Superchargers??
05-22-2018, 06:12 PM
#21
Great info. The questions, however, are always the same. "Don't go over XXX hp or you will melt/break pistons"
This is not a scientific statement (no offense to poster). This is an anecdotal circumstantial point of data.
What broke the piston? Detonation?
Great. Many people run e85, and some may run it properly. When you run that, you don't detonate. So who is running above these numbers on an LT1 without breaking pistons? Or who has? What was being logged and what is the data showing?
When you detonate, you are asking that cylinder to handle 10 times the pressure. So take a nice 800hp build. 100hp a hole. Detonate. Now that piston, rod, and bore is taking 1000hp of pressure. Not made for that, I think we can all agree.
This is not a scientific statement (no offense to poster). This is an anecdotal circumstantial point of data.
What broke the piston? Detonation?
Great. Many people run e85, and some may run it properly. When you run that, you don't detonate. So who is running above these numbers on an LT1 without breaking pistons? Or who has? What was being logged and what is the data showing?
When you detonate, you are asking that cylinder to handle 10 times the pressure. So take a nice 800hp build. 100hp a hole. Detonate. Now that piston, rod, and bore is taking 1000hp of pressure. Not made for that, I think we can all agree.
05-22-2018, 06:24 PM
#22
Great info. The questions, however, are always the same. "Don't go over XXX hp or you will melt/break pistons"
This is not a scientific statement (no offense to poster). This is an anecdotal circumstantial point of data.
What broke the piston? Detonation?
Great. Many people run e85, and some may run it properly. When you run that, you don't detonate. So who is running above these numbers on an LT1 without breaking pistons? Or who has? What was being logged and what is the data showing?
When you detonate, you are asking that cylinder to handle 10 times the pressure. So take a nice 800hp build. 100hp a hole. Detonate. Now that piston, rod, and bore is taking 1000hp of pressure. Not made for that, I think we can all agree.
This is not a scientific statement (no offense to poster). This is an anecdotal circumstantial point of data.
What broke the piston? Detonation?
Great. Many people run e85, and some may run it properly. When you run that, you don't detonate. So who is running above these numbers on an LT1 without breaking pistons? Or who has? What was being logged and what is the data showing?
When you detonate, you are asking that cylinder to handle 10 times the pressure. So take a nice 800hp build. 100hp a hole. Detonate. Now that piston, rod, and bore is taking 1000hp of pressure. Not made for that, I think we can all agree.
05-22-2018, 06:33 PM
#23
Advanced
The cause of the failures above 630 or so whp is that the LT1 ring gap is quite small. The ring expands under the heat of hard pulls or repeated hard driving. The expanded ring puts pressure on the top ring land and the top edge of the piston cracks off. The LT1 pistons are also weaker than the LT4 which exacerbates this issue.
Now obviously, this condition will not occur at exactly the same time for each build. But over the past few years a lot of builders and shops have worked on setups from 500 all the way through 1000whp. Their consensus is what we are basing these basic "Don't go over XXX hp" statements on. People like myself then paraphrase this information in order to give a quick and simple answer.
So, when do we typically see this problem happen? Well, first, this failure rarely occurs below 600whp on any type of build. So that is a pretty safe floor. Then, this sort of failure is happening often to people with 750whp who are racing at the track or street and hot lapping the car. So that is a big O ceiling.
Within that range, shops typically see that even people who drive the car hard under 630whp are not having any problems. And for people who run meth to get there, under about 650 also doesn't show any problems. This is presumably because the meth helps cool the cylinder a little more and removes some of the failure-causing heat from the rings. Running forced induction without meth gets pretty hot - especially if hot lapping a bit.
Now once people are going over 630-650, the failure rate starts to become not insignificant. You start to see a lot of long-term failures by the high 600s, and then short term failures by the 750 range. What I mean by short term is that people that start driving hard on those builds fail quickly, as opposed to having high 600s where the failure might not occur for months or years, but typically eventually occurs.
Because of this observed data, people like myself give an estimated point of failure at around 630-650 whp depending on the build. This estimate assumes that the owner is expecting a reasonably reliable street car and is not ok with tearing apart an engine every few thousand miles. There are a lot of factors at play here, but we shorten the answers to give easily digestible information. If the owner comes back and says "I want to make over 700whp and I'm ready to rebuild the shortblock stronger as soon as it goes out," then yeah I'd be happy recommending them running 700-750 and rolling the dice.
I'd also lastly like to point out that I have a lot less experience than any of the big builders on here with C7 setups. My information has been gathered by reading a ton of posts, and cross-referencing with my existing deeper knowledge of other vehicle platforms.
I hope that helps explain where these short XXX horsepower answers are coming from.
Now obviously, this condition will not occur at exactly the same time for each build. But over the past few years a lot of builders and shops have worked on setups from 500 all the way through 1000whp. Their consensus is what we are basing these basic "Don't go over XXX hp" statements on. People like myself then paraphrase this information in order to give a quick and simple answer.
So, when do we typically see this problem happen? Well, first, this failure rarely occurs below 600whp on any type of build. So that is a pretty safe floor. Then, this sort of failure is happening often to people with 750whp who are racing at the track or street and hot lapping the car. So that is a big O ceiling.
Within that range, shops typically see that even people who drive the car hard under 630whp are not having any problems. And for people who run meth to get there, under about 650 also doesn't show any problems. This is presumably because the meth helps cool the cylinder a little more and removes some of the failure-causing heat from the rings. Running forced induction without meth gets pretty hot - especially if hot lapping a bit.
Now once people are going over 630-650, the failure rate starts to become not insignificant. You start to see a lot of long-term failures by the high 600s, and then short term failures by the 750 range. What I mean by short term is that people that start driving hard on those builds fail quickly, as opposed to having high 600s where the failure might not occur for months or years, but typically eventually occurs.
