Thomas Knight Supercharger

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:
Interesting. The MAF placement is terrible!

No kidding. A hard 90 degree bend right before the MAF?!? That can't be good.

He should have relocated the MAF to that nice looong section up against the firewall. Then ditch the battery and put in a nice big water-air intercooler.

Also, he's going to blow stuff up trying to use a rising-rate FPR.

At what power level do the Duratec MAF/injectors max out at anyway?

BP

17# injectors should be good to about 180whp...I would assume. It's just a guess no logic behind it!

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:
The blower unit looks tiny!

It sounds like it's a T04E compressor housing. Should be good for a decent amount of power depending upon the trim.

40 Trim ~ 275HP @ 6psi
46 trim ~ 300HP @ 6psi

...just from a quick look at my maps.

The kit definitely has some potential. I wonder if you could just buy the supercharger part of it and do it the right way? (MAF in proper place, intercooler, etc.)

BP

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:
The blower unit looks tiny!

It sounds like it's a T04E compressor housing. Should be good for a decent amount of power depending upon the trim.

Yes, but it is spinning MUCH slower than it would if it was attached to it's exhaust side housing!

Actually he'd only have to hit 60-70k rpms. What kind of step-up do you think he's getting? That drive gear looks pretty darn tiny.

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:
Actually he'd only have to hit 60-70k rpms. What kind of step-up do you think he's getting? That drive gear looks pretty darn tiny.

I honestly don't know but IIRC the vortech spins at about 35k RPMs.

Oooo I just had an epiphany! Remove the A/C, clock that supercharger and run an FMIC!

Ouch. That's pretty slow. Heck, the 46 trim compressor map doesn't even start until 40k rpms. 40 trim starts at 46,200 rpms.

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:
Ouch. That's pretty slow. Heck, the 46 trim compressor map doesn't even start until 40k rpms. 40 trim starts at 46,200 rpms.

Yeah, the compressor wheel on a vortech unit is frikkin HUGE!
I've had the pleasure of holding one and it is like the size of a turbo for a 1000hp supra

Man, a relocated battery could be huge for cleaning up that engine bay. Would make lots more space for a clean overflow tank relocation.

Also, that filter placement sucks. Gotta be a way to move that filter away from the engine a bit.

Does look promising, however. The GB price looks pretty good.

EDIT: After looking at it again, I dont know where the filter would go. Also needs quite a bit of extras. Though if you managed to get it for ~1600 I guess its not a bad starting point.

I see why Vortec went to the other side of the engine. Pipe routing doesnt look that clean.

It's going to be pretty hard to fill up the windshield washer fluid too. I guess that's why they left the cap off...

hahaha, good eye.

I think the kit definetly has some potential, but yeah, with the maf placement, I think some idle issues will occur. Should ditch the FMU and upgrade injectors and do it right.

He should have located the battery to the trunk and put the coolant resevoir where the battery to used to be, so he could free up some more room for the intake piping to get rid of that 90 degree bend.

One thing I do like is the price though.

$2000 for the first 4 to sign up and if you a cougar club member.

that thing is down right ugly...

I wanna see some compressor maps of where that thing stands from 20k rpms to 40k rpms.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
that thing is down right ugly...

So are you, but I didn't want to tell the majority of CEG that's never met you.

Mark

Too late.

Originally posted by todras:
Too late.

wow - two ugly bastards in one picture - Wicked awesome!

It looks like a good place to put an aftercooler would be in the window cowl area. Run the piping through the fire wall and viola nice cold air. BTW are those zip ties holding the upper section of piping to the firewall?

Originally posted by DESIGN:
It looks like a good place to put an aftercooler would be in the window cowl area. Run the piping through the fire wall and viola nice cold air. BTW are those zip ties holding the upper section of piping to the firewall?

Thats given that there is suffient room there.

But yea, im with the rest of you:
Relocate Battery
Move resovior down a bit into the battery spot
remove 90 degree bend
move MAF farther up the intake tube
Route an intake into the wheel well

Go zoom zoom

Turbo is still the way to go tho, hopefully the new ADC kit isnt to $$$$

I can't wait to get home so I can actually see the pictures.

Stoopid work firewall...

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by todras:
Too late.

wow - two ugly bastards in one picture - Wicked awesome!

If we are going on taste of modifying vehicles that isn't saying much for your taste...

Originally posted by Y2KSVT:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
that thing is down right ugly...

So are you, but I didn't want to tell the majority of CEG that's never met you.

