Pontiac - Boost Turbo, supercharged, Nitrous, EFI & other Power Adders discussed here.

          
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-11-2019, 07:53 PM
taff2's Avatar
taff2 taff2 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South Wales in UK.
Posts: 2,172
Default

Yes, two of the 450 lph E85 compatible pumps- it's amazing (to me) that such a small pump can put out so much flow, and price is incredibly low for what they are.

  #62  
Old 06-11-2019, 09:23 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

The 400 and 450 liter per hour pumps Walbro Pumps seem to have the best turbine pump design out there currently.

Agree they are a very good buy for the money invested.

Tom V.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #63  
Old 06-12-2019, 12:00 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

For decades, Walbro Automotive fuel pumps have been manufactured by TI Automotive.

The same pumps are now branded with the TI Automotive name, carrying a legacy for more than 60 years of manufacturing the most popular drop-in fuel pumps, with the same performance, quality and reliability that people have come to know and expect.

The Caro, MI plant is THE TI Automotive High Performance and Aftermarket Fuel Pump and module manufacturing site. The fuel pumps and modules are never manufactured or assembled by a third party or sourced from an outside company. Everything is done by a US company located in Michigan.

Here are the specs on the pumps

F90000295 In-Tank Fuel Pump (the bad boy 450 liter per hour pump)

Fuel: GAS & E85
Horsepower: 900+ at 60PSI, naturally aspirated applications
Over All Pump Length: 131mm
Main Housing Diameter: 39mm
Lower Housing Diameter: 50mm
Fuel Inlet Diameter: 11mm OD
Fuel Outlet Diameter: 11mm OD
Flow Rate: 535LPH at 40psi
Test Voltage: 13.5 Volts

Note: Pump does NOT have a check valve

F90000285 In-Tank Fuel Pump

Fuel: GAS & E85
Horsepower: 900+ at 60PSI, naturally aspirated applications
Over All Pump Length: 131mm
Main Housing Diameter: 39mm
Lower Housing Diameter: 50mm
Fuel Inlet Diameter: 11mm OD
Fuel Outlet Diameter: 11mm OD
Flow Rate: 470lph @ 40psi (120+ gph)
Test Voltage: 13.5 Volts

If you are modifying a fuel tank and have the room, the Dual Fuel Pump set-up below have a lower flow rating (each) vs the other pumps but TI says the dual pumps
are capable of 1450 HP (basically two of the 400 liter per hr pumps) specs below

TCA956 Super Flow In-Tank Dual Pump
Contains dual F90000285 pumps

Fuel: FLEX
Horsepower: 1450
Flow Rate (lph): 725
Flow Rate (gph): 192
Pressure (psi): 50
Pressure (kPa): 345
Max System Pressure (psi): 112
Max System Pressure (kPa): 772
Filter Group: Filter Attached
Inlet: Pumps are in a bracket with filters attached

Tom V.

The pumps below are first the F90000285 In-Tank Fuel Pump (400 liter/hr
then the F90000295 In-Tank Fuel Pump (450 liter/hr)
and finally the Dual F90000285 In-Tank Fuel Pump (400 liter/hr each)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	F90000285.png
Views:	160
Size:	190.0 KB
ID:	514004   Click image for larger version

Name:	F90000295.jpg
Views:	169
Size:	129.4 KB
ID:	514005   Click image for larger version

Name:	TCA956 (dual Fuel Pump Assy .jpg
Views:	180
Size:	74.2 KB
ID:	514006  

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #64  
Old 07-29-2019, 11:10 AM
Scott65's Avatar
Scott65 Scott65 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,991
Default

Tom, could you discuss current thinking on compression ratio in turbo/supercharged applications? I see people using these on engines today that would go against conventional wisdom of years past. I also saw someone(dont remember who) in the industry make a passing remark that the 8:1 compression ratio is old school now. Was curious what the current ideas around this are? I would imagine that modern engine control will "allow" higher compression, but am curious what the new thinking for ideal is? Or is it case by case?

__________________
'65 Tempest 467 3650# 11.30@120.31
  #65  
Old 07-29-2019, 01:16 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

People were very cautious in the old days with boost.
The old Hugh McInnis Turbo book used to talk about 8 to 1 for mild turbo boost pressures and 7 to 1 for higher boost pressures.

Some of this was based on Historical WW-II Aircraft Fighter Plane information.

So that is correct, 8.0 to 1 is "Old School" but SAFE. No one was really talking about ignition Total Timing at the same time.