Because of this observed data, people like myself give an estimated point of failure at around 630-650 whp depending on the build. This estimate assumes that the owner is expecting a reasonably reliable street car and is not ok with tearing apart an engine every few thousand miles. There are a lot of factors at play here, but we shorten the answers to give easily digestible information. If the owner comes back and says "I want to make over 700whp and I'm ready to rebuild the shortblock stronger as soon as it goes out," then yeah I'd be happy recommending them running 700-750 and rolling the dice.
I'd also lastly like to point out that I have a lot less experience than any of the big builders on here with C7 setups. My information has been gathered by reading a ton of posts, and cross-referencing with my existing deeper knowledge of other vehicle platforms.
I hope that helps explain where these short XXX horsepower answers are coming from.
Last edited by StarFox; 05-22-2018 at 06:36 PM.
The following 2 users liked this post by StarFox:
HotRodWebb (06-18-2018),
kc stingray (05-22-2018)
05-22-2018, 06:47 PM
#24
Nearly impossible. Add way more fuel, take away too much - it will pre-ignite on hot spots. But unless someone is a dipshit with IATs and spark plug heat ranges, it will not detonate (detonation and pre-ignition are two different things).
There is a research paper that showed above below 150 degrees IAT as well as timing advanced past what anyone would normally set - it is nearly impossible to get detonation.
Again, pre-ignition something different.
There is a research paper that showed above below 150 degrees IAT as well as timing advanced past what anyone would normally set - it is nearly impossible to get detonation.
Again, pre-ignition something different.
05-22-2018, 06:53 PM
#25
The cause of the failures above 630 or so whp is that the LT1 ring gap is quite small. The ring expands under the heat of hard pulls or repeated hard driving. The expanded ring puts pressure on the top ring land and the top edge of the piston cracks off. The LT1 pistons are also weaker than the LT4 which exacerbates this issue.
Now obviously, this condition will not occur at exactly the same time for each build. But over the past few years a lot of builders and shops have worked on setups from 500 all the way through 1000whp. Their consensus is what we are basing these basic "Don't go over XXX hp" statements on. People like myself then paraphrase this information in order to give a quick and simple answer.
So, when do we typically see this problem happen? Well, first, this failure rarely occurs below 600whp on any type of build. So that is a pretty safe floor. Then, this sort of failure is happening often to people with 750whp who are racing at the track or street and hot lapping the car. So that is a big O ceiling.
Within that range, shops typically see that even people who drive the car hard under 630whp are not having any problems. And for people who run meth to get there, under about 650 also doesn't show any problems. This is presumably because the meth helps cool the cylinder a little more and removes some of the failure-causing heat from the rings. Running forced induction without meth gets pretty hot - especially if hot lapping a bit.
Now once people are going over 630-650, the failure rate starts to become not insignificant. You start to see a lot of long-term failures by the high 600s, and then short term failures by the 750 range. What I mean by short term is that people that start driving hard on those builds fail quickly, as opposed to having high 600s where the failure might not occur for months or years, but typically eventually occurs.
Because of this observed data, people like myself give an estimated point of failure at around 630-650 whp depending on the build. This estimate assumes that the owner is expecting a reasonably reliable street car and is not ok with tearing apart an engine every few thousand miles. There are a lot of factors at play here, but we shorten the answers to give easily digestible information. If the owner comes back and says "I want to make over 700whp and I'm ready to rebuild the shortblock stronger as soon as it goes out," then yeah I'd be happy recommending them running 700-750 and rolling the dice.
I'd also lastly like to point out that I have a lot less experience than any of the big builders on here with C7 setups. My information has been gathered by reading a ton of posts, and cross-referencing with my existing deeper knowledge of other vehicle platforms.
I hope that helps explain where these short XXX horsepower answers are coming from.
Now obviously, this condition will not occur at exactly the same time for each build. But over the past few years a lot of builders and shops have worked on setups from 500 all the way through 1000whp. Their consensus is what we are basing these basic "Don't go over XXX hp" statements on. People like myself then paraphrase this information in order to give a quick and simple answer.
So, when do we typically see this problem happen? Well, first, this failure rarely occurs below 600whp on any type of build. So that is a pretty safe floor. Then, this sort of failure is happening often to people with 750whp who are racing at the track or street and hot lapping the car. So that is a big O ceiling.
Within that range, shops typically see that even people who drive the car hard under 630whp are not having any problems. And for people who run meth to get there, under about 650 also doesn't show any problems. This is presumably because the meth helps cool the cylinder a little more and removes some of the failure-causing heat from the rings. Running forced induction without meth gets pretty hot - especially if hot lapping a bit.
Now once people are going over 630-650, the failure rate starts to become not insignificant. You start to see a lot of long-term failures by the high 600s, and then short term failures by the 750 range. What I mean by short term is that people that start driving hard on those builds fail quickly, as opposed to having high 600s where the failure might not occur for months or years, but typically eventually occurs.
Because of this observed data, people like myself give an estimated point of failure at around 630-650 whp depending on the build. This estimate assumes that the owner is expecting a reasonably reliable street car and is not ok with tearing apart an engine every few thousand miles. There are a lot of factors at play here, but we shorten the answers to give easily digestible information. If the owner comes back and says "I want to make over 700whp and I'm ready to rebuild the shortblock stronger as soon as it goes out," then yeah I'd be happy recommending them running 700-750 and rolling the dice.
I'd also lastly like to point out that I have a lot less experience than any of the big builders on here with C7 setups. My information has been gathered by reading a ton of posts, and cross-referencing with my existing deeper knowledge of other vehicle platforms.
I hope that helps explain where these short XXX horsepower answers are coming from.