Mark

As long as your mom still gives it up I don't mind.

meh, color me not impressed. The price is good, but, it still doesn't seem worth even at the low price.

Poor execution, minimal gain, even less gain if you are already making decent power (seems like, as delivered, it can flow enough air to make 170-180whp, which isn't much mroe than a stock CSVT) Pete is right about the MAF placement, a 90* bend right in front of it, and being placed directly against the throttle body is asking for driveability issues. I think I'd rather deal w/ the durability problems of the Vortech kits, than try to make that thing perform.

does the stock MAF even like to be blown through?

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
does the stock MAF even like to be blown through?

Based on posts in the tubo developers pages for the Focus tubo kits. The two major suppliers solved some drivability issues by placing the MAF on the low pressure side.

I would expect the stock Duratec MAF to be similarly problematic.

I Agree with what someone said earlier, turn it so its pushing though a FMIC and that way you can get rid of all the ugly piping, move the batt. put the intake in the fender and put a different pully to get more pressure. no arguments about poor maf placement. i suppose if we the designers it would cost the same as buying an ADC turbo kit(to match power output anyway)

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:
It's going to be pretty hard to fill up the windshield washer fluid too. I guess that's why they left the cap off...

Silly Ben- That's for the alcohol injection!

In all seriousness, I grant the problems that you guys have brought up, but there is a respectable amount of credit that needs to go to this fabricator just for the effort of making a kit for an EXTREMELY dead platform!

I think this is a good baseline kit. I think it's going to have issues converting the stock suck-through to blow-through. Injector upgrades are a MUST, and I would like to see a bit cleaner install. At least, for the sake of the tiny baby Jesus, use BLACK zip ties!

Bottom line: Kudos to the fabricator, I hope to see a "v2" kit soon!

The best part of this kit is the Rotrex compressor and its mounting bracketry. If you take those by themselves you can imagine a much better lay out for the subsequent piping. That alone makes this a great addition to our forced induction possibilities.

A blow through MAF would not be a "major" issue if you reworked the piping before and after the MAF to include 6-8" of straight pipe. This would also go well with the talked about thinking of different pipe routing.

Can you "clock" the housing so that the output faces another direction?

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The best part of this kit is the Rotrex compressor and its mounting bracketry.

That's no Rotrex. The Rotrex uses a planitary drive with a special closed loop oil system.

It looks like they just copied a Vortech or Paxton but left the belt/gears exposed.

They are actually better off by using a real turbo compressor. This is actually a step up from the Rotrex, IMHO. The Rotrex superchargers use a friggin' Holset compressor. The map is horrible. It's obvious that it was meant for a diesel.

See on the back of the compressor housing those brackets and bolts. The bolts apply tension to the brackets, which applies pressure on the sealing ring INSIDE. From the looks of it ... identicle to a turbo compressor housing and if so, then YES, you can clock it VERY EASILY!

I cant wait to see where this kit ends up going. Hopefully he would be willing to offer the charger and the bracket and we can see some wonderful homebrew kits soon!

Will this unit build boost like a vortech would with a bias to the top end or will it build in a linear fasion?

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:
I cant wait to see where this kit ends up going. Hopefully he would be willing to offer the charger and the bracket and we can see some wonderful homebrew kits soon!

Will this unit build boost like a vortech would with a bias to the top end or will it build in a linear fasion?

I would expect so.

<---- (* Gettin' that 'Ol feelin again... *)

Must.... not .... mod ... .until .... home purchase.... completed....

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The best part of this kit is the Rotrex compressor and its mounting bracketry. If you take those by themselves you can imagine a much better lay out for the subsequent piping. That alone makes this a great addition to our forced induction possibilities.

A blow through MAF would not be a "major" issue if you reworked the piping before and after the MAF to include 6-8" of straight pipe. This would also go well with the talked about thinking of different pipe routing.

I dunno how great it will end up being, but it certainly is a viable option - and affordable at that. I'm actually considering it, now that I get to look at it. It'll need some tweaking and the piping re-route is certainly in order. If I can do only one thing to that kit, it would be to isolate the intake from the engine bay.

I have a return style '99, will I need the FMU or a bunch of other junk to make it work??

from what i read you can do it properly with different injectors and an xcal!

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:
from what i read you can do it properly with different injectors and an xcal!

Injectors would definately get replaced with some larger volume units to avoid going lean. I just have to do some research on what size. Same size as the Vortec kit would prolly be a good place to start...

Vortec kit was stock size with a FMU. Not a good start.

