Supercharger on a 280Z

[kjones]

Justin,

The remote mounting options that you describe have merit, but after considering every option and spending several hours on conference calls with the manufacturer, it was decided that the manifold mounting option was best... why?

1. Ease of installation

2. Throttle response

3. Boost levels in most cases wouldn't require an intercooler

4. Not having to re-orient vacuum canisters, AC components, fuel filter mounting and a bunch of other things that you'd never think of...(keep in mind that if I market a kit someday I want it to be an easy trouble free installation). There are many differences between the 240Z, 260z, 280z and the 280zx and I wanted it to be able to easily adapt to any of them.

Just to clarify one of your points, you can't dump the air from the internal bypass to the atmosphere and this isn't needed. That's what makes the bypass so great and very simple!

One other note on some of your ideas with the wastegate... I think that doing it the way you describe would be doable but it may present a tuning challenge for you... Hard to say without actually trying it I guess.

As far as the water injection.... remember this is an R&D project where we are testing this configuration and the results drive the next set of upgrades.

As a result, in this case water injection will be used to see how much benefit would be derived from intercooling and if it is worth it.

Obviously, I know there is benefit and I'm already planning the next manifold design which will incorporate some VERY cool water to air intercooling options and still have the SC mounted on the manifold... basically the best of both worlds ... I can't say much on that until after June...

The Whipple SC is another very interesting supercharger and we tried for over a year to have them participate in this project! We were ready to design 2 identical setups and compare them! Magnuson decided to work with us and Whipple dragged their feet... If they ever come around again, I'd be happy to work with them.

[Murph]

Justin,

The remote mounting options that you describe have merit, but after considering every option and spending several hours on conference calls with the manufacturer, it was decided that the manifold mounting option was best... why?

1. Ease of installation

2. Throttle response

3. Boost levels in most cases wouldn't require an intercooler

4. Not having to re-orient vacuum canisters, AC components, fuel filter mounting and a bunch of other things that you'd never think of...(keep in mind that if I market a kit someday I want it to be an easy trouble free installation). There are many differences between the 240Z, 260z, 280z and the 280zx and I wanted it to be able to easily adapt to any of them.

Fair enough. I was thinking of going the remote mount option as I wanted to stick with a stock inlet manifold. I've done a quick dummy up and you're right, there are a few things over there that have to be moved....but nothing that's too difficult.

Just to clarify one of your points, you can't dump the air from the internal bypass to the atmosphere and this isn't needed. That's what makes the bypass so great and very simple!

One other note on some of your ideas with the wastegate... I think that doing it the way you describe would be doable but it may present a tuning challenge for you... Hard to say without actually trying it I guess.

I can't see any reason why I couldn't just dump to atmosphere instead of back to the inlet side of the SC? There are a few blokes over here in oz running this exact setup without any hassles. One catch here is you'd have to have to use MAP sensed engine managment, but that'd be a given for what I have planned.

With your internal bypass setup, does the bypass open/close at one given throttle position, i.e. it's open or closer, or does it vary, so that it's fully open with the throttle closed, and gradually closes as you open the throttle? If it work in the later way, then it's operating exactly the same as the wastegate setup (and can be plumbed back into the inlet of course).

Obviously, I know there is benefit and I'm already planning the next manifold design which will incorporate some VERY cool water to air intercooling options and still have the SC mounted on the manifold... basically the best of both worlds ... I can't say much on that until after June...

I'll be vrey interested to see what you come up with here. I've got a rough idea what you're thinking....exactly the sort of thing water-air is perfect for.

The Whipple SC is another very interesting supercharger and we tried for over a year to have them participate in this project! We were ready to design 2 identical setups and compare them! Magnuson decided to work with us and Whipple dragged their feet... If they ever come around again, I'd be happy to work with them.

I'd set on the whipple idea based on the experience of a few people over here. One guy in particular has used them on three difference road and race cars over the years and has been VERY impressed.

Back on the throttle response of a remote mount SC setup, the way I'd planned to do it (and the way the other guys here have), the throttle body remains in the stock location on the inlet manifold, so should still have pretty good throttle response?

Thanks for your input Ken, it's interesting to see another angle on it all.

Justin

[kjones]

Fair enough. I was thinking of going the remote mount option as I wanted to stick with a stock inlet manifold. I've done a quick dummy up and you're right, there are a few things over there that have to be moved....but nothing that's too difficult.

