Supercharger Dyno Chart with finished parts, Finally!
05-20-2004, 10:46 PM
#19
Drifting
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Redondo Beach, CA>>>>Atlanta,GA
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everyone for the kind words!
drnick,
You need some wicked power to match that wicked looking shark of yours.
Jim_R,
I am probably going to make another limited (by my time) run of parts soon If so, you'll have to make a decision. I have sold all 11 from the first run. And I have atleast half again that many people waiting on the next. Intrestingly 2 of the most knowledgeable people in the 928 community will be installing my systems on their personal cars. One of these even had a pretty high quality centrifugal kit he could have put on his car but didn't even want it. Additionally there have been 5 928s purchased with the intention to install my system on. This weekend there may be a 6th purchased. 3 of these people had not been interested in owning a 928 before they learned of my system. I wonder if that is helping raise the market value of the 928?
Worried about traction for your 5 speed? Take the extra money and get a set of 18"x11" rear wheels and put a set 295/30/18 tires. They'll fit. One of the most knowledgeable 928s guys around is running these, and he also sells them.
Blau,
Sorry we missed each other, wish you could have been there. Darren was very down to earth and enthuastic about the power the car was making. When you get your system up and running you may want to pay him a visit.
I really like the curves too. The curves are why the centrifugal will never make a 928 auto go as fast as a twin-screw. At 4000 rpms I have 45 HP on them at same, if not less, max boost. In 2nd gear, 4000rpms is 55mph, power right where it maters. There's fable abound of rasing boost for the centrifugals down low then letting it off up high. You can do that. You just can't do it w/o ruining the adiabatic efficency and loosing power up top. Either way the twin-screw wins.
Heinrich.
Pete, Let's get it ON! Mid June is open for me now too. I'm holding on to the wheels for now.
Mike,
You have to say supercharged along with that. I guess the Devek white car has run a faster 1/4 but my 0-60 is a little quicker. It dosen't surprise me that the Devek car is that fast. It has a nice power curve just like mine.
Jim,
.....and when you consider that the twins mentioned are from Sweden.......
Carl,
I appreciate the kind words. Reading of you supercharging your car around 2 years ago was a benchmark that let me know it was possible. You, I and Mark R of Fast, all came up with original designs and I think that deserves a lot of credit.
Hans,
My plan is to supercharge the S4 that I just bought with 216K miles and drive it X country to SITM. I'll then deliver it to a friend in ALT (a different friend than below). So hopefully I will see you in Indiana and at SITM with one of my Supermodels.
Everyone let me introduce 9.28sec. He is a friend of mine in Atl. He visited recently and went to the track with me. It didn't take him long to realize the potential of the 928 and my system. He'll be looking at an 86 this weekend. I have promised him that if he gets it he and I will get the car to do a 10sec 1/4 mile with him having put out less than $10,000 total. When I say total I mean car, supercharger and everything required to go 10.sec. We may have to sell some of the parts removed to lighten the car, but total budget will be under $10,000. And it is not that he is on a budget. As far as I can tell he could pay cash for a Carrera GT. It's just the sport in doing it for less, gives more surprise factor and bragging rights.
Thanks Warren, and you'll be there soon too.
Andy K
drnick,
You need some wicked power to match that wicked looking shark of yours.
Jim_R,
I am probably going to make another limited (by my time) run of parts soon If so, you'll have to make a decision. I have sold all 11 from the first run. And I have atleast half again that many people waiting on the next. Intrestingly 2 of the most knowledgeable people in the 928 community will be installing my systems on their personal cars. One of these even had a pretty high quality centrifugal kit he could have put on his car but didn't even want it. Additionally there have been 5 928s purchased with the intention to install my system on. This weekend there may be a 6th purchased. 3 of these people had not been interested in owning a 928 before they learned of my system. I wonder if that is helping raise the market value of the 928?