Well that's kinda frightening. How many people put those kits on their cars?? Ouch.

Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Well that's kinda frightening. How many people put those kits on their cars?? Ouch.

Original owner of mine! His last update to his Registry said something about 42# injectors waiting to go in.

It does have this "Vortech" hugenormus fuel pressure regulator. Maybe if I knew what "FMU" was, I could speculate at if it's still on my car (thinking Fuel Management Unit, but I could be wrong...)

Originally posted by Big Daddy Kane:

Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Well that's kinda frightening. How many people put those kits on their cars?? Ouch.

Original owner of mine! His last update to his Registry said something about 42# injectors waiting to go in.

It does have this "Vortech" hugenormus fuel pressure regulator. Maybe if I knew what "FMU" was, I could speculate at if it's still on my car (thinking Fuel Management Unit, but I could be wrong...)

Big blue thing, up by the um brake master cylinder.

The return fuel line runs through the FMU. The more boost that goes in, the harder it pinches off the return line raising the rail pressure. On Rev Po'Jay's we hit 100psi on the fuel rail.

Seems like a potentially dangerous way to increase available fuel. Then again, I'm fairly new to this FI stuff.

Originally posted by Keyser:
The return fuel line runs through the FMU. The more boost that goes in, the harder it pinches off the return line raising the rail pressure. On Rev Po'Jay's we hit 100psi on the fuel rail.

So... maybe the big black hugenormous thing with the Vortech lines is the FMU? All it has is the 2 fuel and 1 vacuum line... which is why I thought it was a regulator... which what you explained technically is.

Originally posted by Keyser:
The return fuel line runs through the FMU. The more boost that goes in, the harder it pinches off the return line raising the rail pressure. On Rev Po'Jay's we hit 100psi on the fuel rail.

Don't I know it! That was a duck, run, and/or hide moment for sure. Good Times!

Actually, I've been looking at the responses and I'm quite suprised with all the negativity about it. It isn't that bad.
THe MAF location may only present a problem at idle but can be overcome with more tweaking. Of course the low airflow and the 90* turn are the reasons, but it is definitely workable I think. At cruise and full throttle it will work just fine because the air is forced anyway.
I wouldn't count it out until someone actually tests it.

I say this because of my experience working with some of the big Pro-M mafs and cut stock mafs.
You can get a decent tune but idle is the hardest due to the sampling tube configuration in them.
IMHO this would be easier to tune than both of those types I just mentioned even if it is not ideal.

Couple this thing with an decent tuner or an XCAL2, and proper injectors instead of all that FMU crap and it may be a decent performer, especially for an ATX!

I would rather just use a SCT PRP setup and spend some time tuning this in than to ever deal with a Vortec seal/jackshaft issue.

If you really want it to be finished off right, it needs a battery relocation and the addition of a water to air system like is on the ADC kits, only in front of the MAF and leaving the MAF where it is now. That would cool down the air making a blow through almost a non-issue, raise the power and reliability, and fix the 90* bend issue at the same time because the airflow would be straightened out completely after going through the intecooler cores.

o IMO "completing" this kit would solve all the issues noted and still make it available for the ATX car. Add an ATX 3L to the mix .... hmmm. Hope the transmission holds.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The best part of this kit is the Rotrex compressor and its mounting bracketry. If you take those by themselves you can imagine a much better lay out for the subsequent piping. That alone makes this a great addition to our forced induction possibilities.

A blow through MAF would not be a "major" issue if you reworked the piping before and after the MAF to include 6-8" of straight pipe. This would also go well with the talked about thinking of different pipe routing.

I was thinking about the same thing. This is a great step forward and the things that are issues are relatively easily solved in my opinion.

Originally posted by warmonger:
o IMO "completing" this kit would solve all the issues noted and still make it available for the ATX car. Add an ATX 3L to the mix .... hmmm. Hope the transmission holds.

I think that might be a bit much for the CD4E. Although the new 3L Escape can be hooked up with an SC kit...

As I said, I'm considering this kit, but I am a stoopid nube when it comes to FI and I don't want to make any major mistakes that would render my car and/or the new kit useless.

Originally posted by ButtonPuncher:

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The best part of this kit is the Rotrex compressor and its mounting bracketry.

That's no Rotrex. The Rotrex uses a planitary drive with a special closed loop oil system.

It looks like they just copied a Vortech or Paxton but left the belt/gears exposed.

They are actually better off by using a real turbo compressor. This is actually a step up from the Rotrex, IMHO. The Rotrex superchargers use a friggin' Holset compressor. The map is horrible. It's obvious that it was meant for a diesel.

