Supercharger on a 5 lt ??
Discussion
hi Tiny,
Be careful: if you go beyond the twin plenum/M Adams/etc upgrade, which means more than let's say 320 bhp, your car (driveshaft, gearbox etc) might not be able to take it or will suffer greatly. Or at least that's what the experts tell me. I can assure you, the for-mentioned upgrade gives you PLENTY of power.
Be careful: if you go beyond the twin plenum/M Adams/etc upgrade, which means more than let's say 320 bhp, your car (driveshaft, gearbox etc) might not be able to take it or will suffer greatly. Or at least that's what the experts tell me. I can assure you, the for-mentioned upgrade gives you PLENTY of power.
Be careful - on the RPI Eng. site :
www.rpiv8.com/
There is a warning against super charging as the super charger shrouds certain cylinders from gettin an even mixture distribution ...
Old fashioned screw and routes super chargers would give this .. more modern (see this months EVO) page 73 - I think .. for a modern crank driven charger..
TVR will be using this type.
www.rpiv8.com/
There is a warning against super charging as the super charger shrouds certain cylinders from gettin an even mixture distribution ...
Old fashioned screw and routes super chargers would give this .. more modern (see this months EVO) page 73 - I think .. for a modern crank driven charger..
TVR will be using this type.
Tis also banned from motorsport as well.
The issues about transmission is not a joke. Just rebuilt the 520's gearbox after about 12 months of putting 400 bhp through it and the diff broke... clutch plates shattered. also got through two clutches as well.... Oh and I have also started to bend the suspension mounts so they have been strengthened.
The issues about transmission is not a joke. Just rebuilt the 520's gearbox after about 12 months of putting 400 bhp through it and the diff broke... clutch plates shattered. also got through two clutches as well.... Oh and I have also started to bend the suspension mounts so they have been strengthened.
rev-erend said:
Be careful - on the RPI Eng. site : etc
Its actually a warning about problems with one particularly bad type of supercharger installation, not with superchargers in general. However from the wording you'd think that superchargers are a fundamentally dangerous idea. Could this be anything to do with the fact that RPI have based their business on normally aspirated engines, and don't do superchargers?
mark adams is the man for this...
he's going to be doing something with Peninsula this year. he's done around 40 blowers on RV8's with no trouble producing around 500BHP De-tuned to 400BHP for the road with about 480lb/ft or something stupid
BUT you can't do this on a 500 without a strong risk of breaking the crank 
the reason i didn't go this way - YET!
there's a problem with the revs on the 500. you need around 6500/7000 revs to make the power at about 11psi boost and the crank just don't like it! and theres no point in blowing if it don't rev.
ALSO, ya 500's are High Compression giving probs with pre-detonation (read "blowing up engines!") so you need to expand heads/gaskets etc to lower. which drops power.
put on a blower, driven by the engine and sapping another 15 bhp or so in an already crowded bay and you get more probs...
And compressing the air heats it up - less dense - less power. etc etc.
It WILL be done, and soon as i say, but NOT on my car! so you see why all your experienced racers, like steve go the normal (expensive) route.
oh well...maybe next year...
by the way, i wonder if all you guy's with early, low compression, free revving 400's are reading this with a smile
i think there may be renewed interest (and an accompanying boost in resale prices) in your cars over the next year or so...you heard it on Pistonheads first!
>> Edited by Guillotine on Wednesday 18th February 18:55
he's going to be doing something with Peninsula this year. he's done around 40 blowers on RV8's with no trouble producing around 500BHP De-tuned to 400BHP for the road with about 480lb/ft or something stupid
BUT you can't do this on a 500 without a strong risk of breaking the crank the reason i didn't go this way - YET! there's a problem with the revs on the 500. you need around 6500/7000 revs to make the power at about 11psi boost and the crank just don't like it! and theres no point in blowing if it don't rev.
ALSO, ya 500's are High Compression giving probs with pre-detonation (read "blowing up engines!") so you need to expand heads/gaskets etc to lower. which drops power.
put on a blower, driven by the engine and sapping another 15 bhp or so in an already crowded bay and you get more probs...
And compressing the air heats it up - less dense - less power. etc etc.
It WILL be done, and soon as i say, but NOT on my car! so you see why all your experienced racers, like steve go the normal (expensive) route.
oh well...maybe next year...
by the way, i wonder if all you guy's with early, low compression, free revving 400's are reading this with a smile
i think there may be renewed interest (and an accompanying boost in resale prices) in your cars over the next year or so...you heard it on Pistonheads first!
>> Edited by Guillotine on Wednesday 18th February 18:55
The Taraka mods seem like the spec I was using a few years ago. OK but nothing revolutionary . My current Griff shopping trolley has a similar spec and is reasonable but a bit of a diesel in comparison with what I have done with the 520.
If you want an engine to rev to 6500-7000 then you are looking at a £6K basic engine to start with which makes the total cost about the same as normally aspirated.