Worried about traction for your 5 speed? Take the extra money and get a set of 18"x11" rear wheels and put a set 295/30/18 tires. They'll fit. One of the most knowledgeable 928s guys around is running these, and he also sells them.
Blau,
Sorry we missed each other, wish you could have been there. Darren was very down to earth and enthuastic about the power the car was making. When you get your system up and running you may want to pay him a visit.
I really like the curves too. The curves are why the centrifugal will never make a 928 auto go as fast as a twin-screw. At 4000 rpms I have 45 HP on them at same, if not less, max boost. In 2nd gear, 4000rpms is 55mph, power right where it maters. There's fable abound of rasing boost for the centrifugals down low then letting it off up high. You can do that. You just can't do it w/o ruining the adiabatic efficency and loosing power up top. Either way the twin-screw wins.
Heinrich.Pete, Let's get it ON! Mid June is open for me now too. I'm holding on to the wheels for now.
Mike,
You have to say supercharged along with that. I guess the Devek white car has run a faster 1/4 but my 0-60 is a little quicker. It dosen't surprise me that the Devek car is that fast. It has a nice power curve just like mine.
Jim,
.....and when you consider that the twins mentioned are from Sweden.......
Carl,
I appreciate the kind words. Reading of you supercharging your car around 2 years ago was a benchmark that let me know it was possible. You, I and Mark R of Fast, all came up with original designs and I think that deserves a lot of credit.
Hans,
My plan is to supercharge the S4 that I just bought with 216K miles and drive it X country to SITM. I'll then deliver it to a friend in ALT (a different friend than below). So hopefully I will see you in Indiana and at SITM with one of my Supermodels.
Everyone let me introduce 9.28sec. He is a friend of mine in Atl. He visited recently and went to the track with me. It didn't take him long to realize the potential of the 928 and my system. He'll be looking at an 86 this weekend. I have promised him that if he gets it he and I will get the car to do a 10sec 1/4 mile with him having put out less than $10,000 total. When I say total I mean car, supercharger and everything required to go 10.sec. We may have to sell some of the parts removed to lighten the car, but total budget will be under $10,000. And it is not that he is on a budget. As far as I can tell he could pay cash for a Carrera GT. It's just the sport in doing it for less, gives more surprise factor and bragging rights.
Thanks Warren, and you'll be there soon too.
Andy K
05-21-2004, 01:25 AM
#22
Rennlist Member
Andy, those are some great results. Not just the numbers, all of your results. 
Just makes me even more curious about your 16V project. 
And welcome 9.28sec, I'm going to go hoist a glass right now to toast your anticipated success in living up to your nick.
Just makes me even more curious about your 16V project. And welcome 9.28sec, I'm going to go hoist a glass right now to toast your anticipated success in living up to your nick.
05-21-2004, 02:24 AM
#23
Inventor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Very cool!
You're in Viper P:WR territory now!
You're in Viper P:WR territory now!
05-21-2004, 04:09 AM
#24
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Monterey Peninsula, CA
Posts: 2,374
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
12 Posts
Hi Andy,
I agree with your comments, and the discussions we had, and my research seems to be proven by your testing. I think that with the efficiency of the compressor, and the coolers, the curve will go upwards. I am in fact sure of it, and there will be no detonation. By my calculation, you will have a higher Density Ratio at a given amount of boost pressure, which is the key to this boost game. The Kleemann guys first proved this to me with their SL55. In any event, the math is there. You should have no problems getting over 500 RWHP at .7 Bar/10lbs if you use 4-5 Laminova cores, and keep the air/fuel at about 12.5-13, and possibly use 2 heater cores instead of one.... Your cooler line pump should be moving more than 10GPM for this much power, or the coolers will lose efficiency.
Ok, going to sleep. Chat soon.
