Lotus v's Aftermarket Supercharging

[fpitas]

Originally Posted by turbophil

Finally, I'm not sure measuring parasitic drive-line loss in terms of a percentage is the best way to do it. I don't believe drive-line hp consumption has linear relationship to fwhp as a flat percentage would imply...

All the Best,

Phil

Agreed with the rest of what you said, and wanted to comment that I'd guess the drivetrain loss is probably a fixed amount plus a percentage of the engine hp.

[Jean-Paul]

i am so confused with all these options and i honestly can't choose which one is better as far as reliability is concerned. bear also in mind that most yoda's are failling in 45.000km and talk about superchargers !!!

i am so scared with all the NA engines that go BOOM that i cant really say supercharging them is a good solution.

howver, i cant really tell why lotus is producing 2 eleven or exige 240 charged intercooled though version for track use only. don't these enginnes suffer from reliability ? and if the intercooler is the only problem can't we just install a water to oil cooler in our engines and be the same as far as in temperatures is concerned and thus reliability ???

[John4378]

Originally Posted by Jean-Paul

i am so confused with all these options and i honestly can't choose which one is better as far as reliability is concerned. bear also in mind that most yoda's are failling in 45.000km and talk about superchargers !!!

i am so scared with all the NA engines that go BOOM that i cant really say supercharging them is a good solution.

howver, i cant really tell why lotus is producing 2 eleven or exige 240 charged intercooled though version for track use only. don't these enginnes suffer from reliability ? and if the intercooler is the only problem can't we just install a water to oil cooler in our engines and be the same as far as in temperatures is concerned and thus reliability ???

the 2ZZ Toyota engines are pretty much bulletproof. Which "yoda" engine are you referring to? I haven't heard of any N/A 2ZZ Toyota engines blowing up under 45,000km (~27,300 miles). If that was the case, there'd be a lot of warranty claims given the 3 year / 36,000 mile given on the drivetrain.

[Jean-Paul]

i am reading in pistoneheads.com some guys there had the engine gone off in around 30k miles. i have another instance in greece athens from a guy with an 111R. there are many more cases which i am not aware of. i don't know how the guys in the USA are doing but i am pretty scared with this engine. i am stock for the moment but i am seriously thinking of buying the BWR kit ...but now i am too scared even with the stock engine...

p.s. i am not thinking of ever selling my car so i want to keep it in good/healthy condition !!!

[John4378]

It may be a case of running too much boost, among other things.

There are numerous Sector111 Katana SC's running around the streets/tracks of the U.S. with very few of them blowing up (personally I don't recall reading about any failing).

The stock 2ZZ engine can only handle about 10 psi of boost before you start running into reliability issues. This can be avoided by going to a built motor (new crank, pistons, sleeves, cams, valves, etc...).

So, while you have heard about engines blowing up, it is important to know WHY they blew up. What were the circumstances surrounding each event?

[Blacktan]

Originally Posted by John4378

So, while you have heard about engines blowing up, it is important to know WHY they blew up. What were the circumstances surrounding each event?

+1

[Jean-Paul]

things are so complicated why they blown off. most of them are second hand vehicles and hence the owner didn't know what the previous owner did to the car. but again it seems to me to little miles for an engine to blow !!!

in one case, the guy's car was just received from a toyota service and after some miles it went off....

in what kind of boost do the kits of bwr and katana work ?

[lt0302]

When I was stationed in EU I had something like that happen to me but it was fuel related. I used racing fuel which was by far higher octane than recommended ,then I got on the Autobahn and put the pedal to the metal it was great until the engine "blew up".........the damage was the usual headgasket usually the weakest point.......the car was an EVO VIII with 503hp at the wheels so you can put on all kinds of mods but you got to make sure that you beef up the week points especially if you are going way beyond what that engine was supposed to make!!
My buddy has a R/C Supercharger on his Elise and have driven it at the max from Wurzburg to Vienna on more then one occasion and it was, and is fine........I think he uses the Super Plus Plus which I think is the 108 octane ball park........
Andy

[shay2nak]

Originally Posted by Westrock

Where did a 2008 dyno at 191HP? I haven't see a "S" dyno less then 200HP.

mine. turns out the dyno is reading ~24% loss

was ~195whp
with gotham 220whp

and I'm sure if Chili Red dyno'd his before Gotham it would be below 200. Well the Katana that he took dyno'd below 200 and that is an Exige S equivalent.

[Devious]

Originally Posted by lt0302

When I was stationed in EU I had something like that happen to me but it was fuel related.

Very likely. I have been working recently with a large marine engine manufacturer concerning CE certification of engines in Europe. By far, the biggest issue is fuel. Since the EU countries use RON octane numbers, the MON octane of the fuels available varies widely. While this may not be an issue on some cars, engines with forced induction, or that are heavily loaded, are having fits with the inconsistant fuels with the same RON numbers.

[glueShoe]

Ok, here are _actual_ dyno results to mull over. This is MY first dyno, and I've posted this on other threads too. Since I too was curious and looked Everywhere for Elise SC dyno results and came up empty, I'm posting these results where it seems applicable. I'm giving you the DRF files too, enjoy.

[Bavarian Motorist]

Originally Posted by richw350

Isn't the 2008 SC different as well?

As I understand it:

2008 Elise SC = M45 SC
Katana & BWR = M62 SC

Bingo

[cpeteod]

Originally Posted by TheViper

If Lotus HP and torque numbers are at the flywheel and BWR and Katana, all using similar superchargers are at the wheels, why the difference, what am I missing?