BP

It looks like a Pro-charger to me. Still a good belt driven cog drive compressor. Oil-less and fairly quiet system to make installation easier as well. Also cheaper to maintenance and repair, or even replace than a vortec.

They need to sell it as the supercharger and bracketry only... that's the way I can see them getting the most sales.

You'd be better off making the passenger fenderwell like the driver's side and then putting the maf in the fenderwell. That would take care of all your flow issues... especially since i'm not a big fan of blow-through maf setup to begin with.

You want that 90 deg bend out of there so the air is flowing through the tube uniformly... if you more air flowing on one side (which I believe it what happens when you have a bend) you can get innacurate reporting from the maf since it's in the middle of the tube.

Pro-M at one time was making a maf that had measuring spots all around the tube to account for intake designs like this.

Agreed.

You can get a 90* silicone elbow on the input and run a draw through MAF into the passanger sidefender well easily. Like this..

I have one of these elbows on my turbo and cut the side that mounts to the inlet down to where it's only wide enough for a t-bolt clamp. IMO, there is more than enough room in it's currant setup to pull this off.
SCT's PRP would be ideal for tuning and the usage of a Ford MAF or an SCT MAF along with properly sized injectors for your target power output. Might as well change the fuel pump out if you plan on putting decent power down (Who wouldn't if going to all of this 'trouble'?)

Clock the output to aim downward and run it through a universal type FMIC and run back up the drivers side to the TB. Here is something off of ebay that'd work for a pretty good deal Low cost FMIC, piping and couplers w/ clamps....... not bad

Relocate the coolant resivor and move the battery to the trunk like others have said, and you're on your way to a good upgrade.

As a tuner kit, this would be a good option. I'd s%&^ can the rest of the kit.

You guys are missing all the other points, points that are a benefit to the placement of that maf. The further away up the intake tract that the MAF is then the harder it is to tune for on/off throttle rich/lean conditions, etc.
You will get more rich/lean spikes from sudden changes in throttle application simply because of the length of the column of air between the maf and the cylinders. It also makes running a blow-off valve easy instead of having to tune around dumping metered air and having backfires and stalling.
The location of the maf in front of the TB is only a few inches from stock as well and if you have an intercooler before it that distributes the airflow evenly plus cools it, I can only see one or two negative points to a blow through as opposed to the single negative I mentioned above.

But, you are correct in that it is simply a piece of pipe anyway, intake routing can be your choice since it is the compressor and belt drive system that are the hard part.
That setup there kicks arse IMHO as a starting point.

It would make routing easier to have the MAF right by the TB, but I see your point about tuning too.

With a draw through MAF used in a blow through application, you want to have the piping the same size as the MAF within 8"-12" before and after the MAF.

Everyone is talking about a FMIC or a water to air intercooler like the one ADC uses. Why not use a front mount water to air intercooler and run the intake pipes exactly where the cold air intake would go? Wouldn't this really solve the main concerns?

Originally posted by muntus:
Why not use a front mount water to air intercooler and run the intake pipes exactly where the cold air intake would go?

If you're gonna mount it in the front there's really no point in making it air/water.

It was my understanding that the water to air is more effecient, regardless of where its mounted.

water to air isnt always more efficent when i had my cummins ram i had an air to air, my temp drop was greater than a friend of mine with a water type(No i didnt have a stock truck either- PnP, multi-geometery turbo, banks kit, 3 core FMIC, 5 inch exhaust, propane injection and 50/50 water/methanol injection)

Originally posted by muntus:
It was my limited understanding that the water to air is more effecient, regardless of where its mounted.

fixed!

Water to air can be more efficient... but it eventually becomes limited by ambient temp just like an air to air... what do you think cools the water after it sucks all the heat from your compressed air... it's the ambient air.

Water/Air IC's are typically used in one-shot cars like drag cars so they can pack them with ice... or in the case of the contour, cars w/o a good spot/room to put an air/air.

I'll take just the higher PSI compressor and bracket. I wonder what it would do if you could do a smaller FMIC that will fit in the Contour's bumper, and then a water/air right in front of the TB (besides eat up more money). Ice the water when it's go time, but still take advantage of some of the long pipe that has to go back to the TB anyway.

Well, I've been giving it more thought, and I've come to the conclusion that I will wait to see what the ADC turbo kit will offer.

