possibly twincharging...
Thread Starter
Joined: 08-24-10
Posts: 12,841
Likes: 2
From: Warren, IN
Thread Starter
Joined: 08-24-10
Posts: 12,841
Likes: 2
From: Warren, IN
i drew this up to make sure I understand it right

but then I saw this image where there is no intercooler

but then I saw this image where there is no intercooler
Last edited by tylerjclance; Aug 13, 2012 at 11:41 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
I have never done this myself, though I would absolutely love to at some point, BUT, from what I understand, HEAT is the biggest issue-- compressing air automatically creates heat, and you are talking about compressing it twice-- plan on intercooling. ALL the cooling mods under the TVS, and as much as you dare with the turbo--I'd go air to water under the turbo.
Kangol Riot I belive did this and it was a complete waste of money, It was pretty awesome but they constantley had issues with Tuning and I believe he was around 400 WHP. But he put litterally Thousands of dollars into that build and at the end it just would have made more sense to Turbo Swap it, IMO. I am aware of the cool factor tho and do LOVE the idea myself.....If you could make it work that would be VERY Impressive.
did u try contacting zzp and see if they would sell u wut u would u need? i tried once but i don't think i ever got an answer. it is an epic cool factor and if u pull it off i may be borrowing ur build list. lol
I had dreams of building it like this.... Includes mod list btw
YouTube - 398whp Cobalt SS Twincharged
YouTube - 398whp Cobalt SS Twincharged
I think you have a misunderstanding of how a twincharged setup works. the sc is only for the low end, once the turbo spools up the bypass on the sc opens up so the sc is "free spinning.". From there the turbo takes over. With that said 400 is not obtainable with only 8 psi
I think you have a misunderstanding of how a twincharged setup works. the sc is only for the low end, once the turbo spools up the bypass on the sc opens up so the sc is "free spinning.". From there the turbo takes over. With that said 400 is not obtainable with only 8 psi
"parallel", as you describe above-- where the turbo is providing all your peak power and the blower is essentially "wasted" as soon as the turbo spools
or
"series", where both are run all the time, and boost is compounded.
the drawing provided above seemed to indicated a "series" setup. Seems like tuning would be FAR simpler with the "series" setup
Kangol Riot I belive did this and it was a complete waste of money, It was pretty awesome but they constantley had issues with Tuning and I believe he was around 400 WHP. But he put litterally Thousands of dollars into that build and at the end it just would have made more sense to Turbo Swap it, IMO. I am aware of the cool factor tho and do LOVE the idea myself.....If you could make it work that would be VERY Impressive.
Thread Starter
Joined: 08-24-10
Posts: 12,841
Likes: 2
From: Warren, IN
hmmn. well the idea seems like it could work.. and I believe it can be done for half the cost of turbo swapping.. we'll see. . .
I'm just making sure I understand how it's setup though..
Air intake into the turbo, out to the intercooler, into the supercharger, into the engine.. out of the exhaust mani and into the turbo to spool it up...
yes?
It would be compounding the boost.. 8psi on a turbo along with 15psi on the supercharger.. that's 23 twincharged PSI..
15psi on a tvs makes more power than 15psi on an m62..
I feel that 23 is a safe amount that won't create a ridiculously amount of heat.
I'm just making sure I understand how it's setup though..
Air intake into the turbo, out to the intercooler, into the supercharger, into the engine.. out of the exhaust mani and into the turbo to spool it up...
yes?
It would be compounding the boost.. 8psi on a turbo along with 15psi on the supercharger.. that's 23 twincharged PSI..
15psi on a tvs makes more power than 15psi on an m62..
I feel that 23 is a safe amount that won't create a ridiculously amount of heat.
you will probably need to retune for every season if you twin charge, and probably won't be able to drive it in the rain if you tune it in the dry. the tune is very sensitive as the sc has to be perfectly balanced with the turbo. as the density of the air changes, the efficiency of the tc and sc are affected at different rates. In theory you could probably do it with enough time, but you will probably be tuning the damn thing for a year until you could get it to accept all conditions. this is not a setup you would want for a daily driver.