You'll be surprised how "little" details on moving components turn into big hassles... And some 240Z's have the AC compressor mounted on that side of the motor too! Just one of several reasons why we elected not to remote mount the SC

I can't see any reason why I couldn't just dump to atmosphere instead of back to the inlet side of the SC? There are a few blokes over here in oz running this exact setup without any hassles. One catch here is you'd have to have to use MAP sensed engine managment, but that'd be a given for what I have planned.

If using a SC with an internal bypass there is no outlet provision to allow you to channel the air anywhere other than into the SC outlet, thus with an internal bypass system it can't be done. If you get an external bypass, then maybe? who knows... Maybe I'm misunderstanding you? Take a look at the picture on the magnuson website of the inlet side of the SC, maybe that'll help you visualize it...

With your internal bypass setup, does the bypass open/close at one given throttle position, i.e. it's open or closer, or does it vary, so that it's fully open with the throttle closed, and gradually closes as you open the throttle? If it work in the later way, then it's operating exactly the same as the wastegate setup (and can be plumbed back into the inlet of course).

It gradually closes on light throttle and slams slut immediately on abrupt throttle.... exactly what you want...

One note... the reason I said that your wastegate idea and also the bypass would present a tuning challenge is because my experience has been that the bypass when closing introduces a significant amount of air rather quickly. Getting your engine management system to compensate with the appropriate amount of fuel in these conditions can be tricky (but doable). Most times you have to experiment with Acceleration enrichments and be careful with your tuning. But it's no different to most other tuning challenges... persistence pays off...

I'd set on the whipple idea based on the experience of a few people over here. One guy in particular has used them on three different road and race cars over the years and has been VERY impressed.

Yes, the whipple is intriguing. I was very disappointed that they didn't participate in this project for the magazine. Someday I'll follow up with them again.

Back on the throttle response of a remote mount SC setup, the way I'd planned to do it (and the way the other guys here have), the throttle body remains in the stock location on the inlet manifold, so should still have pretty good throttle response?

That configuration works, but for instant throttle response (which is one of the reasons for picking a SC in the first place) the best physical location to introduce the boost is as close to the intake valve as possible. Remote mounting has it's advantages and disadvantages just like anything else. I'd say if you can mount it to the manifold and intercool it, that is the best option.

Once I get to that point I'll report my findings.

Plus, if I have a manifold cast, it'll solve your dilemma of not having a manifold source available

Stay in touch and I'll let everyone know what's going on with the project... Who knows if it works out "really" well I might move up to the next size blower and attempt to go to 16-20 pounds of boost (with intercooling).

My stroker (8.5:1 CR) has forged internals and should be able to handle up to 20 psi with no problem :devious:

[Derrick072]

I was wondering if anyone has the Holley carb kit on their Z? I have only seen one so far.But never asked the dude how it ran.

[kjones]

Justin,

Have you seen this thread?

http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?p=129685#post129685

There is a short video posted on some testing we were doing... It's explained in the other thread, but the video is located at: http://flzclub.com/videos/blownZ.WMV

[Murph]

You'll be surprised how "little" details on moving components turn into big hassles... And some 240Z's have the AC compressor mounted on that side of the motor too! Just one of several reasons why we elected not to remote mount the SC

No A/C on mine, so all good there....but I can see why it's a problem if you're making a kit.

If using a SC with an internal bypass there is no outlet provision to allow you to channel the air anywhere other than into the SC outlet, thus with an internal bypass system it can't be done. If you get an external bypass, then maybe? who knows... Maybe I'm misunderstanding you? Take a look at the picture on the magnuson website of the inlet side of the SC, maybe that'll help you visualize it...

Yeah sorry, I probably wasn't clear. I meant an external bypass when I was talking about dumping to atmosphere. Aside from bypass valve location, the two systems would work in the same way.

It gradually closes on light throttle and slams slut immediately on abrupt throttle.... exactly what you want...

What's the bypass valve actuator attached to? Is it one line into it or two? With the wastegate setup you have one line to either side of the diaphram. One attaches to the blower outlet and the other to the inlet manifold. The result of this is that the bypass valve position will be pretty much inversely proportional to the throttle position. So, no or low boost at low throttle, medium boost at medium throttle, and full boost as soon as you floor it.