With the additional parts & tuning that this SC kit will require, I might be better off, dollar for dollar, to get an ADC kit to fit my ATX - IF it offers some basic tuning & upgraded injectors with the package. I like plug & play. Especially if an extra grand will get me some basic tuning so I can tool around for a couple of months until I can get to a dyno & have a Superchip re-programmed to suite.

The SC kit is great in the fact that you have less plumbing for turbo cooling & exhaust manifolds to fab/replace. Simple is better for somebody with limited experience, or time, or desire for tearing into the car, so it may yet be the best option for me. I won't be putting down a huge amount of power. Just looking for a greater fun factor. Adding all sorts of extras like an Xcal2 & having to buy injectors & what-not (on top of learing to tune) to make a safe kit is just not worth it for some.

All I want is some bolt in goodness with minimal fuss. Doesn't have to be ideal - I can tweak it if the spirit ever moves me, but for now, simple is better. Maybe I'm being un-realistic, but I am new to FI.

I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.

Just a thought...

Originally posted by DrFrankenbarge:
Water to air can be more efficient... but it eventually becomes limited by ambient temp just like an air to air... what do you think cools the water after it sucks all the heat from your compressed air... it's the ambient air.

Water/Air IC's are typically used in one-shot cars like drag cars so they can pack them with ice... or in the case of the contour, cars w/o a good spot/room to put an air/air.

Correct.

Even without ice the water to air is more beneficial in the short run with the car at low air speeds because the coolant can still absorb heat without airflow going through the radiator.
However, prolonged idling and stop and go traffic will kill the water to air setup when the watter gets too warm. So I don't know, I like the water to air in the long run despite any issues. In winter time it will actually warm the incoming air charge up a little bit as well.

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.

Just a thought...

No room there unless its ON the hood.

Stazi had a plan to use a hood scoop above the stock airbox locationfor a small eclipse Air-Air byt it just turns out better all the way around with the water-air because of how small the core can be to get the same intercooling effect.

Of course you have to have plenty of area for the exchanger in front of the radiator too though.

it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors

Originally posted by warmonger:

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.

Just a thought...

No room there unless its ON the hood.

Stazi had a plan to use a hood scoop above the stock airbox locationfor a small eclipse Air-Air byt it just turns out better all the way around with the water-air because of how small the core can be to get the same intercooling effect.

Of course you have to have plenty of area for the exchanger in front of the radiator too though.

This coming from a man that has proven there is no "Can't"? Tom, you are letting me down. Sure there is room. Make room. A bit of a nice hood cowl and Ba-Da-Bing, you are in there!~

Originally posted by Number47:
it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors

Wrong.

Originally posted by Number47:
it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors

Not really. Heat transfer into the water from the aluminum core is faster and the water can hold more heat before the temperature raises by 1 degree than air can. Putting it back out into the air means that you still have to think of it the same as an air to air.
Let me better explain: Assume no ice is used and that the water temp operates between intake air temp and ambient temp.

Next, the medium that the heat is going through are as follows:
For air to air IC: Air->Alum->Air
For air to water IC: Air->Alum->water->Alum->Air

The only difference is the water in the middle and since heat transfers between aluminum and water 14x faster than between Aluminum and air, having the water in the middle is negligible. Therefore, without some outside factors such as introducing iced/cold/hot water to the system it will act much like an air to air cooler.
With one or two exceptions. The water temp will respond much slower to ambient temperature differences so if ambient temps cool down or you run through a patch of cooler air then you won't see an immediate benefit in your intercooler efficiency until the water has had time to cool down. On the other hand, if ambient temps raise or you run through a patch of hot air, you won't see the penalty as quick. But counting on the benefits of the last statement are so rare you may as well not include it in the discussion.
This is why you are shooting yourself in the foot if you use a very large capacity coolant system in your water to air intercooler!!!!! Your car cannot cool down the coolant quickly once it is heat soaked without a lot of airflow across the heat exchanger, as in driving down the road for a few minutes. Idle heatsoak will reduce the system efficiency. Also, the more tanks and lines you have running the car the more surface area you have to absorb outside sources of heat, and that is anything higher than the coolant temps. The signficance of this is that putting a bucket of ice water in the cooler and esp. having it in the trunk means it absorbs heat from all across the car, often being too warm by the time you get through the staging lines! Only a drag race team with the container next to the IC core with easy acess to flush with iced water can really see the benefits of a large volume resevoir and ice.