Also you can't just add up the boost pressures between the turbo and sc. The amount of boost created by the sc depends completely on the pressure of the intake charge after the turbo (in case of a series setup), and the amount of boost created by both the turbo and sc depends on the pressure of the intake plenum (in case of a parallel setup). the supercharger will not increase the boost as much receiving air at 8psi as it will receiving air at atmospheric pressure (for the sc in a series setup) nor will the turbo or sc create as much pressure trying to force more air into a plenum that has additional pressure being added by another source (in case of a parallel setup). in other words, the volumetric efficiency is not isobaric in either case.
just to make things clear, a turbo doesn't make a car last longer than a supercharger. it produces far more heat than a supercharger, and the system is more complex thus resulting in more room for error. a turbo spins at much higher rpms and experiences much higher temperatures and thermal gradients.
Also you can't just add up the boost pressures between the turbo and sc. The amount of boost created by the sc depends completely on the pressure of the intake charge after the turbo (in case of a series setup), and the amount of boost created by both the turbo and sc depends on the pressure of the intake plenum (in case of a parallel setup). the supercharger will not increase the boost as much receiving air at 8psi as it will receiving air at atmospheric pressure (for the sc in a series setup) nor will the turbo or sc create as much pressure trying to force more air into a plenum that has additional pressure being added by another source (in case of a parallel setup). in other words, the volumetric efficiency is not isobaric in either case.
just to make things clear, a turbo doesn't make a car last longer than a supercharger. it produces far more heat than a supercharger, and the system is more complex thus resulting in more room for error. a turbo spins at much higher rpms and experiences much higher temperatures and thermal gradients.
Last edited by SaberD; Aug 13, 2012 at 05:15 PM.
Just a heads up yeah it was cool being twincharged. However regret it 100% since I would have made way more power more reliably for less money for just going straight turbo. Also once you go twincharged you will not hear the whine anymore since you intake will now be a charge pipe. If you go for it good luck! You can check out my mod list. A lot of the parts in my list you won’t need since I went all out and some that are not in my list you will need because I was remote mount twincharged. If you go for it good luck though! Any other questions you have let me know and Ill try and help you.
Last edited by KangolRiot; Aug 14, 2012 at 05:28 AM.
I don't see how it could possibly come out cheaper in the end, as you need everything that the supercharger requires, AND everything that the turbo requires.
I was taught that boost is compounded in twincharging by MULTIPLYING the pressure ratios.
for example-- say your naturally aspirated engine makes 125 h.p. and you want 400. you need a 3.2 pressure ratio.
so let's say we stick a supercharger on and make 250 h.p.-- that's a 2.0 pressure ratio.
ok, now we want twincharge, so let's say we want each power adder to do half the work--the square root of 3.2 = 1.7888543..... we'll just call it 1.79.
so, the turbo compresses the air 1.79 times, and feeds it to the supercharger, which then forces 1.79 times the air into the intake than the engine can consume. 1.79 x 1.79 = 3.2041
if one atmosphere of pressure is 14.7 psi, then 3.2 atmospheres would be 47.04 psi, or theoretically you would need 32.34 pounds of boost to go from 125 h.p. to 400 h.p.
all of this is fine and dandy, but takes no account of temperature rise from boost, timing, detonation, atmospheric changes, fuel choice, and a million other things, but it gives a rough idea, and hey, it's fun to build stuff on paper!
I was taught that boost is compounded in twincharging by MULTIPLYING the pressure ratios.
for example-- say your naturally aspirated engine makes 125 h.p. and you want 400. you need a 3.2 pressure ratio.
so let's say we stick a supercharger on and make 250 h.p.-- that's a 2.0 pressure ratio.
ok, now we want twincharge, so let's say we want each power adder to do half the work--the square root of 3.2 = 1.7888543..... we'll just call it 1.79.
so, the turbo compresses the air 1.79 times, and feeds it to the supercharger, which then forces 1.79 times the air into the intake than the engine can consume. 1.79 x 1.79 = 3.2041
if one atmosphere of pressure is 14.7 psi, then 3.2 atmospheres would be 47.04 psi, or theoretically you would need 32.34 pounds of boost to go from 125 h.p. to 400 h.p.
all of this is fine and dandy, but takes no account of temperature rise from boost, timing, detonation, atmospheric changes, fuel choice, and a million other things, but it gives a rough idea, and hey, it's fun to build stuff on paper!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




