3.7 Forced induction

[USMCtoARMY]

Back on topic, I was able to acquire the oil and coolant lines for the turbos. I can confirm with about 99% certainty that the oil feed ports are present on the 3.7 block and as such the OEM oil feed lines from a F150 do not have to be modified (barring any clearance issues). The coolant ports do not exist so those lines will have to be modified. With that said, there is a coolant port on each side of the block that you can easily plumb the line too. The coolant return can be plumbed into the intake. Not quite sure why supersix felt it necessary to modify the oil feed lines unless there is an unforeseen issue with clearance. Also, the F150 oil cooler will fit the 3.7 and just needs a tap into the main coolant loop. No additional heat exchanger required that the oil will need to feed to unless you want supercool oil. The OEM oil cooler was about $50 and you can use two tee fittings to tap into the lower radiator hose before the thermostat.

Are the oil feed ports open or are they false ports? I haven't done much digging around for oil feed ports since I wasn't boosting with a custom kit till recently and its kinda hard since I don't have the car with me lol. Is there a oil connection above the oil filter built into the oil pan? If there is an oil pressure sensor port with a "block off" plate? If so we could drill/tap it for the fitting and have an adapter that gives you bungs for remote oil filters which would be pretty easy, but again I haven't checked this part of the engine. Lot of older engine blocks make it easy to do it that route. Personally, do not have an issue running the oil feed lines to the Hayden Oil Cooler from the SSM kit. Its pricing is the same as the F150 oil cooler too. However, I do not want to tap the oil pan to feed the turbos if it can be helped. I am curious to see how your option pans out.

Sponsored

 

[zackmd1]

Are the oil feed ports open or are they false ports? I haven't done much digging around for oil feed ports since I wasn't boosting with a custom kit till recently and its kinda hard since I don't have the car with me lol. Is there a oil connection above the oil filter built into the oil pan? If there is an oil pressure sensor port with a "block off" plate? If so we could drill/tap it for the fitting and have an adapter that gives you bungs for remote oil filters which would be pretty easy, but again I haven't checked this part of the engine. Lot of older engine blocks make it easy to do it that route. Personally, do not have an issue running the oil feed lines to the Hayden Oil Cooler from the SSM kit. Its pricing is the same as the F150 oil cooler too. However, I do not want to tap the oil pan to feed the turbos if it can be helped. I am curious to see how your option pans out.

From what I can tell, the oil ports in the block are real. They have caps installed in them currently. Just fitting the line in there quickly I do not see any real clearance issues. The mounting boss and threaded hole for the line bracket is present as well. There is another feed port on the oil filter assembly (not oil pan) that could be used but you would have to run a line from the drivers side to the passenger side (not a big deal but not as clean as having a port on either side of the block).

 

[USMCtoARMY]

From what I can tell, the oil ports in the block are real. They have caps installed in them currently. Just fitting the line in there quickly I do not see any real clearance issues. The mounting boss and threaded hole for the line bracket is present as well. There is another feed port on the oil filter assembly (not oil pan) that could be used but you would have to run a line from the drivers side to the passenger side (not a big deal but not as clean as having a port on either side of the block).

Honestly less concerned about the feed lines and more about the return lines.

 

[zackmd1]

Unfortunately not much can be done with the return lines.... They apparently have to go to a large surface area which would be just above the oil level in a pan. Your only other option would be to use a scavenge pump and plumb it into the valve cover.

 

[USMCtoARMY]

Yeah thats what im saying. Not many or good options, lol.

 

[zackmd1]

Yeah thats what im saying. Not many or good options, lol.

Yea that is the real issue unfortunately...

 

[zackmd1]

Could always go rear mounted turbos!

 

[zackmd1]

You know, I was joking before but the more I think about it, rear mounting these turbos might be the way to go.... Think about it, they are undersized for our engine to begin with, placing them in the rear might actually put them in the ideal efficiency range for quick (but not instant) spool while maintaining boost throughout the rpm range. That coupled with the fact that you no longer need to worry about oil drain ports in the pan, downpipe clearance, coolant lines (rear mounted means much cooler = no coolant required), ported tiny exhaust manifolds, adapter plates, etc... It starts to look like a much more attractive setup. You could use an oil scavenge pump to create a separate oil loop solely for the turbos and would get better weight distribution front to rear. The turbos would effectively replace the axle-back mufflers. I might be going down this rabbit hole a bit further....