I am looking at blowing the 520 but John Eales keeeps delivering more power so I 'm keeping normally aspirated at the moment.
There are a lot of issues when you get to 400 bhp irrrespective of how it is achieved and being able to make the engine reliable. Normal aspiration is a bit more controllable from that perspective and there are tricks that can be done to allow you to run very high compressions. and get away with it that are not open when blowing the engine.
I can tell you this... the costs make buying a Sargaris look cheaper option...
If you want an engine to rev to 6500-7000 then you are looking at a £6K basic engine to start with which makes the total cost about the same as normally aspirated.
I am looking at blowing the 520 but John Eales keeeps delivering more power so I 'm keeping normally aspirated at the moment.
There are a lot of issues when you get to 400 bhp irrrespective of how it is achieved and being able to make the engine reliable. Normal aspiration is a bit more controllable from that perspective and there are tricks that can be done to allow you to run very high compressions. and get away with it that are not open when blowing the engine.
I can tell you this... the costs make buying a Sargaris look cheaper option...
And as I have often said.... be prepared for gearboxes, clutches, diffs, brakes and suspension to become consumables... You can't increase the power that much without these parts needing serious upgrading. That in my experience costs as much if not more than the engine work. Without it the insurer's won't touch the car....
The 500 engine is not ideal for Supercharging as it is stroked to produce the capacity using a very long throw crank, yes the standard 4.o would work better, or ideally a 4.1 with 96mm bore.
the other problem with forced induction is that insurance companies will charge much more, thats if they will insure you at all.
Tim
the other problem with forced induction is that insurance companies will charge much more, thats if they will insure you at all.
Tim
I think it's all about choosing a sensible stock C/r and then using stock revs. This way the mechanical loadings on the crank and rods stay more or less the same. You have to deal with heat/thermal issues though.
I don't agree with the RPI site at all. They are promoting their own 5.2 stroker product not turbo's or superchargers. In fact I recall reading a magazine where they slated superchargers on the 4.6 engine. A few pages further on there was a feature about a blown rv8 4.6 in Oz. It had a completely stock engine (read cheap) with an eaton 90 on top and motec efi. It was 4wd and spinning all 4 wheels in a cloud of tyre smoke! The stock engine can easily be blown with turbo's or a supercharger and will make mega torque. The gearboxes are ok because you usually break traction before the box. A rover will easily handle 5-6 psi and that's a huge amount of extra power to be had. I happily ran a 4.5 and 5.1 on 7-9 psi boost with turbo's.
I don't agree with the RPI site at all. They are promoting their own 5.2 stroker product not turbo's or superchargers. In fact I recall reading a magazine where they slated superchargers on the 4.6 engine. A few pages further on there was a feature about a blown rv8 4.6 in Oz. It had a completely stock engine (read cheap) with an eaton 90 on top and motec efi. It was 4wd and spinning all 4 wheels in a cloud of tyre smoke! The stock engine can easily be blown with turbo's or a supercharger and will make mega torque. The gearboxes are ok because you usually break traction before the box. A rover will easily handle 5-6 psi and that's a huge amount of extra power to be had. I happily ran a 4.5 and 5.1 on 7-9 psi boost with turbo's.
I would go the route I have gone done. Get a 500. Get a better induction kit, get it chipped and you can get a nice reliable power upgrade that can be a regular user without worrying too much. With the 520 I specced the strongest engine I could get and detuned it to get reliability. It is as close to a race engine that I dare go to while retaining the ability to drive it on the road.
The 520's engine still requires a rebuild every year, an oil change every time the car is used effectively and everything else starts getting consumable. The costs are astronomic. Alright I might have a very quick car but it needs slicks to get the best out of it, mpg in anger is around 2-3 and so on. This is not the sort of car you would necessarily want. I have often thought about dropping the 520's engine into the Griff and building something bigger for the Wedge but it doesn't make sense.
Doesn't matter how you do it, each bhp increase will cost in the region of £100 for the engine work. Double the total estimate to find out what it will be in real terms. The rest will be spent on modifying everything else to cope.
The 520's engine still requires a rebuild every year, an oil change every time the car is used effectively and everything else starts getting consumable. The costs are astronomic. Alright I might have a very quick car but it needs slicks to get the best out of it, mpg in anger is around 2-3 and so on. This is not the sort of car you would necessarily want. I have often thought about dropping the 520's engine into the Griff and building something bigger for the Wedge but it doesn't make sense.
Doesn't matter how you do it, each bhp increase will cost in the region of £100 for the engine work. Double the total estimate to find out what it will be in real terms. The rest will be spent on modifying everything else to cope.
tiny said:
Let's say we put supercharging to one side for the moment then what are the pro/cons of the other 2 existing power upgrade options ?
TVR Power's Taraka package -v- ACT/404cam/M.Adams chip
Hi Simon, You know the way i've gone and theirs no regrets whatsoever.Give Richard a call, get it done and join those FEW on the strip.zzGassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff