Next Generation in Supercharging Means 275whp!

[Ol'Racer]

Spoke to my old buddy in AZ (used to work for Gurney) who has done extensive tuning with superchargers. He's worked on the new Corvettes with the SC's, Hondas, even SAABS.

Here's his explanation. On a smaller (around 2 liter motor) the TVS can run 2-3lbs less boost on 91 octane than an M-60 with an intercooler and deliver the around the same amount of HP. He said that they are just that much more efficient. So, if you stop at 10lbs with an M-60 with intercooler you could run 12-13lbs on 91 octane with a TVS...all other things being equal...temps, injectors, pumps, conditions, etc. That should get you 45hp minimum according to him.

He also said that you could expect 15-20 hp (per pound of boost). Potentially, you could see 60hp for 3lbs *13 lbs of boost. He was talking SAE or flywheel.

HTH

[fzust]

Originally Posted by E.D.

The twin screw that Fred (fzust) is running: is that the same as a TVS or is that an uber-TVS (for the Non-germans: better than TVS).

Mine is a Twin-Screw blower from Lysholm, same as on the FordGT, where as the TVS is still technically a roots, same as on the new ZR1. (Ford vs Chevy deathmatch showdown!!!!) I believe it does its compression on the outside vs. between the lobes like the lysholm. The Lysholm also has a compression rate longitudinally along the screws i.e. the screw threads get tighter toward the exit. What does all this mean? Good question. Both have much higher efficiency than the MP62. I think the TVS has a broader high efficiency range than the Lysholm, but I am not sure. Oh and lastly, my blower is 1.6L/rev vs. 1.2L/rev for the TVS or 1.0L/rev for the MP62. The reason this is important because of sizing the blower to the right air usage. If the blower is too big, you have surge problems down low. If it is too small you have to rev it too high and add alot of heat. The TVS wasn't available when I did my bespoke kit and I needed the headroom to get up to crazy horsepower. I think the 1.6L is too large for non-racing applications. 1.2L is about perfect.

[E.D.]

Originally Posted by charliex

I must be missing something though, since i'm not seeing this big difference between the TVS and the katana HP wise, at those levels of boost we're well between 280RWHP and 300RWHP and before the inevitable, i haven't said the TVS sucks, or it can't be done and this that and the other, just that it didn't interest me.

I must be missing here something also:
Katana 220/140
New flash for Ronin SC 2006
Dave 275/180 (even with the disadvantage of using the EFI which accordingly to some people sucks)
http://www.lotustalk.com/forums/1172595-post355.html
Again, assuming that the TVS flash will have equal power to the current EFI tune (i wouldn't know why that wouldn't be the case) and that boost levels are more or less equal between Katana and TVS.
Under my definition i would consider 55/40 a big difference.
And yes, the MP62 can make high 200's but not without some serious cooling,

[charliex]

Originally Posted by E.D.

I must be missing here something also:

yes, this part "at those levels of boost"

(i wouldn't know why that wouldn't be the case)

depends who does the flash, some of the tuners only have access to the fuel maps and NA base maps, they don't have the fuelling range to support this level of HP, you need to recode some stuff in the stock ecu for that.

it'd also be nice to be able to chat about it without the comments about who thinks what sucks too.

[Bavarian Motorist]

From what little I know, I suppose the best part of the TVS is that you can make more power, higher boost, without the need for an intercooler, and that leaves room for upgrades (with internal motor upgrades, of course). In other words, it's a better platform to start with, whereas the MP62 needs to be sort of "maxed out" to match the TVS. Maybe maxed out isn't the right words, since I know VF has a stage II with more power, but surely it has to be getting there...


If you're looking to make 280-300whp, the VF is a great solution as well. I was impressed by Matt's dyno sheet from his VF kit.

[Darth G-F]

Originally Posted by robains

Darth, you're cracking me -- don't know what you'll do if Charlie stops "playing" with ECUs - sell the car?

Well, Cx has proven many times over that he is the man. That's why Phil and Dave want him to tune the TVS. Don't you think?

If you're happy with other solutions, good for you. For me, only the best will do. And I don't need to sell the car, I already have a Cx tune on my Katana.