Thank you StarLord. I mean starfox.
Methanol can do more than cool the combustion process. Sometimes, btw- depending on its use, it will actually increase combustion temps.
My recommendation is that there is more to this than temps. Combustion pressures are a factor, and are affected by detonation.
E85 will also nearly remove the incidence of detonation. It will also increase combustion temps. The IAT wherever the e85 is may be lower (well, that is port injection, and we are in DI here) - but the actual combusion temps can be higher - which helps turbo cars (as another digression).
Many have found - control det and you get longer lasting motors with less expensive parts. Yes, a "melted" piston or valve is different than one that was blown to pieces.
05-22-2018, 07:19 PM
#26
Advanced
That makes sense. I could see how e85 could hurt the situation a little by increasing piston temps which would expand the rings. I don't know if they fracture from ring pressure alone, or from a combination of rings with no more expansion room left and combustion pressure forcing them to push hard against the piston. Though I am sure that a combination of high piston temp and detonation or predetonation would be a pretty bad thing for the LT1 pistons.
05-22-2018, 08:59 PM
#27
I have an AA SC kit with meth, those are my only mods and the car is right at about 600 without meth and 650 with. I have thought about installing headers and possibly doing one pulley down but I'm paranoid. I do love the car as is, it is really fast as is. However I wouldn't mind another 50 ish hp.
Do you guys think getting a good crankcase breather setup as well as having meth would make it OK to go to 700 hp and be safe for long term street car? I would never do any type of long pulls or laps. Just wondering if the breather thing would help the issue much in terms of prevention of piston ring failure.
Do you guys think getting a good crankcase breather setup as well as having meth would make it OK to go to 700 hp and be safe for long term street car? I would never do any type of long pulls or laps. Just wondering if the breather thing would help the issue much in terms of prevention of piston ring failure.
05-22-2018, 09:05 PM
#28
I'm starting to understand why e85 and methanol kits have become popular...
Theoretically, at least the e85 helps with detonation while methanol helps with heat .. Is that a fair summary?
Theoretically, at least the e85 helps with detonation while methanol helps with heat .. Is that a fair summary?
05-22-2018, 09:12 PM
#29
I have an AA SC kit with meth, those are my only mods and the car is right at about 600 without meth and 650 with. I have thought about installing headers and possibly doing one pulley down but I'm paranoid. I do love the car as is, it is really fast as is. However I wouldn't mind another 50 ish hp.
Do you guys think getting a good crankcase breather setup as well as having meth would make it OK to go to 700 hp and be safe for long term street car? I would never do any type of long pulls or laps. Just wondering if the breather thing would help the issue much in terms of prevention of piston ring failure.
Do you guys think getting a good crankcase breather setup as well as having meth would make it OK to go to 700 hp and be safe for long term street car? I would never do any type of long pulls or laps. Just wondering if the breather thing would help the issue much in terms of prevention of piston ring failure.
05-23-2018, 10:20 AM
#30
Advanced
Typically, you would get something that is a combination of breather and catch can. The breather component allows excess pressure inside the engine case to vent. The catch can collects oil mist that would normally blow out to atmosphere or your intake and puts it somewhere you can drain it.
No a breather/catch can will not improve your ability to increase horsepower in your situation. It will help you prevent a main seal blowout though which is a good thing. You don't want to spray your oil all over the place and have to tear off the front cover.
@badass1g: Looking at the specifics of your situation, you have some good things going for you. You stated you don't do long pulls or hot laps. That will definitely help you out there. If it were me, I would go for it. Bump the hp up another 50. The headers sound great, and will lower backpressure. Having that extra flow may cool things a bit. But raising boost will increase it again. If you aren't doing 0-120 pulls in 95* heat, and mostly drive the car like a normal person except for the occasional mexico race, you should be ok. BUT... you will be at the upper limit of safe power. I'd be ok with this scenario because in the off chance that I blow a piston, I will drive my other daily for a month while I rebuild the shortblock.
Basically, no a catch can won't reduce the risk, yes you will be at the high end of safe power, yes your car should survive just fine with your driving, but there is an increased risk of failure. If you absolutely cannot tolerate that failure, I wouldn't do it. But hey, we're all pushing the limits here - and headers do sound great.
No a breather/catch can will not improve your ability to increase horsepower in your situation. It will help you prevent a main seal blowout though which is a good thing. You don't want to spray your oil all over the place and have to tear off the front cover.
@badass1g: Looking at the specifics of your situation, you have some good things going for you. You stated you don't do long pulls or hot laps. That will definitely help you out there. If it were me, I would go for it. Bump the hp up another 50. The headers sound great, and will lower backpressure. Having that extra flow may cool things a bit. But raising boost will increase it again. If you aren't doing 0-120 pulls in 95* heat, and mostly drive the car like a normal person except for the occasional mexico race, you should be ok. BUT... you will be at the upper limit of safe power. I'd be ok with this scenario because in the off chance that I blow a piston, I will drive my other daily for a month while I rebuild the shortblock.
Basically, no a catch can won't reduce the risk, yes you will be at the high end of safe power, yes your car should survive just fine with your driving, but there is an increased risk of failure. If you absolutely cannot tolerate that failure, I wouldn't do it. But hey, we're all pushing the limits here - and headers do sound great.
05-23-2018, 02:30 PM
#31
Thank you for that awesome info. Now I am getting excited about keeping my current car rather then upgrading to a Z06. Couple more questions, how much louder will a set of catted headers make my car? My current setup is stock npp with gutted second cats with stock x pipe, it is prob about a 4 out of 10 loud IMO, with a 10 being fully straight pipe with no muffler or cats. I want my car to be at about a 7-8 out of 10 loudness. Will headers with cats get my car to be that loud? Or will I need to change out my mufflers to get that loud?
