09-03-2008, 10:44 AM
09-03-2008, 11:35 AM
Bob-
Will you consider the option of including an intercooler? In other words, will you design the system to be capable of being upgraded with a plug-n-play intercooler?
Jim
Will you consider the option of including an intercooler? In other words, will you design the system to be capable of being upgraded with a plug-n-play intercooler?
Jim
09-03-2008, 11:48 AM
not likely - i may do a higher boost setup for my own race car, but it's not the goal of this package - i know the thought of more power is tempting, but there is no free lunch - it's just fraught with too many problems for us
the reduction in intake temps at this boost level, would not add much power - the restriction it would provide would subtract much more - for an intercooler to do anything positive on a setup like this, boost would have to be much higher - that is not something we want to do as a product - the changes in other areas (brakes, suspensions, chassis, etc) that would have to be made to accommodate that much power and be safe, as well as issues with reliability of the engine, are just outside the limits of acceptable liability
we are really looking for a headache free top to bottom plug and play package, not more systems that need tuning, work on some cars, but not others, or have problems - we are trying to follow the paxton model, which was easy setup, more conservative gains, and reliable power
if you want more power, a turbo would be a better setup
the reduction in intake temps at this boost level, would not add much power - the restriction it would provide would subtract much more - for an intercooler to do anything positive on a setup like this, boost would have to be much higher - that is not something we want to do as a product - the changes in other areas (brakes, suspensions, chassis, etc) that would have to be made to accommodate that much power and be safe, as well as issues with reliability of the engine, are just outside the limits of acceptable liability
we are really looking for a headache free top to bottom plug and play package, not more systems that need tuning, work on some cars, but not others, or have problems - we are trying to follow the paxton model, which was easy setup, more conservative gains, and reliable power
if you want more power, a turbo would be a better setup
09-03-2008, 01:27 PM
enough about our plans and such though - as i said earlier, when it's done, then we can talk about it - that is not what this thread was about
09-03-2008, 02:41 PM
[quote name='flash' post='58848' date='Sep 3 2008, 05:52 AM']lol - known this stuff for years, but try google - i found it pretty quickly, but it's all over the place - there is even math to figure it out if you are so inclined
the heat of superchargers is only generated from the compression of the intake air
the hear of a turbocharger starts off with air that is well over 300 degrees hotter and then compresses that
pretty basic stuff[/quote]
yes, the turbo itself is hotter than a supercharger, but the gasses it is compressing are not hotter. They're the same temp. That said, the actual compression is much more efficient in a turbo set up than in a supercharger set up(assuming properly sized equiptment), resulting in a much higher efficiency temp wise. I know the math, and I've done plenty of research on the subject. It's all contrary to what you're saying.
Go pick up a copy of Maximum Boost by Corky Bell if you want some real literature on the subject.
It will make you reconsider your belief regarding superchargers being better than turbos for any application other than making more torque up to 2000 rpm, and will certainly make you reconsider the thought that intercoolers are not needed here, or that they would be a hindrance on a lower boost set up.
I'm not talking about making more power here... I'm talking about making power safely. Taking a blower with poor thermal efficiency, strapping it onto a high compression motor, and not having an intercooler is a bad idea.
the heat of superchargers is only generated from the compression of the intake air
the hear of a turbocharger starts off with air that is well over 300 degrees hotter and then compresses that
pretty basic stuff[/quote]
yes, the turbo itself is hotter than a supercharger, but the gasses it is compressing are not hotter. They're the same temp. That said, the actual compression is much more efficient in a turbo set up than in a supercharger set up(assuming properly sized equiptment), resulting in a much higher efficiency temp wise. I know the math, and I've done plenty of research on the subject. It's all contrary to what you're saying.
Go pick up a copy of Maximum Boost by Corky Bell if you want some real literature on the subject.
