Largest engine with maggie 112?
01-16-2008, 02:33 PM
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2006
Location: Portland TN
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Largest engine with maggie 112?
I know you guys have more knowledge about maggies than the fbody crowd. I currently have a magnacharger 112 on a 99 TA with a stock bottom end. I'm running TEA stage 1.5 heads. If I decided to upgrade my shortblock and run the same heads, what's the largest cubic inch I should get? I doubt this small maggie would be capable of supplying enough air for a large engine. I know I would still keep compression high because that's what works best with the maggie. About 10lbs of boost and maybe add some nitrous later. I may just end up with a forged 347 for the price. Thanks for your input.
Oh, and Funcool is the Maggie King.
Oh, and Funcool is the Maggie King.
01-16-2008, 02:44 PM
#2
Safety Car
I know you guys have more knowledge about maggies than the fbody crowd. I currently have a magnacharger 112 on a 99 TA with a stock bottom end. I'm running TEA stage 1.5 heads. If I decided to upgrade my shortblock and run the same heads, what's the largest cubic inch I should get? I doubt this small maggie would be capable of supplying enough air for a large engine. I know I would still keep compression high because that's what works best with the maggie. About 10lbs of boost and maybe add some nitrous later. I may just end up with a forged 347 for the price. Thanks for your input.
Bigger the better.
Funcool has seen over 15lbs of boost on a 402 and made 600/700 with a mail-order tune showing AF ratio below 10 during the dyno.
Mid you, that's with a near max effort 112 Maggie. 112 Maggie with mods can be made to properly boost a 427.
Last edited by tlaselva; 01-16-2008 at 02:53 PM.
01-16-2008, 11:14 PM
#3
I know you guys have more knowledge about maggies than the fbody crowd. I currently have a magnacharger 112 on a 99 TA with a stock bottom end. I'm running TEA stage 1.5 heads. If I decided to upgrade my shortblock and run the same heads, what's the largest cubic inch I should get? I doubt this small maggie would be capable of supplying enough air for a large engine. I know I would still keep compression high because that's what works best with the maggie. About 10lbs of boost and maybe add some nitrous later. I may just end up with a forged 347 for the price. Thanks for your input.
Oh, and Funcool is the Maggie King.
Oh, and Funcool is the Maggie King.
Thank's, I think when I'm done 700 rwh and 800rwt is possible!! Bigger cam 242/250 640 lift 114, 2 inch headers, 3 inch mufflers, 2.5 inch blower pulley, take off the cat's and finally tune the car!!!
01-18-2008, 04:27 PM
#6
Drifting
Member Since: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this is not really what you were looking for as an answer but it may give you some perspective. I have a 122H, which is not that much larger than a 112 on a 427 engine. The motor built by MTI Racing was built as a high compression N/A motor. Later I wanted a little more punch and I like the Maggie and the way it looks on top of the motor. Now everybody said the Maggie could not support a 427 and it would just huff out. Listen, I got almost 100 more HP and over 50 pounds of torque with just seven pounds of boost. I got that torque at 2100RPM while without the blower that same torque came on about 4200RPM. This blower seems to like cubes and high compression. I would post the dyno but I am not a supporting member so I can't post an attachment!
01-18-2008, 05:22 PM
#7
Former Vendor
Member Since: Feb 2004
Location: Las Vegas NV
Posts: 10,876
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06 & '12
But the claims that everyone said are exactly true..
You got 14.3 rwhp and 7.1lbft of torque per pound of boost. Not to mention significantly higher intake temps. Your blower was putting down less than 50% of what any other blower should put out..
You got 14.3 rwhp and 7.1lbft of torque per pound of boost. Not to mention significantly higher intake temps. Your blower was putting down less than 50% of what any other blower should put out..
I know this is not really what you were looking for as an answer but it may give you some perspective. I have a 122H, which is not that much larger than a 112 on a 427 engine. The motor built by MTI Racing was built as a high compression N/A motor. Later I wanted a little more punch and I like the Maggie and the way it looks on top of the motor. Now everybody said the Maggie could not support a 427 and it would just huff out. Listen, I got almost 100 more HP and over 50 pounds of torque with just seven pounds of boost. I got that torque at 2100RPM while without the blower that same torque came on about 4200RPM. This blower seems to like cubes and high compression. I would post the dyno but I am not a supporting member so I can't post an attachment!