Also, is it safe to say adding headers and one pulley down size will ad apprx 50 whp? Or is it more or less then that? How much will my current tune be off if I add headers and pulley down? Will it possibly be ok or will I for sure need a re tune? I have a wide band I just haven't installed it yet. Thank you for your reply...
Also, is it safe to say adding headers and one pulley down size will ad apprx 50 whp? Or is it more or less then that? How much will my current tune be off if I add headers and pulley down? Will it possibly be ok or will I for sure need a re tune? I have a wide band I just haven't installed it yet. Thank you for your reply...
Typically, you would get something that is a combination of breather and catch can. The breather component allows excess pressure inside the engine case to vent. The catch can collects oil mist that would normally blow out to atmosphere or your intake and puts it somewhere you can drain it.
No a breather/catch can will not improve your ability to increase horsepower in your situation. It will help you prevent a main seal blowout though which is a good thing. You don't want to spray your oil all over the place and have to tear off the front cover.
@badass1g: Looking at the specifics of your situation, you have some good things going for you. You stated you don't do long pulls or hot laps. That will definitely help you out there. If it were me, I would go for it. Bump the hp up another 50. The headers sound great, and will lower backpressure. Having that extra flow may cool things a bit. But raising boost will increase it again. If you aren't doing 0-120 pulls in 95* heat, and mostly drive the car like a normal person except for the occasional mexico race, you should be ok. BUT... you will be at the upper limit of safe power. I'd be ok with this scenario because in the off chance that I blow a piston, I will drive my other daily for a month while I rebuild the shortblock.
Basically, no a catch can won't reduce the risk, yes you will be at the high end of safe power, yes your car should survive just fine with your driving, but there is an increased risk of failure. If you absolutely cannot tolerate that failure, I wouldn't do it. But hey, we're all pushing the limits here - and headers do sound great.
No a breather/catch can will not improve your ability to increase horsepower in your situation. It will help you prevent a main seal blowout though which is a good thing. You don't want to spray your oil all over the place and have to tear off the front cover.
@badass1g: Looking at the specifics of your situation, you have some good things going for you. You stated you don't do long pulls or hot laps. That will definitely help you out there. If it were me, I would go for it. Bump the hp up another 50. The headers sound great, and will lower backpressure. Having that extra flow may cool things a bit. But raising boost will increase it again. If you aren't doing 0-120 pulls in 95* heat, and mostly drive the car like a normal person except for the occasional mexico race, you should be ok. BUT... you will be at the upper limit of safe power. I'd be ok with this scenario because in the off chance that I blow a piston, I will drive my other daily for a month while I rebuild the shortblock.
Basically, no a catch can won't reduce the risk, yes you will be at the high end of safe power, yes your car should survive just fine with your driving, but there is an increased risk of failure. If you absolutely cannot tolerate that failure, I wouldn't do it. But hey, we're all pushing the limits here - and headers do sound great.
05-23-2018, 02:44 PM
#32
Former Vendor
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-packages.html
We just did a grand sport not to long ago and everything fits with very little to almost no modifications that could not be reversed.
The 2017 A8 Grandsport we did a few weeks ago came to us completely stock. we installed only a base A&A kit @ 8-9psi with no exhaust or any other modifications except for a New Ls front seal And it made right around 545rwhp with a completely stock Lt1 fuel system with no meth or exhaust. The customer is however thinking of adding meth to his upcoming mods to help with Iat's and to get a bit more power.
We also at the same time did a manual 14 C7 Lt1 car with the same exact supercharger package paired with ARH catted long tubes and his net results with again no fueling mods or meth 580-585rwhp. with meth we would have been safely in the 620+rwhp range
We just did a grand sport not to long ago and everything fits with very little to almost no modifications that could not be reversed.
The 2017 A8 Grandsport we did a few weeks ago came to us completely stock. we installed only a base A&A kit @ 8-9psi with no exhaust or any other modifications except for a New Ls front seal And it made right around 545rwhp with a completely stock Lt1 fuel system with no meth or exhaust. The customer is however thinking of adding meth to his upcoming mods to help with Iat's and to get a bit more power.
We also at the same time did a manual 14 C7 Lt1 car with the same exact supercharger package paired with ARH catted long tubes and his net results with again no fueling mods or meth 580-585rwhp. with meth we would have been safely in the 620+rwhp range
05-23-2018, 03:02 PM
#33
Advanced
Thank you for that awesome info. Now I am getting excited about keeping my current car rather then upgrading to a Z06. Couple more questions, how much louder will a set of catted headers make my car? My current setup is stock npp with gutted second cats with stock x pipe, it is prob about a 4 out of 10 loud IMO, with a 10 being fully straight pipe with no muffler or cats. I want my car to be at about a 7-8 out of 10 loudness. Will headers with cats get my car to be that loud? Or will I need to change out my mufflers to get that loud?
Also, is it safe to say adding headers and one pulley down size will ad apprx 50 whp? Or is it more or less then that? How much will my current tune be off if I add headers and pulley down? Will it possibly be ok or will I for sure need a re tune? I have a wide band I just haven't installed it yet. Thank you for your reply...
Also, is it safe to say adding headers and one pulley down size will ad apprx 50 whp? Or is it more or less then that? How much will my current tune be off if I add headers and pulley down? Will it possibly be ok or will I for sure need a re tune? I have a wide band I just haven't installed it yet. Thank you for your reply...
For the power question:
-Adding just headers you could probably get away without a tune, but there will be more power to be gained by tuning.
-Adding headers and a pulley (or pullying down at all) I would DEFINITELY get it tuned. You are significantly increasing airflow, probably past the stock computer's ability to compensate with fuel trims. You are fine to drive it to your tuner. Just stay under 4krpms to be safe.