It will make you reconsider your belief regarding superchargers being better than turbos for any application other than making more torque up to 2000 rpm, and will certainly make you reconsider the thought that intercoolers are not needed here, or that they would be a hindrance on a lower boost set up.
I'm not talking about making more power here... I'm talking about making power safely. Taking a blower with poor thermal efficiency, strapping it onto a high compression motor, and not having an intercooler is a bad idea.
09-03-2008, 04:42 PM
Go pick up a copy of Maximum Boost by Corky Bell if you want some real literature on the subject.
Here here!
Here here!
09-03-2008, 06:35 PM
arrrrgh - this thread is totally hijacked - i tried to hint at that earlier - i have now renamed the thread - my apologies to the thread starter and to SFR for letting this go this far
saxman - i think you are missing my point - you are talking about perfect worlds and utopian absolutes - i could care less about differences in efficiency - i am talking about 70hp for a retail price of $5k with all new parts and a complete kit - pure and simple, you cannot get close to that with a turbo, and that is the single defining characteristic that makes this the logical choice - it is also an 8 hour weekend warrior bolt on application - i've done about 30 of these over the years, on different cars (all paxtons), and they work! (i meant to ask, how many have you done?)
yes, the high compression makes for a more complicated engine management issue, but with the electronics available, i do not see an issue - if i could get there with a turbo OF COURSE i would go that route
however, at low boost (below 6psi) there is NO reason for an intercooler on a centrifugal supercharger, and it will in fact COST you about 20% of your power increase, due to the restriction - you have to add at least 2-3lbs of boost to make that up - that means more fuel, more timing, yada yada - bad net idea when all you want is a 30% increase over stock, and that is exactly what we are talking about - we are not talking about anything more
if an intercooler becomes a necessary component, this package will die - (and by the way, are you talking about an intercooler or an aftercooler?) either way though, that is not an acceptable way to go for this package - it pushes the price tag out of the window - i would prefer to do headwork and cams to get to the magic 305bhp number - that is the target - no more - no less
as to the rest, the intake air is definitely hotter in a turbo - the impeller is over 500 degrees, and transfers a LOT of heat to the intake charge - i would be happy to bring along my laser pyrometer and show you on any turbo you choose
the plumbing is also almost always a longer route to the intake point, due to the location of the turbocharger, and its need to be close to the exhaust - this makes the intake air heated by the engine bay along the way - that difference alone is usually about 30 degrees - heck, there is a 30 degree difference in intake temp from the OEM location to the front of the grill, and it doesn't get anywhere near the engine
yes, a turbo is a better unit, more efficient, yada yada - SO WHAT?
there is a big difference between "ultimate setup and efficiency", and doing "only what is needed" for a particular goal - i've been playing with turbochargers and superchargers on and off for 30 years - that's real world stuff, not something somebody read in a book somewhere - i've seen plenty of things that worked, and plenty that didn't, in all types of systems - the right choice is application specific - there is no "one type is better everywhere" solution
if you think you can come up with a turbo package that makes a 70hp bump for under $5k (using only new parts, because you have to be a special kind of idiot as a vendor to sell a used turbo) PLEASE do it - i would be happy to cut a check tomorrow, and avoid this entire process
doesn't it seem at least a little silly to even be discussing this though, when i said earlier in the thread, very clearly, that there WAS NO POINT until it was done?
saxman - i think you are missing my point - you are talking about perfect worlds and utopian absolutes - i could care less about differences in efficiency - i am talking about 70hp for a retail price of $5k with all new parts and a complete kit - pure and simple, you cannot get close to that with a turbo, and that is the single defining characteristic that makes this the logical choice - it is also an 8 hour weekend warrior bolt on application - i've done about 30 of these over the years, on different cars (all paxtons), and they work! (i meant to ask, how many have you done?)
