikup trucks and Boleros.

This motor, MDI3200tc, is exactly the one I had in mind for a turbo upgrade when I started this thread. I own a 2009 Invader equipped with this engine and I would like to get more power from it.



In lieu of the arrival of the MDi Thar, does anybody have anything new to say about installing a larger (midsized) turbo on this motor? My thoughts are that a properly turbo-ed MDi3200Tc Thar should run like a scalded cat! But can it be easily done in India???

Hi Dan,

Working on MDI3200TC, till now with the mods, with superb acceleration it has got top speed of 140kmph. Playing with different turbos from Mahindra parts bin only, certain export version of vehicle fitted with this engine has insane surprises when it comes to DI engines.

regards,
MB4DI

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by ringoism

Interestingly, the original Scorpio has a larger K04 turbo but seems to have less lag than the CRDe's smaller K03.

Hi.

This is very interesting.

Anecdotally, I will endorse that the old 2000-2006 chain drive Scorpio 2.6 Turbo diesel used to chug up the steep Sigur Ghat in 3rd gear in many places where the later 2007-2007 Scorpio 2.6 Crde and later, had to use 2nd gear.

It is indeed true that the 2.6 Crde diesel engine needed time for its Turbo to spool up and this meant that to avoid the inevitable ‘lag’ one had to maintain a certain momentum and a steady pace all through on those sharp switchbacks. This was and indeed is, a near impossible task, considering the gradient, the narrowness of the road, the inadvisability of overtaking and the eternally slow moving traffic that one encounters along that stretch of 36 hairpin bends.

Continuing the Anecdotal References from very recent memory. These pertain to my present stable of vehicles, all of which are petrol powered and two of which are turbo charged;

I drove this road end August 2022 in my bone stock 2014 Gypsy King. Its naturally aspirated engine doesn't strain, when one uses the right gear. Though it is a very light vehicle, its gearing is such that on this gradient I used mostly second gear, occasionally up to 3rd on the straights and on some sharp steep hairpins, shifted to first. I like babying and feathering my engine.

By contrast when I used to go up this road in the early 2000’s, in my old MG410 hardtop Gypsy with its 970cc engine, I had to use first gear a lot more. Same thing with my non Turbo Bolero with its XD3PU engine in the 2000’s.

In end September 2022, I drove up in my 2021 Thar AT with the 2 litre Turbo Petrol. Using manual mode I stayed mostly in second, occasionally moving to third on the straights and at times taking steep curves in first. Again driving this way, one isn't causing over revving and strain on the engine. The thing is, when driven this way, there is no Turbo lag. The power is more or less linear on demand.

Over this weekend 14-16 October 2022, I drove my 2012 Mini Cooper S with its 1.6 litre Turbo petrol engine, up this stretch. Using the paddle shifters throughout, I was still able to get to third, with a happier heart, only on the straights. The gradient is steep and one needs to keep up that constant momentum. Again, when driven in this way, the power delivery remains linear and there is no turbo lag.

The best way to enjoy that road is NOT to put on those sudden bursts of acceleration and speed and constantly keep the foot mashed down. Use higher acceleration technique, only on the rare occasions if and when overtaking. Best to toodle up that stretch keeping the engine comfortably on the boil and maintaining a nice constant momentum.

Good for you as the driver and great for the car too!