McInnis had in one book about retarding the total timing with a dual port vacuum diaphragm that would remove a few degrees of timing at the higher boost pressure (8 psi). They were going for increasing the power by 50% and 8 psi boost pressure typically will get you close to 50% more power with a Turbocharger.

We have had discussion in the street forum about Quench Height and if it is the wrong height what effects it has on Detonation in the engine.

So today more PY members are paying attention to that and trying to stay close to zero deck height on the piston top to block and running around a .042" thick head gasket when crushed and torqued to spec.

If you do all of that right then it is possible to run 27 degrees of timing with most fuels and not hurt the head gaskets. An example with be Charlie66 with E-85 Fuel, 27 degrees of timing, 35 psi of boost pressure, and 800 engine horsepower out of his 4 cylinder pontiac engine. he is also about 8.75 to 1 compression ratio.

So you see the compression ratio is only one part of the equation.
Engine comes into the picture, head gasket thickness, deck height of the piston, fuel that you run, boosting device, total timing under highest boost pressure, and type of cylinder head material.

If you are sure that you will never exceed say 15 psi of boost you might be able to run a bit higher compression ratio on the street, like 9.2 to 1.

You will get a slight bit better fuel economy but in reality Boost Guys are on the boost curve so much more often the f.e. benefit does not mean anything.

McInnis used to say a 1/2 of a point lower compression ratio is better vs a tenth of a compression ratio too high of a compression ratio..... (and you hurt engine parts.

Mostly due to less repair costs.

Hope this helps.

The other question is what are you doing with the Boost system. It does make a difference. If 12 psi is good, 16 is better? how about 20, how about 25, 30?
Ok to get a bit boost greedy, sometimes. Many times the engine will live.

You get timing greedy and the engine will quickly tell you that you screwed up royal with that extra 2 degrees of timing. Better to add 5 psi and make safe power vs 2 degrees of timing and and hurt parts.

Tom V.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #66  
Old 07-29-2019, 01:57 PM
73 TRANSAM 73 TRANSAM is online now
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 545
Default

I made 1265hp@5900 and 1100@5900 on a stingy engine dyno. Single 91mm old school PTE, blow thru, locked timing at 25, Pontiac 482 with 4.25 Crower crank,Callies ultra I beam rod, JE dish, WP heads and 8.7 to 1. This is on E85 and NO intercooler. But now I replaced the cam with a more aggressive duration. So it should make more power and carry over the power higher in the rpm range.

  #67  
Old 07-29-2019, 02:28 PM
JSPONT's Avatar
JSPONT JSPONT is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: ROCKY POINT NY
Posts: 2,917
Default

subscribed

  #68  
Old 07-29-2019, 04:07 PM
Scott65's Avatar
Scott65 Scott65 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,991
Default

Thanks for the explanation Tom. I'm not a participant in the FI world, but like learning. Sounds like keeping the cr "old school" still has merit.

__________________
'65 Tempest 467 3650# 11.30@120.31
  #69  
Old 09-16-2019, 04:04 PM
AIR RAM AIR RAM is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Homestead FL
Posts: 412
Default

This is all great information!!! I have a direct link saved to my desk top for future reference.

It seems as though Turbos have a larger following than the supercharger crowd, almost cult like... LOL

I'm on the fence on which one I should go with for what I'm looking for on my current build. It will be a 9:1cr 496ci and see much more street than track.

Knowing that my block will be already at its limitation power wise I have decided my initial idea of 15psi was to much and have decided to adjust the goal to running 8-10psi however Turbos seem to have a very large cost of admission over the wallet friendly Supercharger making the it very attractive. I have always felt the Superchargers where best for low instant boost while a turbo is king for anything over 15psi....

So my question is how much harder on parts is a supercharger over a Turbo or is that something that even needs to be considered?

I hear so many people talk about turbos breaking less parts because they are easier on them. Since I will be pushing my cast iron block to its limits, I'm wondering if the turbo would be easier on the block or is that a mute thought. LOL

SPEED SAFE, NICK

__________________
"The grass is not greener on the other side, its just fertilized with different $h!t"
  #70  
Old 09-16-2019, 05:16 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AIR RAM View Post
This is all great information!!! I have a direct link saved to my desk top for future reference.

It seems as though Turbos have a larger following than the supercharger crowd, almost cult like... LOL

I'm on the fence on which one I should go with for what I'm looking for on my current build. It will be a 9:1cr 496ci and see much more street than track.

