Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the support.

I can make one for the 16V's, but it will be pricey, and I would suggest running an aftermarket ECU with my setup, as the older ECU and fueling are not friendly to this setup as it was designed for aftermarket ECU's and at a minimum the LH. (The system has optional safeguards that a CIS will nt be able to make use of, and some aftermarket ECU's as well..) One such thing is the dual injector per cylinder..... (I will use a Motec to control this, as well as dual wideband O2 sensors, and traction control.....)

If the LH is used, then it MUST be Sharktuned with both LH and EZK chips being remapped based on motor setup parameters.

Once I get things sorted and tested, I will be happy to look at options for any that are interested.

Right now, I am focusing on getting this setup done and tested. I hope to be making more progress in the coming days/weeks.. However, I am at the mercy of other suppliers for parts fabrication etc..

Best regards,

 

I look forward to the finish product. I can’t tell you enough great looking design. Read your PM.

 

Thank you I had given up on boost as I don't like CS blowers and that is really what is available unless you build your own turbo from scratch.

I had a Thunderbird SC and played with eaton M90's and TS blowers. The TS really love to be in the high teens of boost. I ran mine at 17lds and she really would have liked 19 or 20lbs.

The 4.5 would be perfect for this. Build a boost setup for internals with the proprer HG and turn up the boost.

I am installing euro cams now and I will hold onto my 79 cams and start saving for this setup. Then she will be done!

Awesome awesome awesome, I love TS blowers!

Stephen

 

Good luck with that...

 

Hi Stephen,

Don't take this the wrong way, but the setup I am making is designed to run as little "boost" (pressure) as possible, while flowing the most air possible (CFM).

The reason is that pressure = heat, and the more heat = detonation to be controlled. ALL the heat in the intake charge comes from compressing it (Boost Pressure). That being said, it sounds deceiving until you get a calculator and work through the equations..

More MASS airflow (CFM) at least pressure = Increased Density, which when fuel added at the same AFR, the denser charge will make more power as there is just physically more air and fuel mass in the chamber to ignite...

I understand what you are trying to get at by running higher boost on the T-Birds, and yes, the twin screw compressors are very exciting when they are used, as they can produce prodigious amounts of power early in the RPM range. In addition, if set up correctly, they can hold the airflow across the RPM range from idle to redline...

The other seemingly overlooked part is the ability of the system to flow air with the least restriction possible through it..... The key is of course, in the details as it is with all the forced induction systems..

My setup can work with a twin turbo setup as well, and as I mentioned, if someone wanted to be a bit nuts, the setup can be used with both a Twin Turbo and Twin Screw to significantly increase the pressure ratio and get to enormous levels of output..

Of course, the block, cylinders, rotating assembley, and heads need to be prepared adequately for this.

I will let you know how things proceed by posting details on the forum, and in my profile photo gallery.

There are many modifications that are done, and are in process of being done on the car. If you look at my profile album, you will get a better idea.

I will only be making prices available once I have finished testing everything and observing the results.

I am happy to make as many setups as there is a demand for. It was however, not my initial intention to sell "kits." I just wanted to have the car the way that I thought it should be done, and there was nothing like it available. So, I had to do it from scratch..

Anyway, that's all in the past, and with the amount of interest on this forum, and privately, I will make the system available to those who are sincerely interested, and are willing to pay for it.

Thanks again,

 

Dave good buddy, I will need all the luck I can get..!

 

Richard,

While normally, I would agree with you on most points, using an Opocn/Kenne bell type supercharger with a turbo is not a very good idea, unless you implemented a complex DBW throttle bypass system. If you read any of the white papers on these style units, it is clear that intake charge temp is directly related to bearing failure (and $800 rebuild) of these units. Cold intake is required, and even underhood ambient intake will damage these twinscrew units. If you were going to do a twin-charged setup, the turbos discharge would need to pass through an intercooler before the supercharger, or it would need to bypass it altogether, and enter the laminova plenums directly (alla staged DBW throttles used as a by-pass system).

Keep up the awesome work. I am excited to see the results too.

Thanks,
Hans

 

I thought majority of the air restriction comes from the size of the valves and intake/exhaust ports. Regardless how well the intake manifod flows, the bottle neck will be the stock heads. Or am I missing something?

 

Hi Hans,

I am aware of the DBW, and can use it with an upgraded Motec ECU. (If I go to an M880, I will also do to DBW, and can use twin throttles a la BMW, or just use two WRX units..)