Elise 2008 SC 217 hp, 156 ft/lb torque at flywheel -
15% drivetrain loss = 184 hp, 132 ft/lb torque at wheels

BWR supercharged 223 hp, 146 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 262 hp, 172 ft/lb torque at flywheel

Katana supercharged 216 hp, 142 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 254 hp, 167 ft/lb torque at flywheel

Question. Your numbers above i think may be off. I have never seen one make over 210 hp. We did my stock car on a dyno dynamics and i came in at 174hp. I only have stage 2 and intake is a K&N. The other supercharger kits were below 210. I know people will jump all over this post. But fact is 2 basic stock cars on the same dyno and the same day did 174hp and 175hp. The 2 supercharger kits did under 210.

[Ol'Racer]

Originally Posted by TheViper

If Lotus HP and torque numbers are at the flywheel and BWR and Katana, all using similar superchargers are at the wheels, why the difference, what am I missing?

Elise 2008 SC 217 hp, 156 ft/lb torque at flywheel -
15% drivetrain loss = 184 hp, 132 ft/lb torque at wheels

BWR supercharged 223 hp, 146 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 262 hp, 172 ft/lb torque at flywheel

Katana supercharged 216 hp, 142 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 254 hp, 167 ft/lb torque at flywheel

I believe it should read like this...by the way Lotus seems to mess with their figures.

If the 2008 SC Elise puts down 217 hp...they really mean "RWHP" which would mean the FLYWHEEL hp is 255.29 fwhp. Less than the BWR and more than the Katana.

Now take your 15% off of the 255 and you'll come up with 217. I always was confused with my Porsches which stated DIN hp. Anyway...dat's the story on dat one.

You can't confuse FLYWHEEL HP with REAR WHEEL HP even though LOTUS LIKES TO publish confusing/tricky figures.

[ChrisH]

Sorry, but you have it wrong. Lotus is specifying flywheel HP of 218 HP (current lotuscars.com web page value), not rear wheel. The MP45 based Lotus SC adds very little to the power (just 15%). It is a very conservative boost, which is no surprise since there is no intercooler for it. It appears the dyno plot that was shown here was corrected to the flywheel already.

I want a CARB approved supercharger, and it seems that the Lotus kit is the only way to get it. But, the Lotus MP45 upgrade is so little extra power that it doesn't seem worth the money.

[Ol'Racer]

Originally Posted by ChrisH

Sorry, but you have it wrong. Lotus is specifying flywheel HP of 218 HP (current lotuscars.com web page value), not rear wheel.

Exactly my point, they don't say flywheel they just say hp. (what kind of hp...rw, fw, brake?) You're making an assumption without Lotus clearly defining what they are talking about. They're leaving it open to interpretation. So, until then...it's JMO...which may or may not be wrong. Could you be wrong?

They don't say RWHP...does that mean it could or could not be? The figures never make sense. If you check their P/W ratio the car shouldn't be as fast as it is in the time trial tests. As far as the dyno of the SC on these pages, is it RWHP or Flywheel? Most dyno figures are concerned with RWHP not FW.

If the figures are rwhp then...figure it out.

I've seen all the figures and read it in the magazines, and until I see a dyno that proves it, I'll have to stick to what figures make sense. Specifically, the FI figures.

[Aedo]

Originally Posted by ChrisH

Sorry, but you have it wrong. Lotus is specifying flywheel HP of 218 HP (current lotuscars.com web page value), not rear wheel. The MP45 based Lotus SC adds very little to the power (just 15%). It is a very conservative boost, which is no surprise since there is no intercooler for it. It appears the dyno plot that was shown here was corrected to the flywheel already.

I want a CARB approved supercharger, and it seems that the Lotus kit is the only way to get it. But, the Lotus MP45 upgrade is so little extra power that it doesn't seem worth the money.

As I understand it the desire for S/C is more to fatten the torque curve and improve driveability than to boost ultimate HP

[sleepe]

Originally Posted by richw350

Isn't the 2008 SC different as well?

As I understand it:

2008 Elise SC = M45 SC
Katana & BWR = M62 SC

correct

[sleepe]

Originally Posted by Ol'Racer

Exactly my point, they don't say flywheel they just say hp. (what kind of hp...rw, fw, brake?) You're making an assumption without Lotus clearly defining what they are talking about. They're leaving it open to interpretation. So, until then...it's JMO...which may or may not be wrong. Could you be wrong?

They don't say RWHP...does that mean it could or could not be? The figures never make sense. If you check their P/W ratio the car shouldn't be as fast as it is in the time trial tests. As far as the dyno of the SC on these pages, is it RWHP or Flywheel? Most dyno figures are concerned with RWHP not FW.

If the figures are rwhp then...figure it out.

I've seen all the figures and read it in the magazines, and until I see a dyno that proves it, I'll have to stick to what figures make sense. Specifically, the FI figures.

For marketing purposes alone, ALL automakers advertise hp/tq. numbers from the flywheel. Think about it?

-Robert

[sleepe]

Originally Posted by TheViper

If Lotus HP and torque numbers are at the flywheel and BWR and Katana, all using similar superchargers are at the wheels, why the difference, what am I missing?

Elise 2008 SC 217 hp, 156 ft/lb torque at flywheel -
15% drivetrain loss = 184 hp, 132 ft/lb torque at wheels

BWR supercharged 223 hp, 146 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 262 hp, 172 ft/lb torque at flywheel

Katana supercharged 216 hp, 142 ft/lb torque at wheels -
15% drivetrain gain = 254 hp, 167 ft/lb torque at flywheel

The 2008 Elise SC using the MP45 is almost comparable to the NA Elise. If this is the SC Lotus is offering, forget about it....waste of $$$$$

NA '06 Elise: 171 hp 119 ft/lbs tq. (both figures are sometimes higher)
SC '08 Elise: 184 hp 132 ft/lbs. tq.