They probably would have charged 3500 if they went with the 1.6L whipple and then no one would have bought it.

I still think the M90 swap is feasible. All you would really need is new mounting holes drilled and a throttle body adapter plate. Luckily i picked up a rebuilt M90 off of a GTP today for 250 and will go forward with this little project.

 

hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahah

so your saying you put down 226 WHP in a stock redline on a mustang dyno

 

This is a very interesting thread indeed. My brain is bloated with new info and jargen I can't understand yet.
So this 1.2 L blower won't be making the 350whp, hm?
People have been talking of the TVS as well, so it is something I wouldn't mind seeing.

Going back to the TS: Making that much WHP on a stock car is excellent, but, i think for 3 grand, a bit more should be added. The blower spins at less RPMs than the eaton, though it creates less heat and is more efficient.

So my question is, since the 1.2L doesn't spin fast enough, would the 1.6L be just as safe/reliable, and make more HP and put less PSI on the pistons? 20 is an awful lot of pressure to place on thos pistons. And what of the returnless fuel rail? Wouldn't that have to be upgraded as well?

 

The 1.6L has even a lower max spin limit is 13K but it flows more than the 1.2L. I dont know if it would make more HP or not, im assuming it would.

 

the 1.6 i think would be to much for a application like ours, i mean you have 4.6 pony's that run 1.7l kenne bell's

 

Hm, I see. That makes sense. So it seems that the TS is definitely not what I expected. It just shows I have a lot of learning to do still. It is a very good setup, and I am glad this setup was made, I just need to learn a bit (lot) more. Thanks for the thread LSJ. This was very informative. + rep.

 

i would not give up on it just yet if some how rebel could make forged rotors so you could spin it faster it would be a ok piece but from what i hear forged rotors are crazy $$$$

 

Seems to me the Kenny-Belle unit would be/have been a much better choice due to its forged components...

 

Hmmm....this is another thing that could be considered.

 

yeah but kenne bell will only sell there blowers in a kit form.

 

This is true. The only way I finally convinced Kenne Bell to sell me their 1.33L Jeep blower, which by the way is the perfect size and specs for what we need, was to tell them I had a Jeep that sucked up crud while wheeling and it destroyed the blower. Mase, Rebel, and I certainly could not call them up everytime though to order a new blower with the same excuse!

 

hahaha thats funny. It would be so easy if they just soldthe f**king thing seperately

 

or if they just made a kit for our car....

 

Dyno Test ran at Murillo Motorsports in San Antonio
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TayaT-G6A14

 

Stop trying to seek an even larger blower since the Whipple 1.3L will provide as many as 2.6 times the cfm needed to provide extra boost to this small LSJ ! All we need is more efficiency. The adiabatic efficiency of the whipple is around 64% at high boost ... which is not that much but is surely more than the stock M62. We'll see how it goes on the dyno ...

 

m90 isn't going to provide anywhere near the same gains as the twinscrew. it's already been decided that it's a waste of time.

 

Wow. Eight page and first time someone mentioned PSI in a thread about using smaller pullies to overspin the blower and putting out more than 20 psi which to me would be the most I would want. I would be more worried about popping head gaskets left and right with a smaller pully than overspinning the blower.

 

silly question, short of none, how much overspinning we think we could get away with with the 1200ax blower before serious reliability issues arise?

if we have been overspinning the m62 this whole time, whats to say you cant do that to the ts blower?

 

its rotors spin closer together so it has a greater chance to sieze becuase of it being overspun.

 

i follow... so forged rotors?

 

im enjoying the fact that people think bigger is better.

one must make a motor more efficient first. then worry about force feeding it later.

think of it like this. you have a uncut potato, you are trying to cram it into a 3 year olds mouth. this is a bad idea.

 

That is forced ingestion ...

 

which indirectly relates this this thread, people trying to cram another 1.6 liters of air down a 2.0 liter motor.

 

"Roots blowers are good reliable units, but the twin-screw is a much more efficient design. And that's why Ford has gone to a twin-screw on the new GT," stated Jim Bell of Kenne Bell Inc.

A screw blower looks similar from the outside, but the internals are completely different. With a twin-screw there are male lobes that intermesh with female lobes. Both sets rotate inward and as air is drawn in it is compressed and "screwed" forward towards the front of the case. According to Bell, rotor speed can approach 24,000 rpm.

Bell also said that by design the Roots is about 30 percent less efficient. Therefore, it must be 30 percent larger to pump the same amount of air. And larger blowers take more energy to turn so there are greater parasitic losses and more heat.

Because of the way each of the three blowers arrives at making boost, there are great debates as to which system is more efficient. The generation and dissipation of heat within a blower system has to do with thermodynamics (the physics of relationships between heat and other forms of energy) and this is quite the complicated subject.

Any time you compress air its temperature rises. You can't avoid this--it's one of the laws of physics. You also have heat generated by the blower itself due to internal friction, or more technically, by the work necessary to get the air from its natural pressure up to the desired boost pressure ..."

 

Kenne Bell doesnt know what he is talking about... Roots are typically more Volumetrically efficent than a Twin Screw. However, they typically do generate more heat and THIS is where your extra power loss is coming from..

You can flow equal amounts of air with a roots or a screw of similar size.. actually probably more from a roots...

Anyhow.. i'd love to continue arguing.. but its pointless

TVS is where its at.. believe it or not.. i dont care..