lsd???? lol

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by clean90Si &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">For everyone's info, HKS make a twin charged kit for the MR2 a coulpe of years ago. It was for the supercharged 1st gen MR2. I've personally seen this car rip a TT 2JZ Supra a new @$$ from a standstill and from a roll. This red MR2 still runs around in Brooklyn!

Matter of fact this car belongs to my friend Roger. Heres the article:

Twin Charged Beast</TD></TR></TABLE>

If I remember right, Alamo Motorsports did a sc/turbo setup in a MR2 for Sport Compact Car or one of those mags... anyone else rememebr that?

 

very innovataive although actual performance remains to be seen

 

good work and thanks for sharing and posting pics on here.. i would suggest to upgrade interheater..

 

i would sell the supercharger and buy real fuel management..


its cool to say you have a "twincharged " vehicle but i think you're overcomplicating things with the setup.. especially if you're loioking for big reliable power

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jay Dirt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i would sell the supercharger and buy real fuel management..


its cool to say you have a "twincharged " vehicle but i think you're overcomplicating things with the setup.. especially if you're loioking for big reliable power
</TD></TR></TABLE>

hes really not looking got big reliable power....
this is just a project/expeirment, so we se'll what happens with it
If anything the SC is coming off sooner or later

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .nate &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
If I remember right, Alamo Motorsports did a sc/turbo setup in a MR2 for Sport Compact Car or one of those mags... anyone else rememebr that?</TD></TR></TABLE>

yep it was turbo magazine. they called it compound forced induction - I think I only saw the first stage of the build up tho...

to this project!

 

i remember in a magazine they twin charged type r.... dont really know how it turned out though.

 

I agree with the people who have said that it will increase exponentially...

Ok, normally, air running into a SC is compressed from (for numbers sakes) 0 psi to 6 psi. With this setup the air running into the SC will already be compressed (think about the differences between running at low and high altitudes. Low = more compressed air, = more efficient). The compresser fans in the SC will be spinning at the same speed as normal, but instead of compressing the air running in from nothing to 6 psi, it will be compressing from from 5 psi (from the turbo) to something (as yet unknown). Keep in mind that the fans spin at the same rate, and the compressed air still takes up the same volume as a non sequential system. So, it will compress the same volume of air, but the air will start at an already increased pressure, which in theory would exponentially increase the total boost running into the throttle body.

Other opinions?

 

i want to see some video of this car...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sack &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I agree with the people who have said that it will increase exponentially...
Other opinions?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I agree with this 100% for the most part, but its going to be irrelvant in the scheme of things If it stays setup the way that it is.
I am going to regulate the boost the entire setup makes, not just regulated through the SC pulley and the WG reading off the turbo itself.
The SC does not show boost at the TB, so if i use MAP source there it will regulate what the turbo makes and then your exponential boost increase takes charge.
But if i regulate the boost off the SC MAP source, it will regulate the entire system.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by greekspeed &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i remember in a magazine they twin charged type r.... dont really know how it turned out though.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I saw this too...if I recall correctly it laid down some pretty decent numbers.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DaX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I saw this too...if I recall correctly it laid down some pretty decent numbers.</TD></TR></TABLE>

your probaly talking about the same car we were talking about on the first page of the thread.
I dont have the article handy but if i remember correctly it made like 350 on pump gas on like 15psi
This may be way off but i think it made somewhere above 400 on race gas
and apparently it was a mostly stock motor. I think it had the ceramic coatings and a thicker Headgasket

 

cool project. definately go with it. post your #'s!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by lazerus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">cool project. definately go with it. post your #'s!</TD></TR></TABLE>

thanks, i will

 

I personally think our motors arnt big enough for twin chargers...I dunno I always take the supras they are tt and the big guys go single...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by quik sol &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I personally think our motors arnt big enough for twin chargers...I dunno I always take the supras they are tt and the big guys go single...</TD></TR></TABLE>

our motors are the perfect reason to go twincharger...not TWINTURBO...

mike

 

sweet setup. One of a kind. Post some numbers when you get chance

 

i thought twin charger had the super and turbo in parallel? you have them in series? looks like a how motor to me. "hey check this out i got a jrsc and a turbo and my friends n/a d16 civic just smoked me."

 

And you'll be incorrect along with them.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ok, normally, air running into a SC is compressed from (for numbers sakes) 0 psi to 6 psi. With this setup the air running into the SC will already be compressed (think about the differences between running at low and high altitudes. Low = more compressed air, = more efficient).</TD></TR></TABLE>

Normally air goes into the supercharger at 14.69 psi [1 atm] and is compressed to 20.69 psi when the supercharger is set on "6 psi", yes, your example is, thus far, correct.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The compresser fans in the SC will be spinning at the same speed as normal, but instead of compressing the air running in from nothing to 6 psi, it will be compressing from from 5 psi (from the turbo) to something (as yet unknown).</TD></TR></TABLE>

Here's where the theory falls apart. If it's an additive thing, which it's not (I'll explain shortly), you'd get 11psi of healthy, torquey goodness. If it's multiplied, which it's not (again, shortly), you'd have a sleeve-blowing 30psi (2 bar) raping your engine at max boost.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Keep in mind that the fans spin at the same rate, and the compressed air still takes up the same volume as a non sequential system. So, it will compress the same volume of air, but the air will start at an already increased pressure, which in theory would exponentially increase the total boost running into the throttle body.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, keep in mind that the rotors in the supercharger spin at the same rate regardless of the incoming air charge's pressure (19.69 psi with a 5 psi turbo). The rotors are set to pull/force 20.69 psi into the cylinders per intake stroke.

Now, consider the analogy of two men in an assembly line who crush cans before they go into a furnace. The second man is 20% stronger than the first (6 psi to 5 psi in this example), and they work together to make the cans as small as they can before they hit the furnace so the most cans can be put in during a useable period (i.e., giving time for the cans to melt/pistons to cycle). Now if man 1 can crush the cans down from 100 cm to 20 cm of height, do you think man 2 will be able to further crush the can to some extraordinarally small size (3.667 cm) or will he simply be able to further smash it to 15ish cm?

See, the supercharger isn't some magical device that can infinitely compress air: it's ability to alter pressure is based solely on the size of the pulley that's driving the rotors and thus "pulling" air into the cylinders. If the turbo has already compressed the air charge to 5 psi (tare), the supercharger isn't going to take that compressed air and further churn it to 30 psi because the rotors are only moving fast enough to pull an additional 6 psi of atmospheric pressure. Therefore, your final pressure is going to be 6 psi with a very underworked supercharger (having added only 1 psi to the air charge).

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Other opinions?</TD></TR></TABLE>

If this additive or multiplicitive theory worked, everyone would be doing it. In the end, though, the turbo hinders the supercharger at low rpms and the supercharger impeedes the turbo at high rpms.

To make another analogy: if you're working with a friend tossing fish in Boston for $13/hour and you can toss a fish 8 feet to his 6 feet, will you be able to throw the fish he tosses you a whopping 14 feet simply because he's already provided some energy? Of course not: you might gain a slight advantage, but once he starts throwing a bunch of fish, you'll be hard pressed to even make your 8 foot tosses because your herculean strength will lend itself to slowing down the total system (you ahving to recoil further, etc.).

Same thing with feeding wood into a shredder. Your friend pushes at 10mph and you pull at 12mph, but that doesn't mean that you can induce 22mph of wood chipping madness!! It will become easier for both of you together to achieve the top speed of the greater of you, but no amount of excess will be had for very long as you'll end up in each others' way.

Just a little droplet of information from a physics dude .

 

I think its a great idea, I don't see that as something that will create a lot of peak power. Though, I see it as something that will make a lot of USEABLE power. Maybe this guy has plans to race the car where there are more than just straight lines.

 

It isn't April fools yet

 

Why do I smell the twin engine argument coming back up?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Just a little droplet of information from a physics dude .</TD></TR></TABLE>

Great info man

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DaX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why do I smell the twin engine argument coming back up?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not sure, seeing as that's a completely different arguement. Two torsional forces (twin engine) are additive because they are vector quantities. A sequential twin-charger setup deals with progressive pressurization which is a different animal entirely.

The twin engine setup, however, will end up with the same issues at very high speeds if the engines aren't well matched in horsepower. Acceleration, regardless of the specific output per engine, will be fantastic seeing as all four wheels are being torsionally activated (i.e. having torque transmitted through them). Once you get to higher speeds, though, just like with all AWD vehicles, the added drivetrain components and irregular differential split of torque will create a bit of drag. Note: a bit, not some monumental anti-force like some people proposed in the twin engine thread .