rx7 vert camden supercharger dyno
#101
Originally Posted by snub disphenoid
I'm actually considering doing that(20B project = $20k at LEAST, remember). I'm interested in going standalone, porting the motor, and installing a custom intake manifold with a new throttle body. I think that wouldn't be too hard to fabricate, as you don't have to put anything on the intake mani. except for the air temperature sensor (injectors go under the charger, remember) and a custom bracket for the throttle cable.
#102
Originally Posted by BlaCkPlaGUE
Theres alot more to it than that. Injector position and angle is incredibly important, let alone how long the pipes are, how thick, etc. I'd read up on that **** first before you start whipping **** together. Just to at least get some idea on what to look for.
#103
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
A Whipple 2200. Seriously. I've setup various eaton units and a whipple, and it's just a lot better efficiency. I just don't believe the efficiency of this unit is capable with the common belief people have for it. For a couple of numbers, an eaton m90 on a stock port motor using the stock TB will put out around 270rwhp w/213ft-lb torque, the whipple was last reported back to me at 320hp, I only got to design that and lay it out, didn't get to tune. Now, what is curious to me is the following. A) he's running 11psi with minimal injectors and only getting 171hp, now, even with tuning, it's not going to force any more air into that engine, and the camden unit isn't meant for anymore than that... Now, when you throw a different throttle body, do some serious porting and run a standalone that numbers going to be quite a bit better, how much? Codeblue can tell us! (What's your boost like if you don't mind me asking, similar to what snub posted, RPM to boost?)
Does weight have anything to do with his car sonic? 2nd gens weigh so much more than 1st. I drove home in Atkins 2nd gen supercharged car from sevenstock last year when it was running at its best, and I was very impressed.
Wouldnt the rotary world be boring if we had the same setups
#104
Originally Posted by M.C. Language
also remember this is a 6 port engine.. so make sure you take it up to high revs on your next dyno tune, doesnt the actuators for his 5and6ports open 1 at around 3500rpm then the second one at around 5500? thats where all the power should be. driving a 6 port motor without working ports is just brutal. its like taking the Vtech out of a honda! NO top end at all! so if like everyone is saying, the SC delivers low end torque, then he has those ports to open up and help out his high end. if this girl you guys are talking about hit 210 on a 4 port, then he should be able to beat that!!? sorry if im mistaken.
I think he will get great pleasure out of his car with some more mods.
#105
Originally Posted by snub disphenoid
I'm actually considering doing that(20B project = $20k at LEAST, remember). I'm interested in going standalone, porting the motor, and installing a custom intake manifold with a new throttle body. I think that wouldn't be too hard to fabricate, as you don't have to put anything on the intake mani. except for the air temperature sensor (injectors go under the charger, remember) and a custom bracket for the throttle cable.
#106
well SonicRaT. in the case of your friends thinking they can get 275 by just bolting on, i'm glad you changed there minds. cause how ever they thought that, well it is false. cause camden web page states around 176. so with the thread starters UNTUNED dyno, he's where camden says he should be. if i bought something knowing what it gives and it gives me that and maybe a little more.........well, i'd be happy. and i would expect others to happy for me. but obviously this is a public forum and everybody's got opinions(you know how it goes) and most of them stink. so instead of being happy for someone and saying good job, hope you get a little more, they just gotta let the whole place stink up. i'm interested in what he pulls. and hopefully he's a good sport about it and still posts the results.
#107
Super Raterhater
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Originally Posted by kettlman
well SonicRaT. in the case of your friends thinking they can get 275 by just bolting on, i'm glad you changed there minds. cause how ever they thought that, well it is false. cause camden web page states around 176. so with the thread starters UNTUNED dyno, he's where camden says he should be. if i bought something knowing what it gives and it gives me that and maybe a little more.........well, i'd be happy. and i would expect others to happy for me. but obviously this is a public forum and everybody's got opinions(you know how it goes) and most of them stink. so instead of being happy for someone and saying good job, hope you get a little more, they just gotta let the whole place stink up. i'm interested in what he pulls. and hopefully he's a good sport about it and still posts the results.
#108
going back on the dyno today
will post the slip to ya all later. gil, ps i agree with ya sonic, ive done everything they have told me to do with that sc, soooo we shall see later today.
Last edited by RX7FROMCAL; 12-08-04 at 12:09 PM.
#109
Super Raterhater
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Nice look graph codeblue, nice to know that it almost maintains perfectly the curve of the n/a, just gives it the little extra. Was expecting to see maybe a bit more torque in the lower RPM range, but still damned nice.
#110
Originally Posted by Aaron Cake
It's amazing that every thread about this kit becomes one huge complaint about the price. 90% of the posts here are people whinning about cost. Drop it.
We all know it's expensive. It costs TIME and MONEY for a company to develop products like this. You ever wonder why people aren't making parts for these cars? Well, that's the reason.
Obviously, this kit is NOT targetted at the average 2nd gen owner.
We all know it's expensive. It costs TIME and MONEY for a company to develop products like this. You ever wonder why people aren't making parts for these cars? Well, that's the reason.