Cheers
I agree with your comments, and the discussions we had, and my research seems to be proven by your testing. I think that with the efficiency of the compressor, and the coolers, the curve will go upwards. I am in fact sure of it, and there will be no detonation. By my calculation, you will have a higher Density Ratio at a given amount of boost pressure, which is the key to this boost game. The Kleemann guys first proved this to me with their SL55. In any event, the math is there. You should have no problems getting over 500 RWHP at .7 Bar/10lbs if you use 4-5 Laminova cores, and keep the air/fuel at about 12.5-13, and possibly use 2 heater cores instead of one.... Your cooler line pump should be moving more than 10GPM for this much power, or the coolers will lose efficiency.
Ok, going to sleep. Chat soon.
Cheers
05-21-2004, 10:10 AM
#25
Three Wheelin'
Andy, excellent numbers!
What happened between run 002 and 012 to cause the jump in horsepower? It does not look like a tuning change since the runs mirror one another identically except for being higher. It looks like a hardware change was made, and if I had to guess, I’d have to say that either you put the x-pipe on, or, a smaller pulley. When I installed the x-pipe, the horsepower increase mirrored my non x-pipe run, but gave me 20+ horsepower everywhere; a nice piece of hardware for sure.
Since comparisons are being made to Don’s 7 psi run, a Washington-apple to Washington-apple comparison would be both running the same exhaust (..no x-pipe). Looking at the green line run (..002) of Andy’s, and comparing to Don’s run, both blowers performed exactly as expected with the positive displacement blower putting out more low end, and the centrifugal putting out more on top with the crossover point at 4000 RPM. It’s too bad Don didn’t have a better air/fuel to work with, but that’s the way it fell at the time. By the way Andy, excellent job with the 11.5 air/fuel ratio!
What are the sizes of your pulleys?
Hmm, my calcs do not agree, but that doesn’t mean that you’re wrong; can you show how you came up with those figures?
Here’s what I got, using 336 crank hp accounting for the x-pipe:
07psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 398.56 rwhp
07psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 402.33 rwhp
10psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 458.42 rwhp
10psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 464.16 rwhp
I do not think it’s reasonable to assume that a non-marine application can exceed 90% intercooler efficiency without external help such as using the air-conditioning system (..like Ford is doing).
What will it take to hit 500+ rwhp?
12psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 497.99 rwhp
12psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 505.15 rwhp
So my prediction is that'll take 12psi and some change to to hit 500+ rwhp. Of course, it’s a prediction only which are fun to make, but it's certainly not set in stone.
Andy, again good job, and thanks for posting the results!
What happened between run 002 and 012 to cause the jump in horsepower? It does not look like a tuning change since the runs mirror one another identically except for being higher. It looks like a hardware change was made, and if I had to guess, I’d have to say that either you put the x-pipe on, or, a smaller pulley. When I installed the x-pipe, the horsepower increase mirrored my non x-pipe run, but gave me 20+ horsepower everywhere; a nice piece of hardware for sure.
Since comparisons are being made to Don’s 7 psi run, a Washington-apple to Washington-apple comparison would be both running the same exhaust (..no x-pipe). Looking at the green line run (..002) of Andy’s, and comparing to Don’s run, both blowers performed exactly as expected with the positive displacement blower putting out more low end, and the centrifugal putting out more on top with the crossover point at 4000 RPM. It’s too bad Don didn’t have a better air/fuel to work with, but that’s the way it fell at the time. By the way Andy, excellent job with the 11.5 air/fuel ratio!
What are the sizes of your pulleys?
by blau928
In any event, the math is there. You should have no problems getting over 500 RWHP at .7 Bar/10lbs if you use 4-5 Laminova cores,
In any event, the math is there. You should have no problems getting over 500 RWHP at .7 Bar/10lbs if you use 4-5 Laminova cores,
Here’s what I got, using 336 crank hp accounting for the x-pipe:
07psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 398.56 rwhp
07psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 402.33 rwhp
10psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 458.42 rwhp
10psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 464.16 rwhp
I do not think it’s reasonable to assume that a non-marine application can exceed 90% intercooler efficiency without external help such as using the air-conditioning system (..like Ford is doing).