The problem with the SC bearings and case come from the pressure differential in front of and behind the bearings, and the case temperature and bearing temperature as a result of the pressure ratio differential betweent he case partition.

However, there are things that can be done to relieve the heat and pressure on the Opcon bearings and case. The first is to vent the front chamber, and pressure feed the bearings with cool oil and then drain it to the sump. A lot of prblems with the heat management can be resolved by doing away with the self contained setup, and 20/50 Redline/Amsoil etc will be fine for the SC lubrication requirements.

The second involves using the upgraded compressor with liquid cooled bearings and the pressure equalizing valve in the SC case.....

Putting the coolers before the SC will increase the pressure drop across the cores, and the pressure ratio gain will be negated... The coolers should always be as close to the inlet valve as possible accounting for inlet runner dimensions and design...

Like I mentioned, it would be a little wild, but can be done. If I were to do it, I would go with dual DBW's and use the liquid cooled SC in addition to pressure feeding the bearings in the SC case with fresh cool oil...

My current setup calls for pressure fed bearings and SC sump drain, as well as crankcase evac incorporating the SC snout for the front shaft bearing. ventilation.

Thanks for the notes, as always, it's appreciated..

 

Hi Imre,

The part you are missing is all the piping in the inlet system (From air filter all through the system to the intake valve) needs to be taken into consideration. It is about maximizing optimum values for flow and velocity depending on the design parameters used to build the motor.

Any turn in the system will equate to a loss in flow and or velocity, and corresponding inlet restriction depending on mass of air being flowed, and the size of the tubing/inlet system. (Just plain physics at this point..)

As a result, the compressor will have to overcome all restrictions in the system. The result of inlet restrictions post compressor will be higher system pressure as there will be a corresponding reduction in flow.. (Pressure is inverse to flow, again, basic physics).. This is directly related to the comment I made to Stephen about "Boost".... Lower boost # is not always a bad thing, it depends on the Mass Air Flow being put through the system...

Much of the design I have done incorporated a design parameter to have a few turns as possible to maximize flow and charge velocity at specific places in the inlet tract. These are the items I elude to that are unseen from the outside of the setup, as all the machining on the inside is not viewable to anyone who has not seen the individual part drawings with the details on the inside of certain parts. Even then, you would have to know what goes where, and why...

I have not done any work as yet on the heads, but this will be in future. I am still getting clarification on inlet runner, head chamber roof and floor, and the exhaust port clarified. The effect on BSFC is amazing when you see some of the stuff I have had the opportunity to look at... I am also intrigued with camshaft and lifter profiles, and have some ideas there as well... All in due time, there is only one of me, and I do have other things in my day besides the car project....

Best Regards, hope the explanation helps...

 

Well not really. The physics lesson was great but that's not what I was looking for. I was trying to ask if the majority of the restriction being the stock heads, what difference does it make how well the intake flows. The bottle neck will always be the heads. Do you agree?

I can see that you are working within the design parameter of keeping the stock hood and that's probably the reason for the compromise in the design of the intake. From my past experience, the best design shape for a pressuried intake is always a box with short runners. The internal shape of an boosted intake manifold doesn't need to be as complicated as a N/A one. Simple is always better for these applications.

 

Richard,

Your coments are duly noted on forced cooling of the bearings. I had not considered this as an option, but moving fluid in the bearing cavities could probably avoid the issue. When I was looking at this option on a different car (small TS supercharger and large single turbo), I was using an electric clutch to activate the supercharger (AMG supplied unit), and use a pair of DBW throttles to in a sense completely bypass the supercharger alltogether. When the boost supplied by the turbos reached a setpoint, the pair of DBW throttles (one before and one after the TS) would close in tandem, and voltage to the TS clutch was removed, completely isolating the TS system. A similar setup could be used on your setup. It would only require moving the primary throttle, or to a pair of throttles ala DR or ROE Racing up further in the intake stream, giving you room for the DBW. In my instance no "intelligent" ECU was required, as the DBW was not used as a variable throttle, just as a large-scale bypass system that moved in tandem.

 

Hi Hans,

Interesting idea using the DBW as a bypass... I have not thought about that which you described.. I prefer to heep the system closed after the work of compression is done, as you will not be able to regain the lost work of compression.. Maybe it's a semantic issue, but like I said, I did not think of doing it your way..