01-18-2008, 05:44 PM
#8
I know this is not really what you were looking for as an answer but it may give you some perspective. I have a 122H, which is not that much larger than a 112 on a 427 engine. The motor built by MTI Racing was built as a high compression N/A motor. Later I wanted a little more punch and I like the Maggie and the way it looks on top of the motor. Now everybody said the Maggie could not support a 427 and it would just huff out. Listen, I got almost 100 more HP and over 50 pounds of torque with just seven pounds of boost. I got that torque at 2100RPM while without the blower that same torque came on about 4200RPM. This blower seems to like cubes and high compression. I would post the dyno but I am not a supporting member so I can't post an attachment!
01-18-2008, 09:46 PM
#9
Drifting
Member Since: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,922
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-21-2008, 09:38 AM
#14
Drifting
Member Since: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you were a physician would you make a diagnosis without seeing the patient or reviewing any test? I hope not but perhaps I didn't give you enough information to make a knowledgeable comment.
Could I have gotten more hp and torque from seven pounds of boost. Absolutely, to the tune of 24.2 rwhp at best pull but I requested a very conservative tune on pump gas.
This is NOT a blower motor and I guess I didn't make that real clear. With changes to the internals and lowering the compression I am confident I could have seen over 700rwhp but sadly the funds just were not there for that expense.
I see you are a dealer/tuner, so you better than anyone should know about longevity and driveability. I certainly hope your not one of those tuners that goes for the highest numbers at all cost. We have a few around here and while the owner is thrilled with his numbers he is looking for a new motor in about 12 months. I want a dependable set up that I can drive with confidence and will last me a long time. Frankly, for a non blower motor and a relatively small blower I was very pleased with the results.
Since you haven't seen any of my tables I guess you are assuming my IAT's are high. You will be happy to know they are not and only slightly above the N/A runs. So far I am very pleased with my results and would do it again. Hope I was more clear this time.
Last edited by gorillavet; 01-21-2008 at 12:29 PM.
01-21-2008, 10:04 AM
#15
01-21-2008, 12:27 PM
#16
Drifting
Member Since: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I had the funds to change this 427 to a "blower" motor with the right cam....yes my tuner felt the mid seven's were possible. Just don't have the funds to redo the motor. I will eventually move to meth/alky injection and will see mid 6's very easily with eight pounds of boost.
01-21-2008, 01:10 PM
#17
Former Vendor
Member Since: Feb 2004
Location: Las Vegas NV
Posts: 10,876
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06 & '12
Talk all the **** you want, but facts are facts..
1) Its been proven a 1.8L Maggie on a large cid motor is NOT efficient.
2) PD blowers have MUCH higher IAT's PERIOD......
3) EVERYONE who has low numbers ALWAYS says: Conservative tune, I wanted it safe, Much more in it, cold outside, hot outside, dyno reads low...etc etc etc...
I'm not saying ANYTHING negative about you or your setup, nor am I saying its been set up wrong. All I am saying, is that your claims that everyone was wrong in their FACTS that a 1.8L maggie is inefficient, is incorrect.
Cause if they were, then P1's on stock 347's wouldnt be be making more power than your 427 w/ a maggie.
1) Its been proven a 1.8L Maggie on a large cid motor is NOT efficient.
2) PD blowers have MUCH higher IAT's PERIOD......
3) EVERYONE who has low numbers ALWAYS says: Conservative tune, I wanted it safe, Much more in it, cold outside, hot outside, dyno reads low...etc etc etc...
I'm not saying ANYTHING negative about you or your setup, nor am I saying its been set up wrong. All I am saying, is that your claims that everyone was wrong in their FACTS that a 1.8L maggie is inefficient, is incorrect.
Cause if they were, then P1's on stock 347's wouldnt be be making more power than your 427 w/ a maggie.
Wow gone a few days and the experts come out.