What will it take to hit 500+ rwhp?
12psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 497.99 rwhp
12psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 505.15 rwhp
So my prediction is that'll take 12psi and some change to to hit 500+ rwhp. Of course, it’s a prediction only which are fun to make, but it's certainly not set in stone.
Andy, again good job, and thanks for posting the results!
05-21-2004, 10:51 AM
#26
Racer
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hackberry AZ
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Add another 928 to the new cars purchased with the intent to add you system. Picking up a 88 auto today. This will be my play car and the 85 a daily driver formy wife.
Only draw back is your system cost more then what I am paying for the car.
Thurston.
Only draw back is your system cost more then what I am paying for the car.
Thurston.
05-21-2004, 11:54 AM
#27
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Monterey Peninsula, CA
Posts: 2,374
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
12 Posts
Hi Lag,
I use 17% as drive losses, not 20% (480 instead of your 464). In addition, the intake design and the intake restriction on the inlet side of the compressor I believe is good for an 20 hp at this power level. Add 20 to the 480, and 500. My prediction is also not set in stone, so we will see in the testing.
On the intake side is where a great deal of "free" HP can be picked up. Another tip I found out was to use as much water flow through the coolers, and use the biggest I/C radiator you can find. Andy is using heater cores as his I/C radiator, and that's why I suggested to use the bigger water pump, and two heater cores...
We shall see how the testing goes.. I will also post dyno tests when done.. Oh, and as an aside, KLEEMANN got 640-650 EHP wich is good for 500 RWHP at 17% or 20% drive losses using Autorotor and Laminova stuff at .7 bar. Granted, the engine was 5.5L, not 5L like the 928... However, I still think 5L is possible to get 500 RWHP.
I use 17% as drive losses, not 20% (480 instead of your 464). In addition, the intake design and the intake restriction on the inlet side of the compressor I believe is good for an 20 hp at this power level. Add 20 to the 480, and 500. My prediction is also not set in stone, so we will see in the testing.
On the intake side is where a great deal of "free" HP can be picked up. Another tip I found out was to use as much water flow through the coolers, and use the biggest I/C radiator you can find. Andy is using heater cores as his I/C radiator, and that's why I suggested to use the bigger water pump, and two heater cores...
We shall see how the testing goes.. I will also post dyno tests when done.. Oh, and as an aside, KLEEMANN got 640-650 EHP wich is good for 500 RWHP at 17% or 20% drive losses using Autorotor and Laminova stuff at .7 bar. Granted, the engine was 5.5L, not 5L like the 928... However, I still think 5L is possible to get 500 RWHP.
05-21-2004, 12:29 PM
#28
Three Wheelin'
Originally posted by blau928
My prediction is also not set in stone, so we will see in the testing.
My prediction is also not set in stone, so we will see in the testing.
On the intake side is where a great deal of "free" HP can be picked up.
Another tip I found out was to use as much water flow through the coolers, and use the biggest I/C radiator you can find. Andy is using heater cores as his I/C radiator, and that's why I suggested to use the bigger water pump, and two heater cores...
We shall see how the testing goes.. I will also post dyno tests when done..
Oh, and as an aside, KLEEMANN got 640-650 EHP wich is good for 500 RWHP at 17% or 20% drive losses using Autorotor and Laminova stuff at .7 bar.
Granted, the engine was 5.5L, not 5L like the 928... However, I still think 5L is possible to get 500 RWHP.
Let's find out the hp/L of a 5L at 336 crank hp (..like Andy's).
336 crank hp / 5.0L = 67.2 crank hp/L
Then, how much crank hp from a bigger 5.5L engine?