yes, the high compression makes for a more complicated engine management issue, but with the electronics available, i do not see an issue - if i could get there with a turbo OF COURSE i would go that route
however, at low boost (below 6psi) there is NO reason for an intercooler on a centrifugal supercharger, and it will in fact COST you about 20% of your power increase, due to the restriction - you have to add at least 2-3lbs of boost to make that up - that means more fuel, more timing, yada yada - bad net idea when all you want is a 30% increase over stock, and that is exactly what we are talking about - we are not talking about anything more
if an intercooler becomes a necessary component, this package will die - (and by the way, are you talking about an intercooler or an aftercooler?) either way though, that is not an acceptable way to go for this package - it pushes the price tag out of the window - i would prefer to do headwork and cams to get to the magic 305bhp number - that is the target - no more - no less
as to the rest, the intake air is definitely hotter in a turbo - the impeller is over 500 degrees, and transfers a LOT of heat to the intake charge - i would be happy to bring along my laser pyrometer and show you on any turbo you choose
the plumbing is also almost always a longer route to the intake point, due to the location of the turbocharger, and its need to be close to the exhaust - this makes the intake air heated by the engine bay along the way - that difference alone is usually about 30 degrees - heck, there is a 30 degree difference in intake temp from the OEM location to the front of the grill, and it doesn't get anywhere near the engine
yes, a turbo is a better unit, more efficient, yada yada - SO WHAT?
there is a big difference between "ultimate setup and efficiency", and doing "only what is needed" for a particular goal - i've been playing with turbochargers and superchargers on and off for 30 years - that's real world stuff, not something somebody read in a book somewhere - i've seen plenty of things that worked, and plenty that didn't, in all types of systems - the right choice is application specific - there is no "one type is better everywhere" solution
if you think you can come up with a turbo package that makes a 70hp bump for under $5k (using only new parts, because you have to be a special kind of idiot as a vendor to sell a used turbo) PLEASE do it - i would be happy to cut a check tomorrow, and avoid this entire process
doesn't it seem at least a little silly to even be discussing this though, when i said earlier in the thread, very clearly, that there WAS NO POINT until it was done?
09-04-2008, 06:23 AM
[quote name='flash' post='58884' date='Sep 3 2008, 02:35 PM']arrrrgh - this thread is totally hijacked - i tried to hint at that earlier - i have now renamed the thread - my apologies to the thread starter and to SFR for letting this go this far
saxman - i think you are missing my point - you are talking about perfect worlds and utopian absolutes - i could care less about differences in efficiency - i am talking about 70hp for a retail price of $5k with all new parts and a complete kit - pure and simple, you cannot get close to that with a turbo, and that is the single defining characteristic that makes this the logical choice - it is also an 8 hour weekend warrior bolt on application - i've done about 30 of these over the years, on different cars (all paxtons), and they work! (i meant to ask, how many have you done?)
yes, the high compression makes for a more complicated engine management issue, but with the electronics available, i do not see an issue - if i could get there with a turbo OF COURSE i would go that route
however, at low boost (below 6psi) there is NO reason for an intercooler on a centrifugal supercharger, and it will in fact COST you about 20% of your power increase, due to the restriction - you have to add at least 2-3lbs of boost to make that up - that means more fuel, more timing, yada yada - bad net idea when all you want is a 30% increase over stock, and that is exactly what we are talking about - we are not talking about anything more
if an intercooler becomes a necessary component, this package will die - (and by the way, are you talking about an intercooler or an aftercooler?) either way though, that is not an acceptable way to go for this package - it pushes the price tag out of the window - i would prefer to do headwork and cams to get to the magic 305bhp number - that is the target - no more - no less
as to the rest, the intake air is definitely hotter in a turbo - the impeller is over 500 degrees, and transfers a LOT of heat to the intake charge - i would be happy to bring along my laser pyrometer and show you on any turbo you choose
the plumbing is also almost always a longer route to the intake point, due to the location of the turbocharger, and its need to be close to the exhaust - this makes the intake air heated by the engine bay along the way - that difference alone is usually about 30 degrees - heck, there is a 30 degree difference in intake temp from the OEM location to the front of the grill, and it doesn't get anywhere near the engine
yes, a turbo is a better unit, more efficient, yada yada - SO WHAT?