-As fas as how much whp from headers and pulley, I'd really just be guessing. One of the vendors would have a much better idea than me. My wild guess would be that you'd be looking at 50-75whp if the fueling is ok though.
The following users liked this post:
badass1g (05-23-2018)
05-23-2018, 03:25 PM
#34
Awesome, I think I am going to do the headers then. I hate the gas fume smell of a catless car so I will have to get some small cats in there. If I install just the headers, and don't do anything else, will that make the car leaner or richer? I think I am running a little on the rich side as is so if it leans the car out a little it might end up being perfect.
I believe I would gain a bit of lower and mid range torque with headers correct? I would def enjoy some more tq... Now I have to decide what headers to get. Any idea how long install time should be for a decent mechanic to do for his first time at home on jack stands?
I believe I would gain a bit of lower and mid range torque with headers correct? I would def enjoy some more tq... Now I have to decide what headers to get. Any idea how long install time should be for a decent mechanic to do for his first time at home on jack stands?
No problem. The NPP question is something I am most excited about on my car. In my opinion, the C7 NPP with headers is a perfect setup. Using your scale, and my car with ARH 1-7/8 catless headers and catless midpipe (adding cats quiets it just a little bit), I'd say I am at a 4.5 or so with NPP in quiet mode (Touring). But with NPP in sport/track mode, I am at about a 7 when the valves are open. Maybe 8 at full throttle. The valves close often to reduce drone, and with headers you very much notice it in sport mode. But if you want to, you can pull the NPP fuse and have them full open all the time which will give you in the 7-8 noise range I think. I highly recommend trying stock NPP axleback with your catted headers and catless aftermarket midpipes. Pull the fuse if you want more constant noise, and then if you still want more upgrade the axleback afterwards.
For the power question:
-Adding just headers you could probably get away without a tune, but there will be more power to be gained by tuning.
-Adding headers and a pulley (or pullying down at all) I would DEFINITELY get it tuned. You are significantly increasing airflow, probably past the stock computer's ability to compensate with fuel trims. You are fine to drive it to your tuner. Just stay under 4krpms to be safe.
-As fas as how much whp from headers and pulley, I'd really just be guessing. One of the vendors would have a much better idea than me. My wild guess would be that you'd be looking at 50-75whp if the fueling is ok though.
For the power question:
-Adding just headers you could probably get away without a tune, but there will be more power to be gained by tuning.
-Adding headers and a pulley (or pullying down at all) I would DEFINITELY get it tuned. You are significantly increasing airflow, probably past the stock computer's ability to compensate with fuel trims. You are fine to drive it to your tuner. Just stay under 4krpms to be safe.
-As fas as how much whp from headers and pulley, I'd really just be guessing. One of the vendors would have a much better idea than me. My wild guess would be that you'd be looking at 50-75whp if the fueling is ok though.
05-24-2018, 01:05 AM
#35
05-24-2018, 02:04 AM
#36
Melting Slicks
Methanol is a fuel, like E85 and gasoline, when it burns it releases energy. EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature goes up.
Heat expands the gas in the cylinder causing it to apply force to the piston.
It isn't isothermic; the exhaust system still gets hot regardless of which fuel you choose. They all burn and create heat.
The differences are:
A: how much heat is released
B: how quickly it is released
C: how much energy input is required to break chemical bonds
D: how much energy does the fuel use to vaporize
If you want to cool an engine down, you need to vaporize a lot of liquid. Water does this best. 100% water injection can save an engine from having it's ringlands butt. Methanol, not so much. It may reduce intake air temps which does help some. But overall water does a much better job at cooling and it does not produce additional heat during combustion so ultimately EGT is much lower when using water.
Methanol is useful when the octane of the fuel you are using is insufficient. For example when 93 is incapable of producing satisfactory results- a little methanol can go a long way to making 93 safer because it improves the octane. It reduces the risk of having the gasoline explode violently and creating an engine damaging pressure spike. Water can cool the combustion reaction but it cannot improve octane the way methanol can; water injection might slow the reaction and reduce its temperature but poor octane fuels can still explode violently given enough compression with such a low octane (93 is pretty "low" compared to everything else on the table, it is a "poor fuel" or "economy" fuel)
Now that we covered the fuels a bit let me rundown my opinion of super vs turbo debate.
Supercharger: looks easy, simple to bolt on, and it is. A supercharger does not take much skill to install, not really compared to a turbocharger. It also look relatively hassle free at first glance. The OEM uses them so there are some configurations which could become reliable. However, as we will see, a supercharger is more of a novelty; Less reliable, more costly to maintain, and they consume a significant magnitude of rotating force from an engine which makes it 'weaker' overall when compared to the same engine using a turbocharger.
Turbocharger: Turbocharger OEM applications outnumber OEM supercharged cars for multiple reasons. The first (no particular order) is longevity. A turbocharger will last longer than any typical supercharger. Some gasoline application turbo engines achieve 300,000 miles with original units. They are also typically cheaper to replace (around half cost or less) and easier to rebuild (local random shops can often do this).
The second reason OEM tend to use turbochargers is because they add thermal efficiency, and do not parasitically drain an engines power/fuel. A 500 horsepower supercharged engine is really a 600 horsepower turbo engine. The supercharger typically consumes 100-120horsepower on a 500 horsepower setup, thus the engine 'stress level' is truly that of a 600 horsepower application. Often supercharged engines fail at 1000rwhp where a turbo engine of the same kind will fail at 1200 or more.
The third reason the OEM prefer turbo is because it improves engine thermal efficiency and thus improves fuel economy. perhaps this is only worth 1mpg or so; It isn't the 'direct reason' they choose a turbo but it sure doesn't HURT the decision.
