I saw at C6 section at there is a bigger maggie on the way. Will there be a one for LS6 too ?

 

There was a post about the 'new' MP122 Maggie blower a few months ago.

I'd suspect it's in their best interest that they make the MP122 fit both LS6 & LS2's.

 

The question is! Is the extra 10 cubic inches of blower volume worth the money if you already have the MP112?

 

Once you upgrade the snout to a 90mm on the MP112, I'd bet the difference then is very little.

 

here's some interesting comparison data:

"Lyscholm 2300 vs Magna Charger MP122H (soon to be released) HP is very close, but take note of the discharge temps. Remember the 2300 is a 2.3L blower and the 122 is a 2.0L blower. This dis-proves the "screw is cooler" Statement made by most of the "screw" Manufactures.

10 lbs boost on a stock 5.3 truck engine with a G2-3 Lingenfelter cam , timming was locked at 26 degrees and VP 103 was used, This test was done just a few weeks ago. As you can see the discharge temps are about 20* cooler on the 122 at 10 pounds of boost."



"superchargers were tested on the Magnuson Intercooled manifold. The measuring device is the temp probe supplied by Superflow for measuing intake temps. (Type K high resolution thermo couplers)"


side by side:
MP122................................... ........................................ ...........................Lysholm

 

Interesting that the MP122 is running cooler, but is also making about 25 lb/ft of peak torque less and hits 500 lb/ft almost a 1000 rpms later in the curve.

 

BTW, the Eaton blowers are twin-screw. They're called twin-screw/helical roots as the lobes are twisted like a screw. Of course the Lysholm type is already recognized as a twin-screw.

 

My understanding of twin screw was internal compression i.e. compression in screws versus in manifold like Eaton/Magnacharger. The Eatons are more a mixed-flow design.

Just some thoughts…

Mike

 

where did you get this info from?

 

Interesting graphs. It looks like the Whipple started with ~20deg hotter plenum temps then the MP122. Am I just seeing things? That would skew things just a bit wouldn't it? Not trying to start a war but just want to make sure testing was apples to apples. You can manipulate data to show whatever you want. Just look at the 40rwhp cold air intakes out there :-)

Jersey

 

I would have to argue with that statement. They (Maggies) are not a twin screw. They call them a Hybrid Roots. But they are more like a Roots blower. It feeds air in the front like a twin screw, but it does not compress air like a twin screw. The Maggie rotors look identical to each other, while the twin screw has like a "Male" / "Female" rotors that mesh together.

TWIN SCREW and ROOTS

The Roots Supercharger (aka "blower")
The roots supercharger was originally designed as an air moving device for industrial buildings. The roots supercharger features two counter-rotating lobes that trap air from the intake side of the supercharger (normally at the back of the supercharger), move it around the outside casing of the lobes, and out the bottom of the supercharger through an outlet / discharge port. Like the twin screw supercharger, the roots is a "positive displacement" aka "fixed displacement" supercharger, meaning that it moves a fixed volume of air per rotation. Notwithstanding minor amounts of air-leak at low rpms, the roots supercharger cannot flow backwards like a centrifugal supercharger, and is thus nearly as efficient in its ability to pump air at low rpms as it is at high rpms. What this means is that roots superchargers are very capable of making large amounts of boost even when engine rpms are very low. This makes for great low-end and midrange power, and also makes them great for trucks and towing vehicles. The roots is also self lubricated, and is the simplest of the supercharger designs, meaning it is reasonably priced and very reliable. This is why roots superchargers have been the choice of GM, Ford, Mercedes, and Toyota for OE applications.

The only real disadvantage to the roots supercharger is that it creates a lot of heat. There are two reasons for this. First, the roots supercharger does not compress air - it only moves from the intake port to the discharge port (i.e. it is the only supercharger design with no internal compression ratio). All of the compression is done in the intake manifold. Laws of thermodynamics kick in in favor of supercharger designs with an internal compression ratio (centrifugal and twin screw) because they do less work on the incoming air charge. We will leave the mathematics of this phenomenon to a later (much more boring) discussion. Another reason roots superchargers create higher amounts of heat is because they tend to carry some of the compressed air in the intake back into the supercharger because it gets trapped by the rotating lobes that are exposed to the hotter air in the intake manifold.



The Twin Screw Supercharger
The twin screw supercharger at first glance appears to look similar to a roots supercharger both inside and out. The two technologies are indeed similar, however there are significant differences. At the heart of the twin-screw supercharger are two rotors, or "screws" that rotate towards each other. The rotors mesh together and draw air from the back of the supercharger. The twisting rotors move the air to the front of the supercharger, while compressing the air before discharging through a port at or near the front of the supercharger.

Because the compression is done inside the supercharger, this design produces less heat than a roots supercharger - in fact, it is almost as thermally efficient as a centrifugal design. Like the roots design, the twin-screw is a fixed displacement supercharger (meaning that it pumps a fixed volume of air per revolution), and because the tolerances between the rotating screws are very tight, its ability to create boost at low rpms is unparalleled. These characteristics make it ideal for trucks and towing vehicles, where low to mid range power is primary in importance. Another important advantage of the twin screw compressor is its reliability. Unlike a roots supercharger, the rotors in a twin screw supercharger do not actually touch, so there are virtually no wearing parts. For this reason, twin screw compressors are commonly used to pressurize cabins in passenger aircraft. Like roots superchargers, twin screw superchargers are self lubricated and do not tap into the engine's oil supply.

One disadvantage of the twin screw design is that, because it has an internal compression ratio, the twin screw is compressing air even when it is not sending boost to the engine (i.e. under cruising or deceleration). An internal bypass valve releases the pressurized air, but because it takes work to pressurize the air in the first place, the twin screw supercharger draws more power from the engine than while not under boost. Like the roots, the throttle body must be placed before the compressor because it is a fixed displacement supercharger.

 

you have to remember that the twin screw will always generate more heat than a modified roots during any off boost condition, even with a bypass valve, because it's still compressing air between the rotors, so to me, it makes perfect sense

 

I might be wrong, but doesn't the Roots type blowers generate more heat?

 

not during off boost conditions with a bypass valve

 

I'm not trying to argue but the twin screws have by pass valves too though. At least the KB for the C5does.



Sorry for jacking your post, just trying to learn something here.

 

your absolutely correct, however, a bypass valve cannot release the compression between the screws rotors, not as efficiently as it can in a modified roots application anyway. It's just simply not as effective because of it's design.

 

Gotcha! Thanks!

 

Has anyone 122 case on LS6 yet ?

 

Forget the Mag, and go with the Kenne Bell, its definitely the better choice.

 

Oh yeah, i would but i really dont like the looks of it