Knowing that my block will be already at its limitation power wise I have decided my initial idea of 15psi was to much and have decided to adjust the goal to running 8-10psi however Turbos seem to have a very large cost of admission over the wallet friendly Supercharger making the it very attractive. I have always felt the Superchargers where best for low instant boost while a turbo is king for anything over 15psi....

So my question is how much harder on parts is a supercharger over a Turbo or is that something that even needs to be considered?

I hear so many people talk about turbos breaking less parts because they are easier on them. Since I will be pushing my cast iron block to its limits, I'm wondering if the turbo would be easier on the block or is that a mute thought. LOL

SPEED SAFE, NICK
I WILL TRY TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION:

QUOTE=AIR RAM;6062553] So my question is how much harder on parts is a supercharger over a Turbo or is that something that even needs to be considered?

I hear so many people talk about turbos breaking less parts because they are easier on them. Since I will be pushing my cast iron block to its limits, I'm wondering if the turbo would be easier on the block or is that a mute thought. LOL

SPEED SAFE, NICK[/QUOTE]

A) A supercharger is driven by the crankshaft snout/ crankshaft.

The snout sees a bending/twisting load as you drive the supercharger compressor, be it a load located at 12:00 (Roots Supercharger) or at 2:00 or 10:00 (Centrifugal Supercharger like a Vortech, Procharger, or Paxton unit).

The crank would see a twisting load if it was like some of the newer Alston/Vortech front mounted superchargers.

B) The Turbocharged engines would see none of these loads when they provided compressed air to the engine.

The loads in "A" would also create a load on the #2 block main bearing and a smaller load on the #3 block main bearing. At lower boost levels, say 12 psi, this can be contained easily with a Vortech / Procharger / Paxton Supercharger. A Roots unit, depending on the size, might see a much higher load on the crankshaft. I know of three Pontiac Engines (Cranks) who have had the snout replaced after it developed a crack.

So on a 15 psi Vortech Installation, you probably will be ok with the crank and block as many have been down that road with weaker blocks (Ford and Chebby).

No comments on Roots Race stuff as I personally have minimal experience on them but a lot of experience with the OEM (Ford) side of the units 3.8L and 4.6/5.0/5.8L production hardware. Some of these units have well over 100K miles on them.

Superchargers just look cool sticking out of the hood.

Centrifugal stuff is more stealthy. Turbos if done right are the real sleepers.
John Meany (Big Stuff3 owner) had a 1000 HP Corvette street car that could go anywhere and was very quick for what it was.

A few Fords have made 1400/1500 HP and are still built as true street cars.

A lot more time and effort to do it right though.

Tom V.

I like the 1000 HP street type engines that Luhn Performance is looking to market at some point. Be it Belt or exhaust driven.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #71  
Old 09-16-2019, 08:04 PM
GTOGEORGE's Avatar
GTOGEORGE GTOGEORGE is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Rockwood, MICHIGAN
Posts: 8,884
Default

I WILL answer your questions since I’ve been running superchargers since the mid 80’s. For instant torque nothing beats supercharger ( of course roots blowers are by far king)! A supercharger is harder on bearings the a turbo but In my 30 something years I’ve only spun one bearing, now I’ve broken 2 factory blocks and one IA block but it was a power thing and one bad rod bolt in my Oliver rod! That brings me to where I’m at now........aluminum rods the best thing since flat screen tv’s! Yes I would run them in a street car! They make a world of difference in the bearings in a blower engine! Since I’ve been running them my bearings always look new! Obviously since the blower runs off a belt it tougher on the crank snout...........a good steel crank will take care of it, in your case! A Whipple or Edelbrock I think would work great for you.


GTO George


Last edited by GTOGEORGE; 09-16-2019 at 08:14 PM.
  #72  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:40 PM
AIR RAM AIR RAM is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Homestead FL
Posts: 412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Vaught View Post
I WILL TRY TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AIR RAM View Post
So my question is how much harder on parts is a supercharger over a Turbo or is that something that even needs to be considered?

I hear so many people talk about turbos breaking less parts because they are easier on them. Since I will be pushing my cast iron block to its limits, I'm wondering if the turbo would be easier on the block or is that a mute thought. LOL

SPEED SAFE, NICK
A) A supercharger is driven by the crankshaft snout/ crankshaft.

The snout sees a bending/twisting load as you drive the supercharger compressor, be it a load located at 12:00 (Roots Supercharger) or at 2:00 or 10:00 (Centrifugal Supercharger like a Vortech, Procharger, or Paxton unit).