Finally a turbo typically requires little/no maintenance.
The supercharger requires a belt, which if you have ever owned one is a constant concern of the owner. Everytime you step on the gas pedal you are thinking about that belt. Is it going to fly off this time? Does it need to be replaced? Is it slipping? All these questions and worry will follow you with the car wherever you go. And those belts are sometimes very expensive. And since nobody is every 'happy' with engine output there is always the 'desire' to run more boost and 'upgrade things' which further put strain on the belt system and often requires expensive belt-part upgrades all in and of itself.
So to re-cap,
Supercharger is less reliable, more maintenance/frustrating at times, parasitic/uneconomical, and super easy to install compared to a turbo (which makes the owner look inept with cars, uninterested in unique/imaginative/economical strategy)
Showing off a supercharger under the hood is just showing off sombody elses work; the company whos kit you bought. You are really only showing off a pile of money. Anybody can pile up money on top of an engine.
When you show off a turbo on the V8 it typically required fab work. So you are showing off the blood/sweat you put into the setup, instead of a pile of money. I Respect $40 of junkyard exhaust tube welded together functionally over a $3500 purchased supercharger kit.
The supercharger starts out looking friendly, easy, and can be quite compact for tight spaces; There are reasonable applications, but these are usually for people who do not wish to fabricate or have little imagination. A turbo can be installed almost anywhere, even in the rear of the vehicle. There is a twin rear mount turbo-oilless cartridge vette running around here with 2000rwhp and running 1-mile races. Anybody with some time and skill could buy the proper plumbing and plumb this sort of system out for almost any car. there are no excuses except "I was too lazy".
Heat expands the gas in the cylinder causing it to apply force to the piston.
It isn't isothermic; the exhaust system still gets hot regardless of which fuel you choose. They all burn and create heat.
The differences are:
A: how much heat is released
B: how quickly it is released
C: how much energy input is required to break chemical bonds
D: how much energy does the fuel use to vaporize
If you want to cool an engine down, you need to vaporize a lot of liquid. Water does this best. 100% water injection can save an engine from having it's ringlands butt. Methanol, not so much. It may reduce intake air temps which does help some. But overall water does a much better job at cooling and it does not produce additional heat during combustion so ultimately EGT is much lower when using water.
Methanol is useful when the octane of the fuel you are using is insufficient. For example when 93 is incapable of producing satisfactory results- a little methanol can go a long way to making 93 safer because it improves the octane. It reduces the risk of having the gasoline explode violently and creating an engine damaging pressure spike. Water can cool the combustion reaction but it cannot improve octane the way methanol can; water injection might slow the reaction and reduce its temperature but poor octane fuels can still explode violently given enough compression with such a low octane (93 is pretty "low" compared to everything else on the table, it is a "poor fuel" or "economy" fuel)
Now that we covered the fuels a bit let me rundown my opinion of super vs turbo debate.
Supercharger: looks easy, simple to bolt on, and it is. A supercharger does not take much skill to install, not really compared to a turbocharger. It also look relatively hassle free at first glance. The OEM uses them so there are some configurations which could become reliable. However, as we will see, a supercharger is more of a novelty; Less reliable, more costly to maintain, and they consume a significant magnitude of rotating force from an engine which makes it 'weaker' overall when compared to the same engine using a turbocharger.
Turbocharger: Turbocharger OEM applications outnumber OEM supercharged cars for multiple reasons. The first (no particular order) is longevity. A turbocharger will last longer than any typical supercharger. Some gasoline application turbo engines achieve 300,000 miles with original units. They are also typically cheaper to replace (around half cost or less) and easier to rebuild (local random shops can often do this).
The second reason OEM tend to use turbochargers is because they add thermal efficiency, and do not parasitically drain an engines power/fuel. A 500 horsepower supercharged engine is really a 600 horsepower turbo engine. The supercharger typically consumes 100-120horsepower on a 500 horsepower setup, thus the engine 'stress level' is truly that of a 600 horsepower application. Often supercharged engines fail at 1000rwhp where a turbo engine of the same kind will fail at 1200 or more.
The third reason the OEM prefer turbo is because it improves engine thermal efficiency and thus improves fuel economy. perhaps this is only worth 1mpg or so; It isn't the 'direct reason' they choose a turbo but it sure doesn't HURT the decision.
Finally a turbo typically requires little/no maintenance.
The supercharger requires a belt, which if you have ever owned one is a constant concern of the owner. Everytime you step on the gas pedal you are thinking about that belt. Is it going to fly off this time? Does it need to be replaced? Is it slipping? All these questions and worry will follow you with the car wherever you go. And those belts are sometimes very expensive. And since nobody is every 'happy' with engine output there is always the 'desire' to run more boost and 'upgrade things' which further put strain on the belt system and often requires expensive belt-part upgrades all in and of itself.
So to re-cap,
Supercharger is less reliable, more maintenance/frustrating at times, parasitic/uneconomical, and super easy to install compared to a turbo (which makes the owner look inept with cars, uninterested in unique/imaginative/economical strategy)
Showing off a supercharger under the hood is just showing off sombody elses work; the company whos kit you bought. You are really only showing off a pile of money. Anybody can pile up money on top of an engine.
When you show off a turbo on the V8 it typically required fab work. So you are showing off the blood/sweat you put into the setup, instead of a pile of money. I Respect $40 of junkyard exhaust tube welded together functionally over a $3500 purchased supercharger kit.
The supercharger starts out looking friendly, easy, and can be quite compact for tight spaces; There are reasonable applications, but these are usually for people who do not wish to fabricate or have little imagination. A turbo can be installed almost anywhere, even in the rear of the vehicle. There is a twin rear mount turbo-oilless cartridge vette running around here with 2000rwhp and running 1-mile races. Anybody with some time and skill could buy the proper plumbing and plumb this sort of system out for almost any car. there are no excuses except "I was too lazy".
