camden superchargers is all most done [ please read]
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: CALIFORNIA
Boost Is At 10 Lbs , 6 To 8 On The Stock Ones , 8 To 12 On Bigger Injectors But Im Running 650 On The Secondarys, No The Idle Is At 1500 Not 1800 Anything Below 1500 It Dies, And Yes Im Running That **** 91 Octain , Lol
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
So, 6-8psi on stock injectors, and they say the stock injectors max at 180hp(roughly).
Now it seems a bit strange that, with upgraded injectors the boost will be about 12-14 or so, and is supposed to yield 300. So is the charger either that inneficient at low boost, or what? It doesn't make sense that 6-8psi only yeilds about 30-40hp increase, and yet 12-4 is supposed to be almost twice the stock levles.
Now it seems a bit strange that, with upgraded injectors the boost will be about 12-14 or so, and is supposed to yield 300. So is the charger either that inneficient at low boost, or what? It doesn't make sense that 6-8psi only yeilds about 30-40hp increase, and yet 12-4 is supposed to be almost twice the stock levles.
Last edited by SonicRaT; Sep 29, 2004 at 12:00 AM.
Wait................What?
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh/Cary, NC - USA
Originally Posted by rotarygod
Not every turbo is efficient. Admittedly neither is a roots supercharger, especially a 2 lobe nonintercooled one like Camden's. The stock T-II turbo can't even flow enough air for 300 hp. Maybe at the flywheel it can but that is seriously pushing it. The exhaust side of the stock T-II turbo is just an atrocity. Terribly restrictive. Even a fairly inefficient supercharger can make good power with a nice set of headers. A properly tuned exhaust header on a supercharged car will easily offset alot of the inefficiency of the supercharger in comparison to a turbo. It isn't hard to get anything to work better than a stock T-II turbo. Your M90 should actually be able to outdo it if done properly. They flow more air than you think they do. If you tune it right and use an intercooler, you can probably get 300 hp on a ported motor. I'm not arguing that the Camden kit can get 300 hp. They claim that 300 is possible with a ported motor but the only dyno numbers they have ever admitted to, have only shown up to about 276 fwhp or so. The M90 is a far more efficient blower. I understand that a properly designed turbo system is more efficient. I am just making the statement that not all turbo systems are.
)
When I rode in Codeblue's car at Sevenstock, it had a ton of low end. It came in right off idle. That alone made it way more fun that a T-II at low rpm's. It would be a blast in an autocross or as a fun little street car. As the rpm's rose though, you weren't pushed back into the seat any more. It was like you had an initial low end kick and then it just stayed there. It wasn't like a turbo where you start moving and the faster you go, the harder you get pushed into the seat. It felt more like a Mustang GT. Off idle torque but nothing as you get faster. Still fun though.
Last edited by poor_red_neck; Sep 29, 2004 at 12:02 AM.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Yes, the m90 is more efficient, but the numbers for an m90 are VERY close to 300hp, which really boggles me that the camden is supposed to get there as well. This is why i put my m90 project on hold and am trying to get a whipple, I want a bit more than 300. 
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Yes, the m90 is more efficient, but the numbers for an m90 are VERY close to 300hp, which really boggles me that the camden is supposed to get there as well. This is why i put my m90 project on hold and am trying to get a whipple, I want a bit more than 300.
...although that's nitromethane...
heheRegardless though, lysholm blowers rock, turbo level efficiency, and roots style boost/power curves.
i am legendary
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 8,478
Likes: 1
From: Kirkland, WA
I thought to increase the boost on a s/c you have to put a bigger pulley on or whatever? How is putting bigger injectors on magically increase the boost? Or are you putting on a larger pulley too?
Wait................What?
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh/Cary, NC - USA
Originally Posted by dDuB
I thought to increase the boost on a s/c you have to put a bigger pulley on or whatever? How is putting bigger injectors on magically increase the boost? Or are you putting on a larger pulley too?
)
Rotary Freak
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 1
From: Northern California
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Pulley changes. Anybody got anything to chime in on how they figure it makes 300hp, non intercooled?
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
What we really need is a map of the camdens efficiency, then we can at least figure out how many CFM/rpm it's kicking off, and figure in the heat thrown out, and get a rough estimate, but as for 300 on a extensively ported? I'm still a bit leary.
As far as the site goes, it basically says 35% increase with larger injectors, no mention of this is over stock or what, but lets this way:
35% increase over the maxed out stock (176), is about 240. Oh well, I guess that's the reason the page no longer says 300. I'm tired of arguing, for the price, you could've had a high compression turbo that would spool so quickly you wouldn't even begin to think about a lack of low-end, but oh well.
As far as the site goes, it basically says 35% increase with larger injectors, no mention of this is over stock or what, but lets this way:
35% increase over the maxed out stock (176), is about 240. Oh well, I guess that's the reason the page no longer says 300. I'm tired of arguing, for the price, you could've had a high compression turbo that would spool so quickly you wouldn't even begin to think about a lack of low-end, but oh well.
