I've done a search on this topic, but it seems that the past posts were inquiries if this can be done or not. What I'm interested in is if anyone has actually done it with a 5th Gen Lude, or any lude. I already have a JR superchager and I'm wondering if I can add a turbo without messing it up. 9 psi compared to up to 25-30 psi, is such a big difference.

 

It's possible, but you need a nice ECU and building in a better bypass system for the blower and a bypass sytem for the turbo. Is it worth it? Not if you care about accel.

 

Accel? That's the main reason for doing this? Instant boost for the supercharger, and high end boost for the turbo.

How so you build a bypass for the turbo? The JRSC comes with it.

 

You should check out this thread.. https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1293497.

 

The idea has crossed my mind, but I'm not sure it's really practical. I don't know enough about turbo setups to even begin to guess how the two would act together. I guess in theory it would work, but I'm sure it would be no small task. Twin turbo (sequential) was aimed at accomplishing the same thing right? Small turbo for quick spool and a larger one for mad boost?

 

You'll be slower running a dual boost setup than a properly designed turbo setup.

 

A turbo comes on sooner and harder than a supercharger.Ask anyone that has had both.You can sit and like power brake it and get full boost at 2000rpms.

 

picture this........ the air flows out of the engine and into the turbo, the turbo sucks in new air, compresses it and heats it up to very hot temperatures (bad).........and then is shoved into an itercooler to cool the air down and make it even more dense (good)........

and then you take all that you've done and shove it through a hot *** supercharger and heat it back up again??? it's unecessary. you see that the twin turbo supras convert to single turbo........why though?.....because a single turbo setup is more efficient. the air just needs to be compressed, cooled and fed to the engine one time. further compressing it again is useless, because you could have just compressed it that much the first time via boosting more psi.

compressing the air causes heat, so on our preludes, using both a turbo and supercharger would not be efficient, especially since we have no means of cooling down the supercharged air. hot boost = detonation =

 

very nicely said!

 

yes but could you not have a liqued cooled super charger and the have a intercooler for the turbo. just a thought

 

Thanks to "Bubs" for pointing me to an excellent thread. If anyone is curious what this set up that I'm referring to, check out this interesting thread below. 377+ WHP from a B16! Tell me that this set up doesn't work. I wonder how much HP I'll be able to make on a 2.3 Liter H22A4...hmmmm...


https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1293497

 

Well, enjoy trying to make that work. As I said before, a properly done turbo setup will yeild much more power mid range and below than a JRSC + turbo setup. Why? No bypasses, not having to route though the blower, yada yada. Just as an FYI the JRSC on the prelude puts IAT's around 180F+, turbo is around 90-100F. Efficiency wise you're loosing out on a lot for pumping losses. Buy a nice ball ceramic ball bearing turbo trimed for your app and I guarantee you that you'll have better mid range and top end than a dual boosted setup.

 

I can't really see any advantage .When you are running two things that rob HP at the same time .To get the same boost as using one.Unless you do like the Toyota's.
They have clutch pulley like an A/C compressor.But until your at full boost.Your still turning the SC and still blocking off the exhaust with the turbo.
I have done about 10 turbo cars in the last year or so.And every one of them that had 15 pounds boost made more than 400 hp.And the ones that had 20 made 500 hp.
I'm not saying that my stuff is better ,I'm just pointing out the difference
in HP.I'm sure Geoff from Full Race will agree with my numbers.


Also when you try to force more air down a supercharger than it can take .It tries to stop it from turning.

 

In the link to that dyno of the car it looked faster with just the turbo. he might have gained more midrange but over the top 1/3 of his tach the single turbo was higher. Also it still looks like it would have more area under the curver compared to the blown/boosted line.

 

in sport compact car (i believe it was...) a few months ago they did an analysis on this topic and really just decided that no matter what it wasnt worth the pita to try. take that for what its worth coming from the pages of a monthly publication...but either way im not even close to sold on the idea

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 94Vtecluder &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">In the link to that dyno of the car it looked faster with just the turbo. he might have gained more midrange but over the top 1/3 of his tach the single turbo was higher. Also it still looks like it would have more area under the curver compared to the blown/boosted line. </TD></TR></TABLE>

He lost 20 peak whp but gained up to 50 whp in the midrange and tons of torque... He is much faster with the dual setup...

 

Plain and simple, it's a good way to spend a lot of money on accomplishing the same thing if you were to have a properly sized turbo.

the only thing it would be good for is bragging rights. and more parts that could potentially fail.

 

I hear you all loud and clear, but the idea that I'm building from is that a supercharger can provide nearly an instantenous boost giving you the advantage to build power quickly over a turbocharger. Why do you think dragster funny cars uses superchargers? However, it cannot provide as high of a boost as a turbo charger can, obviously a well known fact. So by combining the two in a "tag team" set up, I think that if done right, you'll have a quick and powerful machine. This was the idea behind the Toyota's factory dual charger setup.

I think the key to make this work efficiently is the transition from Supercharger to Turbo. The guy that did it tried to explain how he did his bypass system, but it was unclear to me so I ask him to draw a diagram or something. The JRSC comes with a bypass system where if you are not at full throtle the boost is at 0 psi no matter at what rpm you are in. I know this for a fact because my car has it and it helps when you are trying to save gas. If that by pass system can be made to be able to handle larger volume of air and pressure, and is activated when the boost goes up to say more than 8 psi or so or at certain rpm, then this could definitely be an advantage at the track.

I might be just preaching to the choir or talking out of my butt, but I'm waiting and see how this guys project will turn out given more time, before I even try to do it on mine.

 

I see it as a waste of time. If you want top-end power, just go w/ a big turbo.
If you want daily driven power, then go w/ a smaller faster spooling turbo.

Too much low end torque and you'll break traction on the streets to easily.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cpforyou &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I see it as a waste of time. If you want top-end power, just go w/ a big turbo.
If you want daily driven power, then go w/ a smaller faster spooling turbo.

Too much low end torque and you'll break traction on the streets to easily.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

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

Actually traction is much better than it was with the turbo alone. The torque delivery is so much smoother that it is much easier to control with the accelerator. Non-linear torque delivery was always one of the things that pissed me off about my turbo setup. This thing delivers power much more predictably.</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

i'm not at all saying it wont work, it has been done plenty of times before. engineers were playing with turbo/supercharged combinations since back in the 40s, possibly earlier. like you said, toyota has done it. lancia used a similar setup on their delta s4 rally car back in the 80's.-&gt; http://gamma.nic.fi/~globe/ral...a.htm
nissan also tried on their '89-'92 march "superturbo" models in japan.
http://www.hilmersson-racing.com/start.asp?show=ea
here's one on an rx4-&gt; http://www.cardomain.com/ride/565513
another on a corrado-&gt; http://www.redline.lt/articles/vwcorrado.htm
a b series in SuperSkreet from a few years back-&gt; http://www.superstreetonline.c...e.jpg

like i said, it is do-able. nothing new. plenty of people have done it. it's just expensive and time consuming with no real benefit over a properly sized turbo. why do you think manufacturers didn't stick with the dual concept? because it's unrelaible. could you really 100% rely on on the extra systems responsible for it operating correctly? there's just too many things that could potentially go wrong or fail.

more often than not, simplicity is the key.

but, that's jut my 2 cents.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by H22Si &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why do you think dragster funny cars uses superchargers? </TD></TR></TABLE>
not for the reason you're thinking. on smaller displacement gas-powered engines (500ci and smaller) turbochargers a more optimal form of forced induction. on nitomethane, topfuel alcohol engines, or bigger displacement engines superchargers a more reliable way to make power. or a less cumbersome way. the turbocharged engines ramp up the pressure too quickly, blowing off the tires and blowing up the motor before the car even gets half track. it's just an inherent characteristic of an exhaust driven turbine dealing with that much power (heat).

superchargers are more CONSISTENT.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2point3h22lude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> the idea that I'm building from is that a supercharger can provide nearly an instantenous boost giving you the advantage to build power quickly over a turbocharger. Why do you think dragster funny cars uses superchargers?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
They use superchargers because...

a) These designs can be air or water cooled
b) They have MASSIVE dead start traction via the wheelie bars and insane slicks and a suspension built to do one thing.
c) The 1/4 mile is made in the 60 ft times.
d) SC's have a more linear power band.
e) They just don't need the extra power that the turbo will give and IIRC they use a nitrous setup for top end speed anyway. Plus they're running ethanol...


So don't use that as a comparison point unless you plan to invest as much as a funny car team into your car.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2point3h22lude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
So by combining the two in a "tag team" set up, I think that if done right, you'll have a quick and powerful machine. This was the idea behind the Toyota's factory dual charger setup.</TD></TR></TABLE>

With the Toyota setup IIRC (I can't find the specs quickly online) you're going to have to get a clutch based system for the supercharger on top with enlarging the opening for the bypass. Along with an ECU designed to work with both (MoTEC). Also realize that you're going to have to design a one off intake manifold along with possibly an air/water cooling system, along with the bypass, along with.. yada yada yada. Just realize that it's going to be a very expensive project.

ULTIMATELY you'll still be slower than a properly designed turbo system. All the bypasses cause pumping loss and ultimately the air is much more turbulent when trying to pass though all the chicanes. A properly designed turbo w/ a good exhaust system and stock (if not a little higher) compression can be in boost as low as 2000 RPM, will cost a ton less, and be faster than the dual charger setup w/o as many heat issues.

It'll be an interesting project if you do take it on, but personally if you were trying to do this, try to horseshoe a lynsolm/whipple blower in instead of a turbo if you want low end and top end power. It's quite a bit more efficient than a roots blower and you can try to work in an air/water cooling system. But if you want to be proven fast, you can't do better than a turbo.

 

well worded.