Obviously, this kit is NOT targetted at the average 2nd gen owner.
#112
In my opinion if I owned a 2nd gen car I would not supercharge it as much as I would a 1st gen. I would prefer to go turbo vs the supercharger. The weight on a 2nd gen is much more than on a 1st. As for cost. Its no object when you want to be different.
How can you say just a little power added. Ive gained over 110hp with my setup. Thats just with 5lbs boost.
In time I will gain more if I decide not to have my car as a daily driver. As Im sure RX7FROMCAL will want as he gets use to his blower and wants more.
How can you say just a little power added. Ive gained over 110hp with my setup. Thats just with 5lbs boost.
In time I will gain more if I decide not to have my car as a daily driver. As Im sure RX7FROMCAL will want as he gets use to his blower and wants more.
#113
Will you also tell us how much you spent on the WHOLE setup, including your injectors, and microtech and all the other little things in addition to the $3k supercharger. So what HP are you upto now? Also your 110hp increase does include other mods such as exhaust and intake. I could make much more power for less. I probably do, I just need to take my car to the dyno.
#114
Super Raterhater
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Well, that's not really a valid statement. The setup you have should easily make 180 on an n/a without the charger, so you can't really say that. And who you callin fat!? My s4 sport weighs in at 2420lbs, i thought I was doin good damnit!
#115
Man you guys shoot anything down which is new. You wonder why new parts are scarce and expensive.
I think a SC FC would be cool. I planned on doing this until I blew my NA motor.
BTW 3k for 170+RWHP isn't too shabby.
I've spent over 6k on my turbo conversion. As of now I've dynoed at 180 RWhp/tq.
Now a downside to a supercharger is that it's more of a fixed rate HP while turbo's can generally be over boosted much easier to high HP levels. Although a SC does have a more predictable curve to work with.
I think a SC FC would be cool. I planned on doing this until I blew my NA motor.
BTW 3k for 170+RWHP isn't too shabby.
I've spent over 6k on my turbo conversion. As of now I've dynoed at 180 RWhp/tq.
Now a downside to a supercharger is that it's more of a fixed rate HP while turbo's can generally be over boosted much easier to high HP levels. Although a SC does have a more predictable curve to work with.
#116
Originally Posted by Net Seven
Will you also tell us how much you spent on the WHOLE setup, including your injectors, and microtech and all the other little things in addition to the $3k supercharger. So what HP are you upto now? Also your 110hp increase does include other mods such as exhaust and intake. I could make much more power for less. I probably do, I just need to take my car to the dyno.
Saying that they give hardly any power is wrong to say. They may not give as much power pursay as a turbo, but different mods for different power.
I know someone that has a 13b 9in supercharger that does over 600hp. Not bad for a blower. It is a Camden blower.
I have decided after all this to put the 11lb boost on my car just for a Dyno to see what I can get as far as HP is concerned. I will try for next week to see if it can be done. Or right after Christmas.
#118
I would like to hope that people that have DONE the work will post with their experiences, but guessing at how much a project will cost to get done is just pure speculation at this point.
Just because you can get it done due to your resources doesn't mean everyone else will...
Seriously, can we drop the bitching and let the people who have direct experiences post?
There's too much crap in here that muddies the intent of this thread.
-Ted
Just because you can get it done due to your resources doesn't mean everyone else will...
Seriously, can we drop the bitching and let the people who have direct experiences post?
There's too much crap in here that muddies the intent of this thread.
-Ted
#119
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Well, that's not really a valid statement. The setup you have should easily make 180 on an n/a without the charger, so you can't really say that. And who you callin fat!? My s4 sport weighs in at 2420lbs, i thought I was doin good damnit!
#120
final tune on dyno
dyno at 173rwhp 139.86 torque tuned fuel ratio perfect after we were done, this is the best its going to get, with what i have. next to pull the cat and run a straight pipe, that should help. well here ya go people tear it up . cya all the pic on the left is the first run , the one on the right was the last.[/img]http://www.cardomain.com/id/rx7fromcali[img] click this page 8 for bigger pic.
#123
Originally Posted by RX7FROMCAL
it doesnt require a inner cooler!! its a superchager, not a turbo.
Any boosted application requires an intercooler eventually!!
The more boost you run, the higher your intake temps will get and the less power you'll make. If you think just because it's a supercharger it doesn't require an intercooler then well, fine don't do it.
If you run a turbo at low enough boost it doesn't require an intercooler, just like a supercharger at low enough boost. But as far as I heard 8psi on the camden unit is about as much as you should go without some type of cooling, either air to air, or air to water, whatever.
#124
I would have assumed that an SC wouldn't need one do to the fact that it is not directly or indirectly interacting with the exhaust.
Why would the SC air even get hot? This is a serious question, as I can understnd that on a Turbo Exhaust gas is spinning the turbine blades, thus heat is being transferred to the turbo housing directly.
anybody?
Why would the SC air even get hot? This is a serious question, as I can understnd that on a Turbo Exhaust gas is spinning the turbine blades, thus heat is being transferred to the turbo housing directly.
anybody?