there is a big difference between "ultimate setup and efficiency", and doing "only what is needed" for a particular goal - i've been playing with turbochargers and superchargers on and off for 30 years - that's real world stuff, not something somebody read in a book somewhere - i've seen plenty of things that worked, and plenty that didn't, in all types of systems - the right choice is application specific - there is no "one type is better everywhere" solution
if you think you can come up with a turbo package that makes a 70hp bump for under $5k (using only new parts, because you have to be a special kind of idiot as a vendor to sell a used turbo) PLEASE do it - i would be happy to cut a check tomorrow, and avoid this entire process
doesn't it seem at least a little silly to even be discussing this though, when i said earlier in the thread, very clearly, that there WAS NO POINT until it was done?[/quote]
How many have I done? 12. All custom turbo set ups on honda motors, running nearly as high of c/r, all using intercoolers, running anywhere from 5 psi to 12 psi. All of which I did all of the ecu tuning myself. Many of which were showing way more than 70 hp gains. All of which were done for a fraction of your 5k goal. Which is a moot point, because parts cost different amounts.
As for "utopian ideals" and such, I think you're missing the point. A properly sized turbo, given an identical boost/load/volume level will put out colder air than a properly sized supercharger. By how much depends on the particular unit, but it's a significant amount. I understand that the impeller on the turbo may be hotter than the compressor, but that's irrelevant. It's not the heat transfer from the metal thats the issue, its the efficiency of the compression. Don't compare the temps of the charger itself, compare the IAT's of the two set ups. You will find time and time again that the turbos win this battle at all power levels.
Honestly, I think a turbo would be more cost effective as well... in my experiences with hondas, they certainly always were... that may not be the case on these motors. I'll admit I haven't priced it out. There may be plenty of a market for a supercharger system. I'm just trying to express my concerns so that in the planning stage, you can take all of the available info into account.
The fact of the matter is that superchargers blow a lot of hot air. A properly sized intercooler is not that expensive, and will make a huge difference in how reliable the system is. Yes, it will involve more tubing. Yes, you will see a psi drop. Keep in mind, however, that 6 psi after an intercooler can very easily make more power than 7 psi before an intercooler due to a more efficient charge, ability to run more timing, etc. I am yet to see a usable situation where an intercooler wouldn't be helpful in adding a bit of power, but more importantly make a set up more reliable, regardless of the boost level.
Tuning, imo, should be done for each individual vehicle, especially when dealing with boost in a high compression motor. That said, I understand what you(and any mass produced charged set up) are trying to achieve with a bolt on kit without needing extra tuning. Given that request, an intercooler would be even more appropriate, as it allows for a bit more wiggle room when it comes to ignition timing and such.
Long story short, I understand what you're trying to achieve, but I think you're trying to cut too many corners in places they shouldn't be cut to reach your budget. There is a better way, just make sure you have all the info available digested. The whole point of these forums is for the sharing of information so we can learn from one anothers' experiences and knowledge. Use that to your advantage so that you can better the product you want to put out.
saxman - i think you are missing my point - you are talking about perfect worlds and utopian absolutes - i could care less about differences in efficiency - i am talking about 70hp for a retail price of $5k with all new parts and a complete kit - pure and simple, you cannot get close to that with a turbo, and that is the single defining characteristic that makes this the logical choice - it is also an 8 hour weekend warrior bolt on application - i've done about 30 of these over the years, on different cars (all paxtons), and they work! (i meant to ask, how many have you done?)