The crank would see a twisting load if it was like some of the newer Alston/Vortech front mounted superchargers.

B) The Turbocharged engines would see none of these loads when they provided compressed air to the engine.

The loads in "A" would also create a load on the #2 block main bearing and a smaller load on the #3 block main bearing. At lower boost levels, say 12 psi, this can be contained easily with a Vortech / Procharger / Paxton Supercharger. A Roots unit, depending on the size, might see a much higher load on the crankshaft. I know of three Pontiac Engines (Cranks) who have had the snout replaced after it developed a crack.

So on a 15 psi Vortech Installation, you probably will be ok with the crank and block as many have been down that road with weaker blocks (Ford and Chebby).

No comments on Roots Race stuff as I personally have minimal experience on them but a lot of experience with the OEM (Ford) side of the units 3.8L and 4.6/5.0/5.8L production hardware. Some of these units have well over 100K miles on them.

Superchargers just look cool sticking out of the hood.

Centrifugal stuff is more stealthy. Turbos if done right are the real sleepers.
John Meany (Big Stuff3 owner) had a 1000 HP Corvette street car that could go anywhere and was very quick for what it was.

A few Fords have made 1400/1500 HP and are still built as true street cars.

A lot more time and effort to do it right though.

Tom V.

I like the 1000 HP street type engines that Luhn Performance is looking to market at some point. Be it Belt or exhaust driven.
Thanks Tom, that the first I have heard about with the #2 & #3 main bearing loads with the belt driven centrifugal's... it makes complete sense now that you brought it up. I was basing it all on the way the power increase was delivered and not even thinking about the load force on the crank and its relation to the main bearings.

For my build the options are Turbo or Centrifigal... I'm leaning even more towards a 10psi turbo set up based on what I have heard and your above response. I just wish a bolt on kit with all the cold and hot side pluming existed.

Thanks for the information.

SPEED SAFE, NICK

__________________
"The grass is not greener on the other side, its just fertilized with different $h!t"
  #73  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:53 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

The Art Whipple stuff is nice and well made but he wants some cash for his good stuff..

Art sells different sized Screw Superchargers. A 3.3L supercharger might work very well for you.

One of the PY members has a 510 cid Whipple Supercharger.

I talked to Art and they were able to make a deal. The PY member might be PROBIRD but not sure about that. He ordered it some years ago.

(That is 510 cubic inches of air mass flowing thru the supercharger every revolution.)
The supercharger can also make 30 psi of boost pressure at 12,000 supercharger rpm.

Art wants $6500 for the supercharger and then you would have to fabricate/ modify the rest of the intake and belt drive parts.

The units are quite, well made, and very efficient.

The supercharger is a Lysholm screw supercharger design.

$6500 is about the number that I paid for each one of the 53 3.3L screw superchargers that I ordered from Lysholm some years ago. (Over $255,000) was the tab.)
They are a smaller supercharger vs the 510 race unit Art sells now but the largest at the time. More suited for what you want to do.

You could buy a couple of very nice Turbos from Harry H at Precision/Turbonetics for $6500 but if you want belt stuff that is very efficient, the Whipple stuff is very good.

Features:

Manufactured in the USA
Virtually noise free operation
Increased efficiency and increased durability
Replaceable and upgradeable component design
Oil sight glass for proper oil level inspection
100,000 mile oil change intervals

W510R 8.3L Specs:

Max Continuous RPM - 11,000
Max Peak RPM - 12,000
Max CFM - 3250
Max PSI - 30
Peak VE - 93 (VE is Volumetric Efficiency
Peak AE - 75 (AE is adiabatic Efficiency)

Tom V

ps Do a search on the 3.3L superchargers.

We did a program for the Canadian Government and ran the supercharger on one of the 300 hour test cycles I have posted about in the past. Over 100 Hours on the dyno at max rpm of the engine plus 10%. Think over 6000 rpm for 6 hours at a time and we ran the 6 hour highest rpm test point 18 cycles. Very very durable units. Some run a 8 second cycle on the strip.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.

Last edited by Tom Vaught; 09-16-2019 at 10:09 PM.
  #74  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:58 PM
Scott65's Avatar
Scott65 Scott65 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,991
Default

Tom, what is considered best attainable adiabatic efficiency in a supercharger? Just the supercharger itself, not intercooled.

__________________
'65 Tempest 467 3650# 11.30@120.31
  #75  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:12 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

Roots stuff is about 50-53% Adiabatic Efficient
Screw stuff is 75% AE.
Centrifugal and Turbo stuff typically can be from 72% to 78% AE.