 

[USMCtoARMY]

You know, I was joking before but the more I think about it, rear mounting these turbos might be the way to go.... Think about it, they are undersized for our engine to begin with, placing them in the rear might actually put them in the ideal efficiency range for quick (but not instant) spool while maintaining boost throughout the rpm range. That coupled with the fact that you no longer need to worry about oil drain ports in the pan, downpipe clearance, coolant lines (rear mounted means much cooler = no coolant required), ported tiny exhaust manifolds, adapter plates, etc... It starts to look like a much more attractive setup. You could use an oil scavenge pump to create a separate oil loop solely for the turbos and would get better weight distribution front to rear. The turbos would effectively replace the axle-back mufflers. I might be going down this rabbit hole a bit further....

I know your love to look at things differently and explore the less trodden path has got a hold of you here in regards to turbo options, but I wouldn't bite on this setup. These turbos IMO would be horrible in a rear mount arrangement I have many reservations about pursuing this type of project when a proven setup already exists. I can get over tapping my oil pan and making a custom down pipe. I just want some more flexibility.

My problem with rear mounts is the custom work and R/D that outweighs the above mentioned issues. There’s the sheer amount of tubing that has to be placed below the car to integrate the turbo. All of that compressed air from the turbo has to get back to the engine to be forced back into the cylinders, so intricate piping has to be put in place to achieve this. This is also applicable for the oil system which will need a long feed from the sump to function properly, or a bespoke oil reservoir put in place to cope with the demands of the turbos. Also, if all this tubing isn’t designed properly with the right increases and decreases in diameter (especially to match the turbocharger inlet) the turbo lag will become a serious issue. With the turbos not being situated in close proximity to the inlet manifold, lag will definitely not only be present but very noticeable. This can be combated with a finely-tuned tubing system, but it goes to my point about more tubing and more R/D. These turbos are designed to hit peak efficiency quickly for instant TQ. It would not be good to move them further away and lose what makes the ecoboost conversion so attractive for a street build. There is tons more I could go on about, but these are just my simple problems with this setup. Is it doable, absolutely. I just don't want to be spending all my time on something like this, lol.

 

[zackmd1]

I understand the reservations but if you actually take a look at a rear mounted setup and start to build it conceptually, it's not that vastly different then a front mounted setup. The key with any turbo setup is to keep the area before the turbos on the exhaust side small and on the compressor side. The compressor side area wouldn't be vastly different then a front mounted setup especially if you go with a water to air intercooler to eliminate the FMIC area and I would argue that it would be less complicated then the front mount routing. The exhaust will of course be much larger but that's the key. Placing these 3.5 turbos in the stock location is putting them outside their efficiency range. As you said, these turbos were designed with a .2L smaller engine with an entirely different head design in mind. Now without doing alot of analysis I can't say for sure placing them in the rear would help but I am thinking it will. The turbos when placed in the rear are dealing with less energetic but denser air (colder but generally the same mass of air). I wouldn't be surprised if the turbos still spool under 3k when placed in the rear using the stock 2.25" exhaust piping.

The fabrication work could honestly be completed by an exhaust shop. You are basically creating an axleback exhaust with these turbos and would have a single 2-2.25" pipe to run back up to the front. Nothing says it has to be aluminum with silicone clamps. Again I understand the reservations but it's honestly no more complicated then the front mount. It's just no one has completed a rear mount yet.

 

[USMCtoARMY]

Not entirely true about a rear mount not being done. JMP's first single mount turbo kit was a rear mount. Now, I definitely haven't seen a twin rear mount these models.

I won't address every point we are talking but remember the differences in the 3.7 and 3.5 are compression rating and direct injection plus a different head design. In regards to the piping we are talking all stainless and definitely not aluminized.

 

[zackmd1]

Not entirely true about a rear mount not being done. JMP's first single mount turbo kit was a rear mount. Now, I definitely haven't seen a twin rear mount these models.

I won't address every point we are talking but remember the differences in the 3.7 and 3.5 are compression rating and direct injection plus a different head design. In regards to the piping we are talking all stainless and definitely not aluminized.

No one has done it yet with 3.5 turbos.

Aluminized wouldn't be out of the question if properly protected from corrosion. Most of the stock catback could be used. Cut the pipe right at the muffler and mount the turbo there. Biggest thing would be routing the charge pipe where it will not hang low.

 

[USMCtoARMY]

No one has done it yet with 3.5 turbos.

Aluminized wouldn't be out of the question if properly protected from corrosion. Most of the stock catback could be used. Cut the pipe right at the muffler and mount the turbo there. Biggest thing would be routing the charge pipe where it will not hang low.

Keep it real man, lol.

 

[Rocketboy]

Have you guys looked at the comp oil-less turbos? Nautilus Performance is working on a 3.7 project with these turbos. Maybe rear mounted they won’t have the heat issues. Similar to what STS turbos used to do in the past.

 

[zackmd1]

The problem with oil-less turbos are the costs... The cheapest I have seen one is $1800... But oil-less turbos would be great for rear mounted setups.

Sponsored