yes, the high compression makes for a more complicated engine management issue, but with the electronics available, i do not see an issue - if i could get there with a turbo OF COURSE i would go that route
however, at low boost (below 6psi) there is NO reason for an intercooler on a centrifugal supercharger, and it will in fact COST you about 20% of your power increase, due to the restriction - you have to add at least 2-3lbs of boost to make that up - that means more fuel, more timing, yada yada - bad net idea when all you want is a 30% increase over stock, and that is exactly what we are talking about - we are not talking about anything more
if an intercooler becomes a necessary component, this package will die - (and by the way, are you talking about an intercooler or an aftercooler?) either way though, that is not an acceptable way to go for this package - it pushes the price tag out of the window - i would prefer to do headwork and cams to get to the magic 305bhp number - that is the target - no more - no less
as to the rest, the intake air is definitely hotter in a turbo - the impeller is over 500 degrees, and transfers a LOT of heat to the intake charge - i would be happy to bring along my laser pyrometer and show you on any turbo you choose
the plumbing is also almost always a longer route to the intake point, due to the location of the turbocharger, and its need to be close to the exhaust - this makes the intake air heated by the engine bay along the way - that difference alone is usually about 30 degrees - heck, there is a 30 degree difference in intake temp from the OEM location to the front of the grill, and it doesn't get anywhere near the engine
yes, a turbo is a better unit, more efficient, yada yada - SO WHAT?
there is a big difference between "ultimate setup and efficiency", and doing "only what is needed" for a particular goal - i've been playing with turbochargers and superchargers on and off for 30 years - that's real world stuff, not something somebody read in a book somewhere - i've seen plenty of things that worked, and plenty that didn't, in all types of systems - the right choice is application specific - there is no "one type is better everywhere" solution
if you think you can come up with a turbo package that makes a 70hp bump for under $5k (using only new parts, because you have to be a special kind of idiot as a vendor to sell a used turbo) PLEASE do it - i would be happy to cut a check tomorrow, and avoid this entire process
doesn't it seem at least a little silly to even be discussing this though, when i said earlier in the thread, very clearly, that there WAS NO POINT until it was done?[/quote]
How many have I done? 12. All custom turbo set ups on honda motors, running nearly as high of c/r, all using intercoolers, running anywhere from 5 psi to 12 psi. All of which I did all of the ecu tuning myself. Many of which were showing way more than 70 hp gains. All of which were done for a fraction of your 5k goal. Which is a moot point, because parts cost different amounts.
As for "utopian ideals" and such, I think you're missing the point. A properly sized turbo, given an identical boost/load/volume level will put out colder air than a properly sized supercharger. By how much depends on the particular unit, but it's a significant amount. I understand that the impeller on the turbo may be hotter than the compressor, but that's irrelevant. It's not the heat transfer from the metal thats the issue, its the efficiency of the compression. Don't compare the temps of the charger itself, compare the IAT's of the two set ups. You will find time and time again that the turbos win this battle at all power levels.
Honestly, I think a turbo would be more cost effective as well... in my experiences with hondas, they certainly always were... that may not be the case on these motors. I'll admit I haven't priced it out. There may be plenty of a market for a supercharger system. I'm just trying to express my concerns so that in the planning stage, you can take all of the available info into account.
The fact of the matter is that superchargers blow a lot of hot air. A properly sized intercooler is not that expensive, and will make a huge difference in how reliable the system is. Yes, it will involve more tubing. Yes, you will see a psi drop. Keep in mind, however, that 6 psi after an intercooler can very easily make more power than 7 psi before an intercooler due to a more efficient charge, ability to run more timing, etc. I am yet to see a usable situation where an intercooler wouldn't be helpful in adding a bit of power, but more importantly make a set up more reliable, regardless of the boost level.
Tuning, imo, should be done for each individual vehicle, especially when dealing with boost in a high compression motor. That said, I understand what you(and any mass produced charged set up) are trying to achieve with a bolt on kit without needing extra tuning. Given that request, an intercooler would be even more appropriate, as it allows for a bit more wiggle room when it comes to ignition timing and such.
