Few pics of gary on the dyno....

 

looks like you could use a good clean up shaun! pretty scruffy, that or start pickin up the chicks that keep you clean cut!

sucks i couldnt make it... i was tearin the fence down at the new house, totally forgot :/

 

What numbers did it pull?? Nice to see a supercharger under there!

 

This thread is worthless without #'s!!!!!!!

 

it was on a mustang dyno and to be honest i am not completely sure what the final numbers were....

he will probably post them, i put this up because i told him that i would post the pictures for him....

 

Arch, i saw ur car domain site and the vid against the chevy, very nice bro... keep up the good work.

 

hehe, thanx dude, i'm trying!...

big mods on their way....

 

Is this after the fueling issue was fixed and hopefully making more than 135 WHP now?

Vids and numbers would be good.

 

i believe he still is having a few little issues but i believe he got 160rwhp now and loads of torque....

those are my guesses, i am not 100% sure....

 

158HP and 140 tourque @ 13PSI

When it hit 6000 RPM it just died because of the 6-Port setup. It revved out to 8000, but no gain was there. It was a bit of a heartbreaker seeing how much difference a 4-port setup really makes. Having known that (and having the budget) we would have went 4-Port Instead.

I must admit though, the driveability of this car is phenominal. It drives just like it did from the factory, gets the same milage, Has over a 50% increase over stock power and the engine will last hopefully just as long. It also sounds better than any RX-7 I've ever heard.


So I'd say we made out pretty good.



If anyone can assist in file hosting, I have videos. I also have footage of the 572cui BB Chev truck that ran after gary.

 

ahh, so thats what the results were, good to hear....

it's all good, he took me in a drive not too long ago in the car and i could not believe how hard the car pulls and how smooth it was, a total sleeper....

i would never be discouraged with 158rwhp, after seeing him put that down, to be honest, i'm not very far off from what he was laying on the rollers....

that truck was scary, my head still hurts....

 

I guess you're lucky you didnt put money on your previous predictions eh...
Its a nice looking car and its pretty unique with the supercharger but dollar/power wise it really doesn't make alot of sense in the end result..But I guess someone had to do it to find out...Max

 

Ya that was king of dissappointing. Plenty of people have made 50 more horses than that using a stock S4 motor, stock turbo and a standalone. I would imagine the driveability would be fine, I'd be a little upset if at such a low power number it was experiencing driveability issues.

Very clean looking car though, real nice, props for trying the supercharger. I'm sure there were people who saw this car run and thought it was making considerably more power, it's funny sometimes it takes a car like this to help people realize the significance of a 400rwhp car.

 

Nice looking first gen. How much was the supercharger conversion? I was under the impression that a stock T2 would put down similar numbers - if not higher. Would a turbo conversion have more potential and be more cost effective? I'm sure the car feels like a rocket due to the power to weight ratio.

 

well there was a deadly truck there, and if i remember correctly they wanted atleast 600rwhp and were down right PISSED OFF that they only netted around 460rwhp....

was on a mustang dyno aswell, though i doubt that makes much of a difference....

the car is very quick though, suprises the hell outa me....

 

As a comparison I made 270 rwhp & 307 lb/ft torque with my 944 Turbo on a Mustang Dyno. About 1 year later I made almost the exact same numbers on a Dynojet. Surprised the hell out of me too.

 

Most people will agree that given the same variables the mustang will spit out lower numbers than the dynojet. I agree this is probably true but the variables are never the same so it gets difficult to state a universal percentage of how much lower it actually is.

The key to all this is if the owner is happy. If the owners happy with the money spent and the power made then it doesnt matter. It's a real clean car and as mentioned a good driver so....Unique as well, not alot of supercharged 1st gens around town.

 

I have recently read that only the N/A cars produce lower power on a Mustang dyno and that a turbocharged car will produce higher numbers because the Mustang dyno applies a load to the car which helps build more boost quicker. Apparently some cars have difficulty achieving full boost early on a Dynojet because the rollers are free rolling. This is contrary to everything we have been told so far. I guess the only way to know is to go from one to the other back to back and see what the differences are. Even then things like the initial dyno set up can make a difference in the reported numbers.

 

Our goal was 200HP. I would have bet money on it because its still possible. We're just done for now. Being only the 2nd S/C around, its very very difficult to know how to go about building an engine and setup. That Supercharger is capable of plenty of power. The engine however, is just simply a street ported 6-Port. The 4-Port would have done wonders. High Compression rotors would have helped, but shortened the life of the engine. I suspect EFI and an exhaust that flows better will net us the missing 50HP. He undertook a project that demanded alot of time, money and respect. I'd do it forsure if I had the money. But S/C isnt like Turbo at all. Its a totally different animal IMO. Theres alot of things about an S/C that rob power compared to Turbo. The powers there, it just needs to be tapped.


Neils S/C Lasted 5 years of brutal driving and conditions and it runs better now than it ever did. I hope garys lasts just as long. Hopefully I'll have the 3rd S/C.