If you were a physician would you make a diagnosis without seeing the patient or reviewing any test? I hope not but perhaps I didn't give you enough information to make a knowledgeable comment.
Could I have gotten more hp and torque from seven pounds of boost. Absolutely, to the tune of 24.2 rwhp at best pull but I requested a very conservative tune on pump gas.
This is NOT a blower motor and I guess I didn't make that real clear. With changes to the internals and lowering the compression I am confident I could have seen over 700rwhp but sadly the funds just were not there for that expense.
I see you are a dealer/tuner, so you better than anyone should know about longevity and driveability. I certainly hope your not one of those tuners that goes for the highest numbers at all cost. We have a few around here and while the owner is thrilled with his numbers he is looking for a new motor in about 12 months. I want a dependable set up that I can drive with confidence and will last me a long time. Frankly, for a non blower motor and a relatively small blower I was very pleased with the results.
Since you haven't seen any of my tables I guess you are assuming my IAT's are high. You will be happy to know they are not and only slightly above the N/A runs. So far I am very pleased with my results and would do it again. Hope I was more clear this time.
If you were a physician would you make a diagnosis without seeing the patient or reviewing any test? I hope not but perhaps I didn't give you enough information to make a knowledgeable comment.
Could I have gotten more hp and torque from seven pounds of boost. Absolutely, to the tune of 24.2 rwhp at best pull but I requested a very conservative tune on pump gas.
This is NOT a blower motor and I guess I didn't make that real clear. With changes to the internals and lowering the compression I am confident I could have seen over 700rwhp but sadly the funds just were not there for that expense.
I see you are a dealer/tuner, so you better than anyone should know about longevity and driveability. I certainly hope your not one of those tuners that goes for the highest numbers at all cost. We have a few around here and while the owner is thrilled with his numbers he is looking for a new motor in about 12 months. I want a dependable set up that I can drive with confidence and will last me a long time. Frankly, for a non blower motor and a relatively small blower I was very pleased with the results.
Since you haven't seen any of my tables I guess you are assuming my IAT's are high. You will be happy to know they are not and only slightly above the N/A runs. So far I am very pleased with my results and would do it again. Hope I was more clear this time.
01-21-2008, 04:14 PM
#18
Drifting
Member Since: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talk all the **** you want, but facts are facts..
1) Its been proven a 1.8L Maggie on a large cid motor is NOT efficient.
2) PD blowers have MUCH higher IAT's PERIOD......
3) EVERYONE who has low numbers ALWAYS says: Conservative tune, I wanted it safe, Much more in it, cold outside, hot outside, dyno reads low...etc etc etc...
I'm not saying ANYTHING negative about you or your setup, nor am I saying its been set up wrong. All I am saying, is that your claims that everyone was wrong in their FACTS that a 1.8L maggie is inefficient, is incorrect.
Cause if they were, then P1's on stock 347's wouldnt be be making more power than your 427 w/ a maggie.
1) Its been proven a 1.8L Maggie on a large cid motor is NOT efficient.
2) PD blowers have MUCH higher IAT's PERIOD......
3) EVERYONE who has low numbers ALWAYS says: Conservative tune, I wanted it safe, Much more in it, cold outside, hot outside, dyno reads low...etc etc etc...
I'm not saying ANYTHING negative about you or your setup, nor am I saying its been set up wrong. All I am saying, is that your claims that everyone was wrong in their FACTS that a 1.8L maggie is inefficient, is incorrect.
Cause if they were, then P1's on stock 347's wouldnt be be making more power than your 427 w/ a maggie.
Talkin ****, everyone who has low numbers always says,Geez...what do you say when you are going negative! First of all it's a two liter blower if my calculations are correct and yes they were wrong in the assumption it would "huff out".. And yes I can set it up to outpower most of the centri guys but that was not my goal. Sorry if it's not what you wanted to hear but it's the truth. By the way I noticed you seem to be a dealer for ANOTHER blower....now this wouldn't be influencing your comments.
That is why I just love this forum....no matter what you post....someone somewhere will find fault with it. Sorry I even tried to help this gentleman.