One note... the reason I said that your wastegate idea and also the bypass would present a tuning challenge is because my experience has been that the bypass when closing introduces a significant amount of air rather quickly. Getting your engine management system to compensate with the appropriate amount of fuel in these conditions can be tricky (but doable). Most times you have to experiment with Acceleration enrichments and be careful with your tuning. But it's no different to most other tuning challenges... persistence pays off...

Good point about the acceleration enrichment. I suppose that'll be a hassle to deal with at the time.

Yes, the whipple is intriguing. I was very disappointed that they didn't participate in this project for the magazine. Someday I'll follow up with them again.

I'd be very interested to see how it compares with the eaton. Looking at the charts the eaton M90 seems to be on par with the whipple 2300 (?).

That configuration works, but for instant throttle response (which is one of the reasons for picking a SC in the first place) the best physical location to introduce the boost is as close to the intake valve as possible. Remote mounting has it's advantages and disadvantages just like anything else. I'd say if you can mount it to the manifold and intercool it, that is the best option.

Once I get to that point I'll report my findings.

Plus, if I have a manifold cast, it'll solve your dilemma of not having a manifold source available

I'll be interested to see how the new setup turns out....I might just be ordering a manifold from ya.

Stay in touch and I'll let everyone know what's going on with the project... Who knows if it works out "really" well I might move up to the next size blower and attempt to go to 16-20 pounds of boost (with intercooling).

My stroker (8.5:1 CR) has forged internals and should be able to handle up to 20 psi with no problem :devious:

Will do! They're the sort of boost levels I'm looking at running....so will be interested to see how it goes with the bigger blower.

Thanks again Ken.

[Murph]

Justin,

Have you seen this thread?

http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?p=129685#post129685

There is a short video posted on some testing we were doing... It's explained in the other thread, but the video is located at: http://flzclub.com/videos/blownZ.WMV

Yeah I think I had seen that one Ken.....sounds cool.

What is your estimated power level with the current setup?

[kjones]

Should be around 270-280 rwhp based on the configuration on that day... The low end torque is very impressive and comes in very strong at very low rpm.

I'll by putting it on the dyno again shortly.

[Dreco]

if you build it, they will come. you have a customer right here. I'd love to add that to my 3.0L stroker

[kjones]

That's great to hear!

BTW the current motor has no head work at all... I wanted people to see a baseline number without tons of engine mods so that people could easily reproduce it... the engine has a stock p90 head on it, with a custom cam made my schneider...

Obviously with some head work and some more experimenting with the cam much more power can be found

The bottom end is .040 over bore stroker... LD28 crank and 240Z rods with custom forged pistons... 8.5:1 CR Nothing special...

The exhaust is LOUD due to the headers (Nismo 1 3/4" primaries) with a 3" exhaust...

Aside from that it's nothing all that radical as far as the engine is concerned.

I'd love to see the performance of one of these babies on a Rebello or Sunbelt motor!

Ken

[thehelix112]

Holy moly, I turn my back for a couple of days and look what happens.

A few points:

What a joke. In a typical turbocharged engine, the ratio of exhaust manifold to inlet manifold pressure is around 2:1 - 3:1. Having such a large back pressure on the exhaust side robs the engine of considerable power, but of course, this is what is driving the turbo. Power aint free. What is typically the biggest downside of a supercharger is the extra drag it places on the engine in normal driving. However, that isn't too hard a problem to work around. Read on.

The typical applications you are talking about are stock applications where they are designed to drive like naturally aspirated cars (very low boost threshold and next to no lag). With a properly matched turbo and exhaust manifold the pressure ratio between inlet and exhaust drops to more like 1:1 and below. Check out http://pforums.company-hosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67189028 with a video. Notice that as the turbo comes on boost it gets to 21psi intake while the exhaust manifold pressure is still around 100kpa (14.7psi). That will be flowing more through the chamber than a naturally aspirated engine which can only ever hope to get to 1:1 (or slightly beyond momentarily). The obvious tradeoff is low-end torque and lag.

3. Boost levels in most cases wouldn't require an intercooler

Are you kidding? I wouldn't be running anything over 7psi without an intercooler. And why wouldn't you use one? Its free power, it makes detonation less likely, etc. Especially considering positive displacement superchargers have horrid adaibatic efficiency compared to centrifugal compressors.