Long story short, I understand what you're trying to achieve, but I think you're trying to cut too many corners in places they shouldn't be cut to reach your budget. There is a better way, just make sure you have all the info available digested. The whole point of these forums is for the sharing of information so we can learn from one anothers' experiences and knowledge. Use that to your advantage so that you can better the product you want to put out.
09-04-2008, 11:01 AM
Saxman,
You make a number of excellent points. Clearly you have proven expertise in this area and if you have a better, cheaper way to go faster then you should lay it out, cost it and produce it (Maybe you can form a joint venture if you don't tear each other apart). I love capitalism, and no one has a monopoly on information or methodology.
I am not inclined to make this kind of modification to my car, but others have been lining up for as long as I can remember. I'd like to see someone bring a product to market.
Regards,
Jay
You make a number of excellent points. Clearly you have proven expertise in this area and if you have a better, cheaper way to go faster then you should lay it out, cost it and produce it (Maybe you can form a joint venture if you don't tear each other apart). I love capitalism, and no one has a monopoly on information or methodology.
I am not inclined to make this kind of modification to my car, but others have been lining up for as long as I can remember. I'd like to see someone bring a product to market.
Regards,
Jay
09-04-2008, 11:11 AM
Ok, let's now talk about electric superchargers... <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/tongue.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />
Ducking for cover..
Ducking for cover..
09-04-2008, 11:18 AM
first off, i think you are mixing up positive displacement (roots type) superchargers with dynamic compressors (centrifugal units) - very different animals - a centrifugal unit is a dynamic compressor, just like a turbocharger - it is merely driven by a belt rather than by the exhaust
given that you were playing with hondas, i now understand why you take the position you do - had you have grown up playing with V8s, you would feel very differently
i think you need to do some homework on how this engine works, how it is very different from how a honda engine works, and study how a centrifugal system works, and how it differs from a roots and is much more like a turbo - you will find that in low boost form, the two are a natural marriage, and exactly what the market needs
as for costs, i see no way a turbo could cost less than a centrifugal unit, especially at these quantities - the units themselves are about the same cost (makes sens - they are essentially the same unit) - beyond that there are only brackets, belts, and tuning items for the centrifugal system, but with a turbo, you have all that plumbing, wastegate, yada yada - and then there is the cost of the intercooler
as for individual tuning, that is no more needed at low boost than a custom chip for each of our cars as they stand - yes, again custom tuning could make more power, just as it could in normally aspirated form, but that is NOT the goal
to date NOBODY makes a plug and play package for this car in any form at any power level - that is our goal - limiting to 305bhp is also the goal - more than that is beyond the cars capability in perfect stock trim, let alone the condition these 15 year old cars are in now, and would be irresponsible to mass produce - a package that would allow people to raise boost would also be irresponsible - for the same reasons that car manufacturers design in understeer and front biased braking, we need to design in very hard limitations in power output - the last thing we want to be able to happen is some yutz slapping this thing on (or worse trying to outsource components themselves to try to save a buck), then use tinkertoy tools, raise the boost, and blow their engine - that person would certainly blame us, as they were dumb enough to think they could do it themselves in the first place, without the understanding of what is involved, but still feels that it was our design and the "only bumped it 2lbs" or "only changed the electronics", or "only started with a used unit"
there are very specific criteria for us to go forward with a package - we are just now beginning - it is nuts to get this far into a discussion about something THAT DOES NOT YET EXIST
but, if something more cost effective came up, while we would consider that, we would still limit it to the same output level - it is dollars per hp that we are looking at that is the primary driving force here, not which unit works better or could put out more power - if lawrence welk's bubble machine could add 70hp, and cost less, we would strap that puppy on in a blink
as i said, PLEASE step up to the plate and do this yourself - i have no love for doing this - until that point though, we are going to rely on the experience of my years of doing this, pete's experience with this engine, follow the existing successful over 50 year running model, and do a CENTRIFUGAL unit with no intercooler
given that you were playing with hondas, i now understand why you take the position you do - had you have grown up playing with V8s, you would feel very differently
i think you need to do some homework on how this engine works, how it is very different from how a honda engine works, and study how a centrifugal system works, and how it differs from a roots and is much more like a turbo - you will find that in low boost form, the two are a natural marriage, and exactly what the market needs
as for costs, i see no way a turbo could cost less than a centrifugal unit, especially at these quantities - the units themselves are about the same cost (makes sens - they are essentially the same unit) - beyond that there are only brackets, belts, and tuning items for the centrifugal system, but with a turbo, you have all that plumbing, wastegate, yada yada - and then there is the cost of the intercooler
as for individual tuning, that is no more needed at low boost than a custom chip for each of our cars as they stand - yes, again custom tuning could make more power, just as it could in normally aspirated form, but that is NOT the goal
to date NOBODY makes a plug and play package for this car in any form at any power level - that is our goal - limiting to 305bhp is also the goal - more than that is beyond the cars capability in perfect stock trim, let alone the condition these 15 year old cars are in now, and would be irresponsible to mass produce - a package that would allow people to raise boost would also be irresponsible - for the same reasons that car manufacturers design in understeer and front biased braking, we need to design in very hard limitations in power output - the last thing we want to be able to happen is some yutz slapping this thing on (or worse trying to outsource components themselves to try to save a buck), then use tinkertoy tools, raise the boost, and blow their engine - that person would certainly blame us, as they were dumb enough to think they could do it themselves in the first place, without the understanding of what is involved, but still feels that it was our design and the "only bumped it 2lbs" or "only changed the electronics", or "only started with a used unit"
there are very specific criteria for us to go forward with a package - we are just now beginning - it is nuts to get this far into a discussion about something THAT DOES NOT YET EXIST
but, if something more cost effective came up, while we would consider that, we would still limit it to the same output level - it is dollars per hp that we are looking at that is the primary driving force here, not which unit works better or could put out more power - if lawrence welk's bubble machine could add 70hp, and cost less, we would strap that puppy on in a blink
as i said, PLEASE step up to the plate and do this yourself - i have no love for doing this - until that point though, we are going to rely on the experience of my years of doing this, pete's experience with this engine, follow the existing successful over 50 year running model, and do a CENTRIFUGAL unit with no intercooler
09-04-2008, 04:55 PM
I'm very much aware of the differences between roots blowers and centrifugal chargers... and I'm aware that centrifugal chargers are more efficient than their roots brethren. They still don't meet the same efficiencies as turbos. Doesn't matter much, whatever blower system you feel you would like to use, the better.
I'm curious the cost of the blower system you're using and which turbos you're comparing them to in price.
I think you misinterpret a lot of what I say as an attempt to gain more power. I am trying to offer my experience and knowledge to allow a better product that is a much better platform for delivering a reliable, easy to use package.
I can not step up to the plate and do this myself. I have no time, space, or money to do such a thing. I can however offer my knowledge to improve things.
I'm curious the cost of the blower system you're using and which turbos you're comparing them to in price.
I think you misinterpret a lot of what I say as an attempt to gain more power. I am trying to offer my experience and knowledge to allow a better product that is a much better platform for delivering a reliable, easy to use package.
I can not step up to the plate and do this myself. I have no time, space, or money to do such a thing. I can however offer my knowledge to improve things.
09-04-2008, 06:42 PM
a roots blower and a centrifugal unit are not brethren - a centrifugal unit is a belt driven turbocharger - a turbo and a centrifgual unit are closer to being brethren than a roots blower and a centrifugal unit
as for efficiencies, yes, it takes some power to make some power with a belt driven system, making a turbo more mechanically efficient than a centrifugal unit - again, SO WHAT?