Last edited by SonicRaT; Sep 29, 2004 at 01:57 AM.
Rotary Freak
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 1
From: Northern California
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Oh well, I guess that's the reason the page no longer says 300. I'm tired of arguing, for the price, you could've had a high compression turbo that would spool so quickly you wouldn't even begin to think about a lack of low-end, but oh well.
I'm a boost creep...
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 8
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Originally Posted by RX7FROMCAL
Using your stock Mazda Rx7 13B ECU, we estimate you will get 35% more horsepower at the wheels by increasing your injector sizes.
Missin' my FD
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,755
Likes: 0
From: Seminole, FL (Tampa Bay Area)
Originally Posted by pianoprodigy
I found the numbers on Camden's old site that I mentioned by using archive.org.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ported and Polished Four Port 13B with Seven Inch Supercharger
Horsepower: 275 HP
Torque: 184 lb-ft.
Boost: 10 lbs.
Ported and Polished Six Port 13B with Seven Inch Supercharger
Horsepower: 276 HP
Torque: 178 lb-ft.
Boost: 9 lbs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://web.archive.org/web/200304101...ex.php?pag=304
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ported and Polished Four Port 13B with Seven Inch Supercharger
Horsepower: 275 HP
Torque: 184 lb-ft.
Boost: 10 lbs.
Ported and Polished Six Port 13B with Seven Inch Supercharger
Horsepower: 276 HP
Torque: 178 lb-ft.
Boost: 9 lbs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://web.archive.org/web/200304101...ex.php?pag=304
These numbers were for the carbed S/C setup.
Dan had said that these numbers were at the flywheel.
This is the only dyno information that has ever seemed to make sense to me.
Surely, an FI setup would be able to make more power from fine tuning.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: CALIFORNIA
hey guys i can tell theres some questions that need to be answered out here, thoses number i posted were just figures that i went over with gary from atkins rotary. belave me im not trying to blow smoke up anybodys *** here , lol the 305 was to the fly not the rear, and remeber thoses are just numbers surly doent mean its gonna happen, hell it would be nice , but we shall see when i get my dyno some time within the next two weeks . even it if it doent get 305 hell im happy with what ive felt with my car up tell this point. so the dynos a sure thing , i just wanna work out some small bugs still , before i put on the dyno . will keep ya updated . gil
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 575
From: The South
Man, this thread is funny. They said that it made 176 rwhp with a supercharger, streetport, and a full racing beat exhaust. I realize that the average power is up more over an NA, but that's, what, only 15 horsepower peak over what that setup would do NA?
Originally Posted by bouis
Man, this thread is funny. They said that it made 176 rwhp with a supercharger, streetport, and a full racing beat exhaust. I realize that the average power is up more over an NA, but that's, what, only 15 horsepower peak over what that setup would do NA?
A Whipple (or lysholm screw) supercharger is an aftermarket design, I'm not aware of any US cars that use them stock. They compress air in the housing, and push compressed air out into the intake, instead of compressing it in the intake (roots). What this gets you is major efficiency (high 80s adiabatic, same range as a turbo) with the boost curve of a roots charger (quickly increasing to full boost, vs. spooling slowly on a turbo). I'm not going to get into the whole turbo vs. S/C debate, but trust me, with it done properly, a screw type blower can get similiar peak power and even better area under the curve then a turbo.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Originally Posted by digitalsolo
That's 176 HP at the wheels, a stock S4 N/A makes what? 115 or so? That's a pretty major increase in power.
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Comparing a stock motor, to a motor with a streetport and racing beat exhaust, isn't a very good comparison. That engine probably pushed at least 140rwhp on it's own.
i am legendary
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 8,478
Likes: 1
From: Kirkland, WA
Originally Posted by SonicRaT
Comparing a stock motor, to a motor with a streetport and racing beat exhaust, isn't a very good comparison. That engine probably pushed at least 140rwhp on it's own.
So if that was true, the s/c only adds around 42 wheel hp, right? That even LESS worth it... I'm starting to wonder more and more why someone would buy this kit, no offense to those that have, because ~42 wheel hp for 3 grand? So you get like 14 hp per 1000 dollars or so, haha that's awesome.
Everyone sees that 176 rwhp and assumes it was on a stock motor it seems like, kind of deceiving
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,630
Likes: 3
From: NY, MA, MI, OR, TX, and now LA or AZ!
Hell, any motor with an intake/exhaust is going to be a pretty close to 120-140, porting generally is about 150-160, so it's hard to really understand just WTF was going on with that number. Oh well, on the other hand, it should be good for about 240ish once the boost is turned up, but that's kind of iffy since nobody knows any stats on the charger itself. I think it's peak will be about 240