So I come back full circle to the discussions over the past three years that the large trunk mounted tanks are a waste of time, money, space, and of course too much added weight (figure 8#s/gallon)!!
Even though there is a sweet spot in coolant amount for best efficiency, you should think of it as using only enough coolant to fill the lines, cores, and a small resevoir to provide enough coolant for when the water contracts as it cools down.
This improves transient temperature efficiency.

Hey, I used the words UNLESS in my post!

Unless you make a hood scoop or cowling. Anything is possible.

The piping in this kit looks fairly small would this restrict the power output? What size piping would be optimal for a 3L setup? It looks like 2-2.5" piping and if you went larger I doubt it would even fit around the back of the engine.

2.5" is plenty large ... optimal would probably be 2.25"

Originally posted by fastcougar:
2.5" is plenty large ... optimal would probably be 2.25"

You are absolutely correct. This is yet another great example of the bigger is rarely better philosophy. The larger the piping the more "lag" time and psi drop because the compressor has to pressurize a significantly greater volume of air PER INCH of piping.

2.5" according to most of what i've read is good for about 450hp or so worth of air.

Another things to consider are your transitions for your tubing... you should always have as gradual a transition if you can (within reason) when changing tubing size... or going from your compressor outlet to the proper inlet tract tubing size.

450hp at what temperature?

Originally posted by Keyser:
450hp at what temperature?

Sure... now you're gonna make me look crap up and question my memory...

Well this is a non intercooled system and you are relating hp to the diameter of the pipe. I just think that temperature is relevant to conversation. It goes back to 2.25 being large enough. Large enough for how many cfm at the 190 temperature that blower will put out? We would need a mad scientist like Warmonger to figure it out.

Well using the general calculation of 1.5 x hp for cfm for the engine and using corky bells thoughts that you don't want the air velocity to be great than mach .4 as since at that point, according to bell, the drag and flow losses increase greatly.

So if we do some math.. again with the 1.5x hp which will be a little low actually since you'd need more volume of a less dense air... anyway.

So if we go to the limit with 450 hp worth of air you're looking at around a 2.25" OD tube at 450 f/s (Mach .4). So to give yourself a little breathing room 2.5 should easily flow fine for 450hp.

Now say we are using this kit on a decent 2.5L and say we're making about 275 at the crank. For a velocity of 450 f/s you're looking at about a 1.75" OD tube (say 16 gauge wall).

So now let's look at a temp of 190 for outlet temp and an ambient temp of 78 for the 1.5 x hp rule (I figure that's close to what they're thinking and i'm too lazy to check). So say the density ratio of the outlet to what we'd consider ambient is 1.18. So using that let's say that instead of 1.5 x 275 we use 1.5x275x1.18 for cfm. If we do that we're looking at only about a 2" OD tube (16 gauge again).

So anyway.. rough math... with this non-intercooled system i'd say 2" OD should be fine although 2.25" would give you a little breathing room and shouldn't kill you with "lag".

Now I hope someone appreciates this... and I used 275 for crank because I didn't feel like looking up what the original post said for power and 275 seemed like a good number.

Originally posted by WRX Barge:
Well using the general calculation of 1.5 x hp for cfm for the engine and using corky bells thoughts that you don't want the air velocity to be great than mach .4 as since at that point, according to bell, the drag and flow losses increase greatly.

So if we do some math.. again with the 1.5x hp which will be a little low actually since you'd need more volume of a less dense air... anyway.

So if we go to the limit with 450 hp worth of air you're looking at around a 2.25" OD tube at 450 f/s (Mach .4). So to give yourself a little breathing room 2.5 should easily flow fine for 450hp.

Now say we are using this kit on a decent 2.5L and say we're making about 275 at the crank. For a velocity of 450 f/s you're looking at about a 1.75" OD tube (say 16 gauge wall).

So now let's look at a temp of 190 for outlet temp and an ambient temp of 78 for the 1.5 x hp rule (I figure that's close to what they're thinking and i'm too lazy to check). So say the density ratio of the outlet to what we'd consider ambient is 1.18. So using that let's say that instead of 1.5 x 275 we use 1.5x275x1.18 for cfm. If we do that we're looking at only about a 2" OD tube (16 gauge again).

So anyway.. rough math... with this non-intercooled system i'd say 2" OD should be fine although 2.25" would give you a little breathing room and shouldn't kill you with "lag".

Now I hope someone appreciates this... and I used 275 for crank because I didn't feel like looking up what the original post said for power and 275 seemed like a good number.

Dim be sum big werdz feller

Maybe if I understood you it would make more sense. But from a "I don't know [censored] stand point" that was a very good post and informative to us all.