Check out this Supercharger
#1
Check out this Supercharger
Hey guys - check this out .......
http://www.dnamotorsport.com/ProChar...8_Kit/RX-8.htm
http://www.rotormaster.com.au/subPage.asp?cid=50
http://www.dnamotorsport.com/ProChar...8_Kit/RX-8.htm
http://www.rotormaster.com.au/subPage.asp?cid=50
#3
Registered
I'd like to here one on a RX8 the procharger on my mustang flat out whines. Does anyone on the board have this system?
#8
Originally Posted by maxxdamigz
Hmmm. They put "turbo" under the badge even though it's a supercharger? A "S/C" would be more appropriate me thinks.
BUT - did you get that - 350 HP
I'll say it again - 350 HP !
#9
Riot Controller
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys do understand that centrifugal blowers only reach peak boost at redline right? that totally negates the point of putting FI on a rotary, as it will only make the torque curve peaky
#11
Metatron
iTrader: (1)
Been done....
Maurice (Canzoomer) had one of those ProChargers on his '8 in 2004.
....after much experimentation he took it off. He was working with some Arizona dealer who wanted to sell them as a package on new cars.
During his experiments, he decided to use an electro-clutch to disengage it at low revs - found they were mostly made by Bendix, engineered the qualities it would need and the size it would be, then got quotes from them for the exact size/specs he needed. They said that size was a common one, because Mercedes use that model on some of their "Kompressor" models! DOH!
S
....after much experimentation he took it off. He was working with some Arizona dealer who wanted to sell them as a package on new cars.
During his experiments, he decided to use an electro-clutch to disengage it at low revs - found they were mostly made by Bendix, engineered the qualities it would need and the size it would be, then got quotes from them for the exact size/specs he needed. They said that size was a common one, because Mercedes use that model on some of their "Kompressor" models! DOH!
S
#12
Registered
iTrader: (25)
that will really drag a small, no-torque engine like the Renesis down at low rpms until the boost starts kicking in, the problem with high rpm engines is this style SC has to have it's internal rpm limit matched to the engine rev limit to prevent spinning it too fast, then it is turning too slow at low rpm to make any boost
look at the low rpm end of the TQ curve in their dyno graph:
look at the low rpm end of the TQ curve in their dyno graph:
#13
^ good point.
they're showing whp + vehicle speed, instead of whp + rpm.
If the stock car makes 80 whp at 3,000 rpm, you might end up with 40 whp due to dragging around the SC.
they're showing whp + vehicle speed, instead of whp + rpm.
If the stock car makes 80 whp at 3,000 rpm, you might end up with 40 whp due to dragging around the SC.
#14
Revolver & Timbo from the Aussie site both drove it & reprted that it was pretty much like stock in the low rpm range .
Maybe it will lose a little - but hey this is a production supercharger producing excellent power that is available now .
You have to give them some credit for that ......
Maybe it will lose a little - but hey this is a production supercharger producing excellent power that is available now .
You have to give them some credit for that ......
#16
I must say that for so called rotary experts i believe they have used the wrong type of Supercharger , a Twinscrew type would have been way more effective especially downlow in the power range were its most needed
Michael
Michael
#17
Riot Controller
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
centrifugal blowers are a waste, all the parasitic loss of a blower with more lag than a turbo...
i suppose if you had a race car with very very close gears it wouldnt matter...you'd just need 30 of them to keep the rpm's usable.
i suppose if you had a race car with very very close gears it wouldnt matter...you'd just need 30 of them to keep the rpm's usable.
#18
Originally Posted by epitrochoid
centrifugal blowers are a waste, all the parasitic loss of a blower with more lag than a turbo...
i suppose if you had a race car with very very close gears it wouldnt matter...you'd just need 30 of them to keep the rpm's usable.
i suppose if you had a race car with very very close gears it wouldnt matter...you'd just need 30 of them to keep the rpm's usable.
This setup with 350hp is going to be as quick as a turbo with around 50 hp less up top - it's the area under the graph that counts right ?
#19
Originally Posted by Grizzly8
I must say that for so called rotary experts i believe they have used the wrong type of Supercharger , a Twinscrew type would have been way more effective especially downlow in the power range were its most needed
Michael
Michael
As you can see from my avatar I'm a AFSC fan but thats not out yet either ... waiting waiting
I hope i'm not going to grow old waiting.
Last I heard there were over 20 of these running around in
Aussie (probably a lot more)
#23
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ekerö, Sweden
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hallo over there !! I have an Rx-8 which I made to a "Racecar a`la Rx-8" and this winter I will build in DNA Supercharger 8 PSI. I`m conviced the supercharger is better comparied to turbo because of the heat the turbo produce. Running the car 3 , 6 , 12 hours race and the turbo is dead. As soon as I have some diagram I will present them for you.
#24
Originally Posted by mysql101
If the stock car makes 80 whp at 3,000 rpm, you might end up with 40 whp due to dragging around the SC.
I don't know, it might be personal preference. But I would like a torque curve that continually increases all the way to redline, it would allow you to better take advantage of the gearing at high rpms.
#25
Riot Controller
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brettus
Can't see that - HP & torque are significantly higher than stock in the 6-9k rev range , which is where you are most of the time when racing.
This setup with 350hp is going to be as quick as a turbo with around 50 hp less up top - it's the area under the graph that counts right ?
This setup with 350hp is going to be as quick as a turbo with around 50 hp less up top - it's the area under the graph that counts right ?
the only curve that counts is the torque curve. hp is actually the area under the curve from 0-X rpm (not quite, but you obviously know calculus so you know what i mean). and the slope of the HP curve is torque. while yea, gains from 6-9k are alright for racing, you're still going to have a sloped torque curve at the point, which only leads to a more sloped hp curve. if your particular setup can support XXXft/lbs of torque, and you only had that at exactly 9000 rpm (ignorning airflow properties of the motor here), you would get beat by the same car that had the same torque at 3500 rpm and held it to 9000 rpm.
and yea, i know the greddy kit doesn't do that, but there are turbos that can hold boost and torque all the way to 9000. Procharger's photoshop dyno graph doesn't really show you much, but look at my own dyno: http://home.cfl.rr.com/epitrochoid/rx8dyno.jpg
If you look at how the torque comes up and peaks at 3500, and holds [fairly] level to about 5.5K. The drop off after is from an undersized turbo, but in most properly set up turbo cars that stays fairly level (take a look at mazsport's stage I turbo dyno, and you'll see). This gives useable torque at nearly all RPM's, not just 6-9