i don't know how to further explain that we do not care about mechanical efficiency - we do not care about the boost math - we do not care about which is better or worse
we only care about horsepower per dollar at 305bhp - on that basis alone, the centrifugal unit is more cost efficient
we've run the numbers - so have many others before us - so far, even using modified used 951 plumbing, it can't be done for what we think we can do it for with a centrifugal unit
again though, this is moot - it doesn't exist yet, any more than a bolt on turbo package for this car, so all such discussions are inane drivel at this stage of the game
thanks for the offer of your experience, but we disagree on which is better, and will continue on to what we are confident will be the better package - we do not want to do a turbo at this time - period
as for efficiencies, yes, it takes some power to make some power with a belt driven system, making a turbo more mechanically efficient than a centrifugal unit - again, SO WHAT?
i don't know how to further explain that we do not care about mechanical efficiency - we do not care about the boost math - we do not care about which is better or worse
we only care about horsepower per dollar at 305bhp - on that basis alone, the centrifugal unit is more cost efficient
we've run the numbers - so have many others before us - so far, even using modified used 951 plumbing, it can't be done for what we think we can do it for with a centrifugal unit
again though, this is moot - it doesn't exist yet, any more than a bolt on turbo package for this car, so all such discussions are inane drivel at this stage of the game
thanks for the offer of your experience, but we disagree on which is better, and will continue on to what we are confident will be the better package - we do not want to do a turbo at this time - period
09-05-2008, 10:45 AM
at this time, i am going to close this thread - not because i don't want anybody disagreeing with me, or i am afraid of being wrong, or anything like that, to which conclusion some smaller minded people might immediately jump
it never ceases to amaze me how wound up people get about things like this - this particular subject gets more attention than most too - funny, since nobody has anything working well - whatever
this thread started off about SFR superchargers, got sidetracked into a discussion about something we are working on, which is nowhere near completion yet, and then into a discussion about different systems and what one person things about one type and another about another type - i even had to change the title of the thread
it has clearly become more argumentative in the way much of this reads as it continued than we would like on this board - i made the thread invisible for a few hours, so as to discuss this with one of the partners, before letting it spin entirely out of control - of course, some people took that opportunity to pounce, as they tend to do - healthy debate is good, but we are talking about pie in the sky things here that do not yet exist, so i do not see the point of this continuing here - i will not be discussing this system any further on this forum until it is done
if and when this system is completed, THEN such discussions would be appropriate here - until then, i am more than happy to continue communicating offline with anyone who wishes, preferably by phone - voice inflection would be very helpful here, to avoid any chances of it getting personal
if somebody else wants to start a different thread about the pros and cons of all systems, feel free, but i won't be participating until we can prove what i am saying - i never should have brought it up until it was done anyway - we are excited about it, as are others, but clearly it was premature
in order to avoid it becoming another back and forth banter, please include data to support any claims made in said new thread - have fun
it never ceases to amaze me how wound up people get about things like this - this particular subject gets more attention than most too - funny, since nobody has anything working well - whatever
this thread started off about SFR superchargers, got sidetracked into a discussion about something we are working on, which is nowhere near completion yet, and then into a discussion about different systems and what one person things about one type and another about another type - i even had to change the title of the thread
it has clearly become more argumentative in the way much of this reads as it continued than we would like on this board - i made the thread invisible for a few hours, so as to discuss this with one of the partners, before letting it spin entirely out of control - of course, some people took that opportunity to pounce, as they tend to do - healthy debate is good, but we are talking about pie in the sky things here that do not yet exist, so i do not see the point of this continuing here - i will not be discussing this system any further on this forum until it is done
if and when this system is completed, THEN such discussions would be appropriate here - until then, i am more than happy to continue communicating offline with anyone who wishes, preferably by phone - voice inflection would be very helpful here, to avoid any chances of it getting personal
if somebody else wants to start a different thread about the pros and cons of all systems, feel free, but i won't be participating until we can prove what i am saying - i never should have brought it up until it was done anyway - we are excited about it, as are others, but clearly it was premature
in order to avoid it becoming another back and forth banter, please include data to support any claims made in said new thread - have fun