One note... the reason I said that your wastegate idea and also the bypass would present a tuning challenge is because my experience has been that the bypass when closing introduces a significant amount of air rather quickly. Getting your engine management system to compensate with the appropriate amount of fuel in these conditions can be tricky (but doable). Most times you have to experiment with Acceleration enrichments and be careful with your tuning.

How does an external bypass dump more air on throttle close than an internal one? especially as the internal one has no alternate route, but the external one does.

Tuning accelleration enrichments depends a lot on the engine management. It was very tricky using a megasquirt, and very easy using an autronic. Good datalogging (AFR, MAP, RPM, TPS) make this no more difficult than any other part of tuning the car.

I was running my 240Z with a L28 supercharged using a toyota SC14 (1GGZE) supercharger. This supercharger is WAY too small for the engine so only gave me 5psi. There are so many factors to consider when you are trying to decide about the viability of superchargers for your application:

- power output

- power delivery

- packaging options (phsyically mounting the bits)

In reality, you will be able to get basically whatever power you want from either a turbo or a supercharger setup with enough development. Horses for courses.

Oh and my final thought (just because this point annoys me something fierce), turbo-lag is a storm-in-a-teacup for street/circuit driving (only people who require instant response in rapid on-off applications are rally drivers). Seriously, grab the next gear down ffs! Gone!

Dave

[Murph]

The typical applications you are talking about are stock applications where they are designed to drive like naturally aspirated cars (very low boost threshold and next to no lag). With a properly matched turbo and exhaust manifold the pressure ratio between inlet and exhaust drops to more like 1:1 and below. Check out http://pforums.company-hosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67189028 with a video. Notice that as the turbo comes on boost it gets to 21psi intake while the exhaust manifold pressure is still around 100kpa (14.7psi). That will be flowing more through the chamber than a naturally aspirated engine which can only ever hope to get to 1:1 (or slightly beyond momentarily). The obvious tradeoff is low-end torque and lag.

I have to sort of disagree. To get a 1:1 ratio you're needing a pretty damn huge turbo. Certainly not something that'd be typically considered streetable. Do remember in the vid of zacs 1600 that we simply can't say acurately what the exhaust pressure was due to the fluctuations (100-200kPa). Even if you take the average of that you have a greater than 1:1 ratio.

How does an external bypass dump more air on throttle close than an internal one? especially as the internal one has no alternate route, but the external one does.

Ignore that point....I had confused ken with what I meant.

Oh and my final thought (just because this point annoys me something fierce), turbo-lag is a storm-in-a-teacup for street/circuit driving (only people who require instant response in rapid on-off applications are rally drivers). Seriously, grab the next gear down ffs! Gone!

Totally disagree on this one. Firstly we should be clear on some terminology. When I'm refering to lag, I'm not talking about the the motor needing to be above a given rpm for the turbo to boost, I'm talking about how long it take to go from nothing to full boost when the engine is already at high enough rpm to spool the turbo. For example take an average turbo car driving down the road at 80kph, 2nd gear, 5000 rpm just holding that speed, turbo wont be boosting. Now floor it. How long does it take for the turbo to start making useable boost? That's lag!

With pansy little turbos eg my mates VG30DETT, we're talking maybe 0.5 sec or so....not much. But when you're talking large turbos, we're talking seconds. Two good examples are two mates RB20 powered skylines, both with different large turbos. Both of them will take around 2seconds to start making useable boost.

That sort of lag shits me to tears. Sure the cars are fun being silly fast and all, but they're almost useless when it comes to the corners, because it simply wont make the power you want when you want it.

Example 1: Brake hard for the corner, even get hard on the power very early in the corner and it still wont make good power until you're out the other side.

Example 2: We were out in the middle of nowhere and decided to pull a donut.....drop it in 2nd, rev out to the limiter almost imediately, so back of the accelerator to get it off the limiter, foot down again, oh look its dropped off boost, then bogs down before it can build boost again.

Basically the same happens in corners. Sure it's an extreme example this car having a rather large turbo and all.....but the same happens with pretty much any turbo setup.

Having come from the 260Z where I am some what spoilt for throttle response, any amount of lag shits me to tears, even the tiny little bit in my mates Z32 tt.

Holy sh*t. That was a bigger spiel that I meant to write!

Cherio