05-24-2018, 09:26 AM
#37
Methanol is a fuel, like E85 and gasoline, when it burns it releases energy. EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature goes up.
Heat expands the gas in the cylinder causing it to apply force to the piston.
It isn't isothermic; the exhaust system still gets hot regardless of which fuel you choose. They all burn and create heat.
The differences are:
A: how much heat is released
B: how quickly it is released
C: how much energy input is required to break chemical bonds
D: how much energy does the fuel use to vaporize
If you want to cool an engine down, you need to vaporize a lot of liquid. Water does this best. 100% water injection can save an engine from having it's ringlands butt. Methanol, not so much. It may reduce intake air temps which does help some. But overall water does a much better job at cooling and it does not produce additional heat during combustion so ultimately EGT is much lower when using water.
Methanol is useful when the octane of the fuel you are using is insufficient. For example when 93 is incapable of producing satisfactory results- a little methanol can go a long way to making 93 safer because it improves the octane. It reduces the risk of having the gasoline explode violently and creating an engine damaging pressure spike. Water can cool the combustion reaction but it cannot improve octane the way methanol can; water injection might slow the reaction and reduce its temperature but poor octane fuels can still explode violently given enough compression with such a low octane (93 is pretty "low" compared to everything else on the table, it is a "poor fuel" or "economy" fuel)
Now that we covered the fuels a bit let me rundown my opinion of super vs turbo debate.
Supercharger: looks easy, simple to bolt on, and it is. A supercharger does not take much skill to install, not really compared to a turbocharger. It also look relatively hassle free at first glance. The OEM uses them so there are some configurations which could become reliable. However, as we will see, a supercharger is more of a novelty; Less reliable, more costly to maintain, and they consume a significant magnitude of rotating force from an engine which makes it 'weaker' overall when compared to the same engine using a turbocharger.
Turbocharger: Turbocharger OEM applications outnumber OEM supercharged cars for multiple reasons. The first (no particular order) is longevity. A turbocharger will last longer than any typical supercharger. Some gasoline application turbo engines achieve 300,000 miles with original units. They are also typically cheaper to replace (around half cost or less) and easier to rebuild (local random shops can often do this).
The second reason OEM tend to use turbochargers is because they add thermal efficiency, and do not parasitically drain an engines power/fuel. A 500 horsepower supercharged engine is really a 600 horsepower turbo engine. The supercharger typically consumes 100-120horsepower on a 500 horsepower setup, thus the engine 'stress level' is truly that of a 600 horsepower application. Often supercharged engines fail at 1000rwhp where a turbo engine of the same kind will fail at 1200 or more.
The third reason the OEM prefer turbo is because it improves engine thermal efficiency and thus improves fuel economy. perhaps this is only worth 1mpg or so; It isn't the 'direct reason' they choose a turbo but it sure doesn't HURT the decision.
Finally a turbo typically requires little/no maintenance.
The supercharger requires a belt, which if you have ever owned one is a constant concern of the owner. Everytime you step on the gas pedal you are thinking about that belt. Is it going to fly off this time? Does it need to be replaced? Is it slipping? All these questions and worry will follow you with the car wherever you go. And those belts are sometimes very expensive. And since nobody is every 'happy' with engine output there is always the 'desire' to run more boost and 'upgrade things' which further put strain on the belt system and often requires expensive belt-part upgrades all in and of itself.
So to re-cap,
Supercharger is less reliable, more maintenance/frustrating at times, parasitic/uneconomical, and super easy to install compared to a turbo (which makes the owner look inept with cars, uninterested in unique/imaginative/economical strategy)
Showing off a supercharger under the hood is just showing off sombody elses work; the company whos kit you bought. You are really only showing off a pile of money. Anybody can pile up money on top of an engine.
When you show off a turbo on the V8 it typically required fab work. So you are showing off the blood/sweat you put into the setup, instead of a pile of money. I Respect $40 of junkyard exhaust tube welded together functionally over a $3500 purchased supercharger kit.
The supercharger starts out looking friendly, easy, and can be quite compact for tight spaces; There are reasonable applications, but these are usually for people who do not wish to fabricate or have little imagination. A turbo can be installed almost anywhere, even in the rear of the vehicle. There is a twin rear mount turbo-oilless cartridge vette running around here with 2000rwhp and running 1-mile races. Anybody with some time and skill could buy the proper plumbing and plumb this sort of system out for almost any car. there are no excuses except "I was too lazy".
Heat expands the gas in the cylinder causing it to apply force to the piston.
It isn't isothermic; the exhaust system still gets hot regardless of which fuel you choose. They all burn and create heat.
The differences are:
A: how much heat is released
B: how quickly it is released
C: how much energy input is required to break chemical bonds
D: how much energy does the fuel use to vaporize
If you want to cool an engine down, you need to vaporize a lot of liquid. Water does this best. 100% water injection can save an engine from having it's ringlands butt. Methanol, not so much. It may reduce intake air temps which does help some. But overall water does a much better job at cooling and it does not produce additional heat during combustion so ultimately EGT is much lower when using water.
Methanol is useful when the octane of the fuel you are using is insufficient. For example when 93 is incapable of producing satisfactory results- a little methanol can go a long way to making 93 safer because it improves the octane. It reduces the risk of having the gasoline explode violently and creating an engine damaging pressure spike. Water can cool the combustion reaction but it cannot improve octane the way methanol can; water injection might slow the reaction and reduce its temperature but poor octane fuels can still explode violently given enough compression with such a low octane (93 is pretty "low" compared to everything else on the table, it is a "poor fuel" or "economy" fuel)
Now that we covered the fuels a bit let me rundown my opinion of super vs turbo debate.