[fzust]

Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist

From what little I know, I suppose the best part of the TVS is that you can make more power, higher boost, without the need for an intercooler, and that leaves room for upgrades (with internal motor upgrades, of course). In other words, it's a better platform to start with, whereas the MP62 needs to be sort of "maxed out" to match the TVS. Maybe maxed out isn't the right words, since I know VF has a stage II with more power, but surely it has to be getting there...


If you're looking to make 280-300whp, the VF is a great solution as well. I was impressed by Matt's dyno sheet from his VF kit.

Fair point. My intercooled twin-screw on the XP car makes about 350-370HP crank. Last weekend at the auto-x, I had a leak in my A/W IC setup that put an airbubble that starved the waterpump. Ultimately, we ran it without the actual cooling. Once it heatsoaked, The highest IAT I saw was only 176F! This is running 14lbs of boost with ALOT of timing on stock compression(VP C12).

[Bavarian Motorist]

Very impressive Fred... Try that with an MP62 now ... LOL

[fzust]

Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist

Very impressive Fred... Try that with an MP62 now ... LOL

We actually had alot of debate on going with the Lysholm 1.2L blower I have in a box here or the 1.6L. PES just finished building this really trick 240Cup car for World Challenge that had a 1.6L Lysholm. Tony said it made rediculous power (Over 300 to the wheels) with zero lag. The debate was if the 1.2L would have better response but ultimately limit power to 350HP or so. Ultimately, PES convinced me that the 1.6L was the way to go. Tony said it feels like an LS7. I have ZERO regrets as you can imagine. That car is a freaking monster.

[charliex]

if you're going to go 300RWHP+ it'll need some significant investment in the engine, clutch, fuel system, etc so you're in the range of stuff where the katana/mp62 wasn't really designed for, so if you lower the boost enough so it is within the katanas range, then the percentages start to shrink. we've seen problems with the transmisson, just as lotus has on the GT3 cars.

so why not just slap a turbo in it ?

[fzust]

Hmmmm. Had a turbo on it for 2 years. Lag is too much for AutoX. Even small turbo, still sucks. IF you only accelerate for 40 feet, you can't give 10 feet up to lag. So yanked the turbo.

Wait, wasn't thread about PHil's TVS blower? Hmmm maybe if we want to talk about intercooled Eaton kits or Twin-screw XP cars we should take that to our own threads????

[charliex]

sure thing, i only found out yesterday you switched to a sc again, i like my SC too, but i'm not after tonnes of torque.

back to the TVS !

[turbophil]

Evening,

At some point or another folks just have to give something a try- just as Dave and Jim did. There's no way that I know to mask figures or play with figures here... Nor would I want to. I've been in this community since 2005 and don't plan on going anywhere. I just assume maintain my reputation--- whatever it may be

Older members will recall all the debate about the original baby blowers when they first came out and whether they would work on the track, etc... A year later, it turns out they did. Dave and Jim simply bolted this system on and then there was power Dave's car laid down 180wtq and 280whp with this setup and a pretty generic tune I sent him from a few states away...Yes, there is more boost (~2 psi more than the 62 as seen below), and we should expect more power from that. The thing is that the efficiency of the blower "allows" more boost. It also recovers faster from hot runs... Looking at my dyno earlier or Daves, it's plain to see that the blower is not running out of steam like the M62 does. My old M62 dynos, Frank's dyno that CX posted, etc all show a declining torque curve in the middle or upper 2/3s of the band, where the TVS builds almost the entire way to red line. When I post my latest pulls, you'll see that the tq builds PAST redline. Yep, peak torque is someplace beyond 8300 rpms!!!! And yes, that's ok for peak torque to be somewhere up there as the rest of the band is all greater than before...

That torque curve really changes the way the car feels. That higher in the revs you go the deeper it puts you in the seat, which is a totally new feeling when compared to how the M62 feels. Once torque starts dropping off, you start losing those intoxicating G forces pushing you back in the seat. Remember torque is power.

I have plenty of M62 logs with temps in the 240s and 250s. However, here's a nice cool pull to give the M62 the benefit of the doubt. I condensed these down to show the real meat of the powerband. Conditions in red at the top of each pic. As the charts show, the M62 was running the 3.2" pulley. The TVS is running the same pulley Dave and Jim are running and it's the same pulley that I was using on the dyno I posted in the beginning and is the pulley diameter for the stock compression motors (recall that I was running low compression though)...