Link to one of Whipples sellers. https://www.vividracing.com/-p-15070...BoCYbsQAvD_BwE

Tom V.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #76  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:23 PM
AIR RAM AIR RAM is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Homestead FL
Posts: 412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOGEORGE View Post
I WILL answer your questions since I’ve been running superchargers since the mid 80’s. For instant torque nothing beats supercharger ( of course roots blowers are by far king)! A supercharger is harder on bearings the a turbo but In my 30 something years I’ve only spun one bearing, now I’ve broken 2 factory blocks and one IA block but it was a power thing and one bad rod bolt in my Oliver rod! That brings me to where I’m at now........aluminum rods the best thing since flat screen tv’s! Yes I would run them in a street car! They make a world of difference in the bearings in a blower engine! Since I’ve been running them my bearings always look new! Obviously since the blower runs off a belt it tougher on the crank snout...........a good steel crank will take care of it, in your case! A Whipple or Edelbrock I think would work great for you.


GTO George
Thanks for your advice. I'm really not wanting to go with a roots style blower and already have the North Wind intake modified for MPFI so my options at this point are centrifugal or turbo. I am planning on just runing a 90degree elbow and running a large single bore LS throttle body up top...

I have been hearing a lot about the aluminum rods and honestly if I had not already committed to the current build I would have most likely gone that route... however at the time of my shopping spreee... everyone to include their grandmothers where saying no to aluminum rods... I have sense heard several speak up for them... ohh well... there is always next build. So its going to have heavy 6.70 Scat Rods and CP pistons with a 40cc dish to get it down to 9:1cr with 72cc heads. 10psi on top of that should make for some fun daily driving... LOL

SPEED SAFE, NICK

__________________
"The grass is not greener on the other side, its just fertilized with different $h!t"
  #77  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:29 PM
AIR RAM AIR RAM is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Homestead FL
Posts: 412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Vaught View Post
Roots stuff is about 50-53% Adiabatic Efficient
Screw stuff is 75% AE.
Centrifugal and Turbo stuff typically can be from 72% to 78% AE.

Link to one of Whipples sellers. https://www.vividracing.com/-p-15070...BoCYbsQAvD_BwE

Tom V.
Its amazing at how far Whipple has takin the screw chargers and made them so darn efficient.

SPEED SAFE, NICK

__________________
"The grass is not greener on the other side, its just fertilized with different $h!t"
  #78  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:59 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

The Lysholm Supercharger people have had the screw supercharger design for at least 20 years.

One of the Lysholm Supercharger Engineers defected from Lysholm (located in Sweden)
to the USA and went to work for Art Whipple. Then Art really started making some BIG Advances with the screw type superchargers. Believe the guy is still there.
Do not remember his name as my contact with him was early on and then he moved to Whipple.

Eaton has a Twisted Rotor Supercharger that was used in several OEM vehicle offerings, the Ford Super Coupe and the Ford Lightning Truck being two of the programs they worked on. Their Supercharger Engineering Center is located in Marshall Michigan.
The Twisted Rotor supercharger is not a Screw Supercharger. Air goes around the walls of the twisted rotor superchargers and rootsm superchargers. Air goes down the center of the screw superchargers.

Tom V.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #79  
Old 09-17-2019, 12:16 AM
GTOGEORGE's Avatar
GTOGEORGE GTOGEORGE is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Rockwood, MICHIGAN
Posts: 8,884
Default

Torque from a roots/screw type blower is far superior compared to a pro charger type blower or a turbo also throttle response is out of site!


GTO George


Last edited by GTOGEORGE; 09-17-2019 at 12:24 AM.
  #80  
Old 09-17-2019, 05:50 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,294
Default

Centrifugal Superchargers have come a long way from the old days, like in 1998, when the Keens could run mid 7s with a legal weight 3000 race weight and a Powerglide trans.

They did not seem to have any issues with beating out Billy Glidden for the Championship that year and Billy is a better racer than 99% of the racers out there. They were running a basic Vortech XX supercharger which is really old technoligy vs the new stuff from Vortech. Course they were racing for a National Championship vs a "Brand" Race. 1998, 2008, 2018 WOW that was 20+ years ago they were running in the 7s with a crummy centrifugal supercharger.

Tom V.

The new stuff with Billet Wheels and optimized compressor housings is a bunch better.

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:01 AM.

 

About Us

The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.

 




Copyright © 2017