5.5L x 67.2 hp/L = 369.6 crank hp
Using 369.6 crank hp as above:
10psi, Screw, 85% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 504.26 rwhp
10psi, Screw, 90% IntCooler Efficiency, -20% Tranny: 510.58 rwhp
These results support your statement:
Oh, and as an aside, KLEEMANN got 640-650 EHP wich is good for 500 RWHP at 17% or 20% drive losses using Autorotor and Laminova stuff at .7 bar. Granted, the engine was 5.5L,
05-21-2004, 01:06 PM
#29
Drifting
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Redondo Beach, CA>>>>Atlanta,GA
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thurston,
I am very happy to hear that!!!! Welcome!!!
Lag,
Thanks. I'll read more later. But there was no hardware change during these runs. Nothing was changed the entire time besides the fuel pressure. It was way too high in the begining. We were getting readings as high as 9.5:1 on some of the first runs.
Oh, I had less than 7 psi, X-pipe probably good for 20, but Don's RMB is good for 10.
Blau,
Did I mention that ProECM uses the same heat exchangers as I do?
Andy K
I am very happy to hear that!!!! Welcome!!!
Lag,
Thanks. I'll read more later. But there was no hardware change during these runs. Nothing was changed the entire time besides the fuel pressure. It was way too high in the begining. We were getting readings as high as 9.5:1 on some of the first runs.
Oh, I had less than 7 psi, X-pipe probably good for 20, but Don's RMB is good for 10.
Blau,
Did I mention that ProECM uses the same heat exchangers as I do?
Andy K
05-21-2004, 02:09 PM
#30
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Green Bay Wisconsin
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy, Great looking dyno chart!! Totally awesome!!
Looks like you were running about 1 psi more boost in run 012 vs run 002? Only reason I mention it is because what I experienced with different levels of boost with the centrifugal and I am curious if it is the same with the twin screw.
Anyway, looks great, congrats on a job well done!
By Andy:
"There's fable abound of rasing boost for the centrifugals down low then letting it off up high. You can do that. You just can't do it w/o ruining the adiabatic efficency and loosing power up top ….snip"
No fable about it, we did it but it didn’t work out at all like we hoped for. Varying the boost after the maps have been established in the ECU completely messes with the air fuel ratio at WOT. I think you would have to change the system to MAP signal vs MAF to get it to work. I’m not sure you could get a turbo to work on a 928 without going to a stand alone ECU based on our findings. We’re done messing with it for now because too many other irons in the fire. We are going to build some blown stroker motors later this year (parts on order) and are in the beginning stages of a close ratio 8 speed transmission with aspirations of F1 style shift paddles. Of course we won’t know if this will work or not until we try but right now it looks like we will at least be trying to do it.
By Andy:
"Either way the twin-screw wins."
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what they feel is important to them. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, congratulations on your success! Looks like you have a very fast and drivable car there.
Tim
http://www.murf928.com/photos/dyno1.gif 8psi, Ott x-pipe, RMB
Looks like you were running about 1 psi more boost in run 012 vs run 002? Only reason I mention it is because what I experienced with different levels of boost with the centrifugal and I am curious if it is the same with the twin screw.
Anyway, looks great, congrats on a job well done!
By Andy:
"There's fable abound of rasing boost for the centrifugals down low then letting it off up high. You can do that. You just can't do it w/o ruining the adiabatic efficency and loosing power up top ….snip"
No fable about it, we did it but it didn’t work out at all like we hoped for. Varying the boost after the maps have been established in the ECU completely messes with the air fuel ratio at WOT. I think you would have to change the system to MAP signal vs MAF to get it to work. I’m not sure you could get a turbo to work on a 928 without going to a stand alone ECU based on our findings. We’re done messing with it for now because too many other irons in the fire. We are going to build some blown stroker motors later this year (parts on order) and are in the beginning stages of a close ratio 8 speed transmission with aspirations of F1 style shift paddles. Of course we won’t know if this will work or not until we try but right now it looks like we will at least be trying to do it.
By Andy:
"Either way the twin-screw wins."
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what they feel is important to them. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, congratulations on your success! Looks like you have a very fast and drivable car there.
Tim
http://www.murf928.com/photos/dyno1.gif 8psi, Ott x-pipe, RMB