Supercharger: looks easy, simple to bolt on, and it is. A supercharger does not take much skill to install, not really compared to a turbocharger. It also look relatively hassle free at first glance. The OEM uses them so there are some configurations which could become reliable. However, as we will see, a supercharger is more of a novelty; Less reliable, more costly to maintain, and they consume a significant magnitude of rotating force from an engine which makes it 'weaker' overall when compared to the same engine using a turbocharger.
Turbocharger: Turbocharger OEM applications outnumber OEM supercharged cars for multiple reasons. The first (no particular order) is longevity. A turbocharger will last longer than any typical supercharger. Some gasoline application turbo engines achieve 300,000 miles with original units. They are also typically cheaper to replace (around half cost or less) and easier to rebuild (local random shops can often do this).
The second reason OEM tend to use turbochargers is because they add thermal efficiency, and do not parasitically drain an engines power/fuel. A 500 horsepower supercharged engine is really a 600 horsepower turbo engine. The supercharger typically consumes 100-120horsepower on a 500 horsepower setup, thus the engine 'stress level' is truly that of a 600 horsepower application. Often supercharged engines fail at 1000rwhp where a turbo engine of the same kind will fail at 1200 or more.
The third reason the OEM prefer turbo is because it improves engine thermal efficiency and thus improves fuel economy. perhaps this is only worth 1mpg or so; It isn't the 'direct reason' they choose a turbo but it sure doesn't HURT the decision.
Finally a turbo typically requires little/no maintenance.
The supercharger requires a belt, which if you have ever owned one is a constant concern of the owner. Everytime you step on the gas pedal you are thinking about that belt. Is it going to fly off this time? Does it need to be replaced? Is it slipping? All these questions and worry will follow you with the car wherever you go. And those belts are sometimes very expensive. And since nobody is every 'happy' with engine output there is always the 'desire' to run more boost and 'upgrade things' which further put strain on the belt system and often requires expensive belt-part upgrades all in and of itself.
So to re-cap,
Supercharger is less reliable, more maintenance/frustrating at times, parasitic/uneconomical, and super easy to install compared to a turbo (which makes the owner look inept with cars, uninterested in unique/imaginative/economical strategy)
Showing off a supercharger under the hood is just showing off sombody elses work; the company whos kit you bought. You are really only showing off a pile of money. Anybody can pile up money on top of an engine.
When you show off a turbo on the V8 it typically required fab work. So you are showing off the blood/sweat you put into the setup, instead of a pile of money. I Respect $40 of junkyard exhaust tube welded together functionally over a $3500 purchased supercharger kit.
The supercharger starts out looking friendly, easy, and can be quite compact for tight spaces; There are reasonable applications, but these are usually for people who do not wish to fabricate or have little imagination. A turbo can be installed almost anywhere, even in the rear of the vehicle. There is a twin rear mount turbo-oilless cartridge vette running around here with 2000rwhp and running 1-mile races. Anybody with some time and skill could buy the proper plumbing and plumb this sort of system out for almost any car. there are no excuses except "I was too lazy".
By King Talon
05-24-2018, 02:42 PM
#38
Advanced
Awesome, I think I am going to do the headers then. I hate the gas fume smell of a catless car so I will have to get some small cats in there. If I install just the headers, and don't do anything else, will that make the car leaner or richer? I think I am running a little on the rich side as is so if it leans the car out a little it might end up being perfect.
I believe I would gain a bit of lower and mid range torque with headers correct? I would def enjoy some more tq... Now I have to decide what headers to get. Any idea how long install time should be for a decent mechanic to do for his first time at home on jack stands?
I believe I would gain a bit of lower and mid range torque with headers correct? I would def enjoy some more tq... Now I have to decide what headers to get. Any idea how long install time should be for a decent mechanic to do for his first time at home on jack stands?
Typically, a header install loses a bit of torque. The loss of backpressure reduces low-mid torque. However you are boosted, so the loss should be minimal. The car should feel more powerful in general because the improved airflow (when you are already trying to flow so much with the S/C) will increase power. Keep in mind if you monitor boost pressure, your pressure may drop a little. This is actually good. you are making more power by flowing more air. Your S/C is still spinning just as fast and so pushing as much air, but now it is getting through with less restriction (boost pressure).
The following users liked this post:
badass1g (05-24-2018)
05-25-2018, 11:45 PM
#40
Team Owner
Installing just headers will make you leaner because you are improving airflow. But typically that should be by a small enough amount that the car easily adapts back to stoich using fuel trims. If your WOT throttle settings are a little rich, and aren't richened more by having the headers, then the headers might bring it back a little leaner.
Typically, a header install loses a bit of torque. The loss of backpressure reduces low-mid torque. However you are boosted, so the loss should be minimal. The car should feel more powerful in general because the improved airflow (when you are already trying to flow so much with the S/C) will increase power. Keep in mind if you monitor boost pressure, your pressure may drop a little. This is actually good. you are making more power by flowing more air. Your S/C is still spinning just as fast and so pushing as much air, but now it is getting through with less restriction (boost pressure).
Typically, a header install loses a bit of torque. The loss of backpressure reduces low-mid torque. However you are boosted, so the loss should be minimal. The car should feel more powerful in general because the improved airflow (when you are already trying to flow so much with the S/C) will increase power. Keep in mind if you monitor boost pressure, your pressure may drop a little. This is actually good. you are making more power by flowing more air. Your S/C is still spinning just as fast and so pushing as much air, but now it is getting through with less restriction (boost pressure).
Last edited by 3 Z06ZR1; 05-25-2018 at 11:54 PM.