 

Codeblues is running 211rwhp, only big diff berween her's and mine is she is on efi with a micrtech (I have an Edelbrock) and she has a better exhaust system(RB road race system) . The tailpipe O2 sensor used had difficulty at very high rpm due to the velocity of the exhaust. I am running a RB header and streetport RB exhaust. Great for torque and midrange but I feel the flow falls off up top. I regret not disconnecting the exhaust for a victory lap run now, maybe in the fall before winter. My exhaust plan icludes a true 2" dual system on my FB, I am certain this'll bring up the numbers. I am sure I could lean the carb out and gain a few ponies but I like to play safe. The mustang does not put on as much load as you think, I was running octane boost and we even cranked up the timing 4 degrees with no detonation but I got detonation in third on the raod afterward. I keep timing down a tad for driveability and safety as well. I am "happy", I have loads of torque out of the hole, power that responds intananeously to throttle input, and great driveability. I had dicussed using a 12a centerplate and possible bridgework but given budget restrictions we decided against it. I kept the SE centerplate so if I chose to go EFI in the future I could. Yaaa see, I used old rotor housings (budget issue) but used s5 rotors and s5 flywheel. Had I bucked up for a s5 4 port setup with hardened stationary gears I'd easily hit well over 200, but at a lot more $$$. Instead I have what I asked for, great driveablity in a daily driver with little change in fuel economy, and show me a TII with a power band of 1800-6500 rpm. My power band matches codeblues to a tee untile 6400 rpm, do the exhaust change ($$$) and I'll be up there. Adam and Bydon did beautiful portwork for me given the driveability and wide powerband. Andrew and Bryan sweated bullet in extra time on details (worked 'til 9 before installation sandblasting every bolthead). Bryan spend hours with the pillar guages since there was no pillar pod available. To drive this thing is to truly appreciate how the camden works, listening to it can only make you smile as well.

 

A holley double pumper with a 4" filter and a 1" riser would've put down a lot more topend #'s. One problem though, "THE HOOD". Dealing with hood clearance has been a big issue!

 

I completely agree....

 

If I read correctly the camden kit is rated at 176 rwhp on a high comp motor.. To be brutally honest , like i said previously to Alak, 200 rwhp isnt gonna happen, I was only 8 hp on my first prediction....efi or or carb at WOT on the dyno isnt gonna change a hell of alot if both are tuned correctly..
The problem with the supercharger is that its inefficient to begin with, typically less than 50%, coupled with no intercooling to gain density recovery, on a thermally inefficient motor, and then using crankshaft power to drive said inefficient blower in the end nets a low net gain, as compared to turbocharging or a really well built n/a for that matter..
Yes I agree that the 6 port is a lost cause past 200 rwhp, however seeing that there are plenty of 180 rwhp+ 6 port n/a's running around, I dont think the 6 port is causing the low net gain..
This is one case where not porting it , probably would end with more power, as the tendency to create more overlap via porting is a no no on a supercharged motor, overlap increases the cfm needs over a motor, meaning that you have to drive the supercharger faster in order to build a given amount of boost, the result, hotter air, which less dense which in turn means less power and more detonation prone motor.
The back pressure maintained on turbo motor has "dam" effect on boost, the overlap allows chamber clearing but backpressure also lessons the charge lost to the exhaust and helps to maintain boost at lower engine speeds..
A power band of 1800-6500 rpm actually sounds kind of narrow for a rotary, 4700 rpm of power is narrower than a stock TII with light mods..
At this point I would be tempted to put water injection on it or methanol to try and get some density recovery out of the blower, that should boost the number somewhat.. For reference I have seen a 13 b-rew with compressor outlet uncoupled from the intake manifold still saddled with the back pressure of the turbine put out 184 rwhp "n/a" so I dont think the exhaust has that much bearing on it, freeing it up more might even hurt if it has more overlap than stock on the ports..
I think the supercharge might work well on the renesis, especially intercooled, the no overlap design lends its self to the characteristics of the supercharger more so than the older motors.. The other lovely aspect is the blower really does do a nice job blending the air and the fuel into a more homgenous mixture for better burning, which is also why efi or carb on a blower doesnt really matter, in fact, injecting on the stock centre plate would probably give you worse fuel distribution and mixurte than pulling through the carb.. The only nice aspect of the efi would be to gain better control of the timing, but thats doable even with out efi nowadays..Max

 

Very very interesting Max... I love reading all your post's... You learn so much..

 

The porting was only a streetport, with a little aggression on the 5&6 ports. I drove a stock TII and there is no comparison in powerband, mine feels very sweet coming off idle compared to the delay waiting for boost. The other nice part is that I can shift at 7000 and maintain great engine life with no loss of boost on a shift (vs a stock TII). What I may do is ditch the presilencer & cut the header and extend the collector further back much like a road race header while maintaining the RB muffler (budgettable for this year). It idles smooth, very much the same as stock, and cruises very well.