I guess in another way of explaining my preference, is, active wastegate control on the turbo hotside would do similar if I am understanding your setup corectly.. I would prefer to regulate the turbo from the hotside with an active bypass to take advantage of the turbo's heat energy, and feed the TS in this manner while draining the sump in the case of the SC, and using liquid cooling and venting to balance the SC main case and bearing case differential pressure. this way, the turbo is not overworked, and neither is the SC.

I think your setup can work, but as the DBW throttles are regulating after the turbo compresses the air, I prefer it as I describe it.

In any event, if you are building such a setup, then it would be interesting to note how it works..

Thanks again,

Cheers,

 

No, I do not agree that it does not matter what the upstream restrictions are if the heads have a bottleneck. How can you measure what the isoated bottleneck of the heads are if the entire system upstream of the valve also has bottlenecks....???????? If you have further restriction upstream, it will make things worse... I think you are missing the point I was trying to make about adding up the restriction in the entire system and understanding things from a system approach....


The hood limitation is only a part of the issue I had to resolve. However, much attention was paid to total plenum volume, shape, interior passages, and other things which I choose not to disclose until I test the system on the car. Some things will not be revealed even then.

I vehemently disagree with yor statement that a box with short runners is the best design for a pressurized intake manifold, and if you especially take what Twin Screw setups are available for 928's currently, and look at the manifold and setup Andy Keel designed, as well as DR's current setup, you will see (maybe not in your case as you disagree) there is so much left on the table with that setup and problems associated with it that IMHO it was not worth buying just because the plenum is so poorly done. Nothing against the people who make and sell it, just not my cup of tea knowing what I know.

I had several discussions with Andy Keel during the production process, and with several others who have gone this route, and decided that I would make things my own way. It is specifically for the design of the plenum that I rejected the purchase of parts from Andy.

A box with the shortest runners is exactly what the current TS offerings are like, and they are not even close to the setups avaiable on the Mc Laren SLR, ZR1, newer mustangs, Kleemann Mercedes, and I could go on. There are flow dynamics going on inside the "box" as you put it that are just wasted by having a plain box..

The key is in the details, ask any Computational Fluid Dynamics Engineer to explain flow and velocity in a box, rectanguar or otherwise, and see what they say..... Tell them you wish to keep the flow laminar and velocity high with the lowest flow restrictional losses, as well as introducing a liquid fuel charge at the valve throat for the best possible fuel atomization, and see if a box with short runners is the best device to do this..

If your experience shows that the case should have short runners and a box plenum, then, so be it. My experience, research, and discussions with several professional racing engineers leads me to believe, and practice otherwise. Nothing personal, I just think differently, and we can agree to disagree about the box and short runners being the best for a pressurized intake..

Like I said, the outside of my setup looks one way, but you cannot see what is on the inside to address all those things I mentioned...... This is the beauty of having access to CAD, and better, having things done on a 5 axis milling machine....

Thanks for the questions, hope it makes sense even if we disagree on the box with short runners.

I do agree that things should be kept simple.... However, it depends on what things, based on what one is trying to accomplish. If it is to flow the most Mass Airflow at peak velocity with the least resistance by using a box with short runners, then my research and experience says no.

I have a question for you.... Why do you think the heads are the bottleneck..? Bottleneck for what, compared to what, and for how much power..? Have you flowed an S4 head..? If it flowed 320 CFM at 28", then it is theoretically capable of making about 640HP NA on a V8 motor using a pair of these heads... What bottleneck are you meaning here...? (I have not introduced velocity into the equation yet, nor discussed chamber shape and valve dimensions nor camshaft specification or lift, and especially runner dimensions and its effect on all of the above and VE....)

Cheers,

 

blau928

You meantioned compound boosting. Google Hellion project. It is a stock cobra that they compound boosted. It has been a year at least since I read it but they started to have the heads lift off the block at a high numbers, something like 34lbs. When they compound boosted the cobra they were able to acheive 44lbs or so and 1100rwhp from a stock block and the heads wouldn't lift.

Not that I would suggest anything like that for a 928. I looked into adding a turbo to my SC as the eaton M90 ran out of steam at the higher rpm. The idea was to use the blower for bottom end power and size the turbo to take over on the top.

As you stated the TS is very capable of producing power through till redline so a turbo really wouldn't be needed but would be really cool. The TS will provide all the power that the engine and drivetrain can handle and they sound really COOL!

Stephen