Notice the boost levels and notice the charge temps. More boost with lower charge temps. An interesting thing that's hard to show on these logs is the temp recovery. The TVS always drops in temps once the throttle is closed. Even after three hours of driving it goes right back down. Not so with the M62, as it would always raise in temp as the throttle closed and then would stay hot for quite some time. In this case the M62 was still hot from a previous pull and the TVS had just come off it's 6th pull (this was it's 7th in a row) and it always comes from a lower temp... It's simply a better design all around...

Here are some pics. The boost drop in both graphs is the cam change... (Sorry for the slight scale variance- It's a print screen type of thing....)

Best,

Phil

[Chococar]

Phil,

Thanks again for doing this great work and sharing it. A lot of us are quite interested in joining you :-)

A couple of points:

• You say "torque is power". Of course, power = torque x rpm. I think you mean torque causes acceleration (and the feeling of acceleration). Power gets you top speed by overcoming aerodynamic drag (& rolling resistance).
• I assume that the drop in boost pressure results from the different valve timing kicking in and the engine being a more efficient air pump in consuming the output of the supercharger. Does that imply that the rpm at which the valve timing changes should ideally be lower?

Thanks,

Joe

[fzust]

Originally Posted by Chococar

Phil,

Thanks again for doing this great work and sharing it. A lot of us are quite interested in joining you :-)

A couple of points:

• You say "torque is power". Of course, power = torque x rpm. I think you mean torque causes acceleration (and the feeling of acceleration). Power gets you top speed by overcoming aerodynamic drag (& rolling resistance).
• I assume that the drop in boost pressure results from the different valve timing kicking in and the engine being a more efficient air pump in consuming the output of the supercharger. Does that imply that the rpm at which the valve timing changes should ideally be lower?

Thanks,

Joe

Joe, I'll take that question. No it doesn't. Ultimately you tune the crossover to maximize torque & power and make as smooth a transition as possible. Depending on VE and flow dynamics etc, this may not equate to smooth transition in boost.

[Bavarian Motorist]

Originally Posted by turbophil

Notice the boost levels and notice the charge temps. More boost with lower charge temps. An interesting thing that's hard to show on these logs is the temp recovery. The TVS always drops in temps once the throttle is closed. Even after three hours of driving it goes right back down. Not so with the M62, as it would always raise in temp as the throttle closed and then would stay hot for quite some time. In this case the M62 was still hot from a previous pull and the TVS had just come off it's 6th pull (this was it's 7th in a row) and it always comes from a lower temp... It's simply a better design all around...

Best,

Phil

Phil, I think Dave's dyno pulls show this beautifully. On his 5th run in 21 minutes, he had his best pull.


Anyone who's never been to a dyno: That's literally one pull after another with maybe 2 minutes in between to check out the data. Every time I've dynoed with MP62 cars, we had to give it a good 5-10 minutes of cool down time before we went at it again.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist

Phil, I think Dave's dyno pulls show this beautifully. On his 5th run in 21 minutes, he had his best pull.

I actually only went to do 3 pulls that day, but as I mentioned, the sniffer blew out on the first 2, so we rushed to get them done in my 30 minute time window. As it turned out, this was a great demonstration of the soak resistance of the TVS...the MP62 would have been blazing.

Originally Posted by turbophil

Dave's car laid down 180wtq and 280whp with this setup and a pretty generic tune I sent him from a few states away...Yes, there is more boost (~2 psi more than the 62 as seen below)

On my car, it was just a pinch over ONE PSI more average boost for that huge power gain. Also note the A/Fs are much more conservative/safer. Excellent work Phil!

[E.D.]

I updated the overview of supercharge kits for the Elise again:
Overview supercharge/turbocharge solutions

I nicknamed the TVS kit the BOE TVS kit for now, assumed a price for the kit and it looks like we may have a new winner pending actual BOE pricing and an actual dyno for the BOE flash tune.

[LordZ]

Phil, you got a dyno, temp, and boost levels for a stock motor running it? If so what temp gauge and sensors are they using on it?

You and dave both dropped compression correct? Not sure I recall what all is on Jim's though.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by LordZ

You and dave both dropped compression correct? Not sure I recall what all is on Jim's though.

Jim and I are running stock compression.