Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Fabberge
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction - V8

Forced Induction - V8 V8 Supercharger, turbo, nitrous discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-18-2008, 09:01 AM   #1
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
New to Forced Induction? Gale Banks talks about FI (Boost).

For those that want a great overview of forced induction (Superchargers and Turbos), here is a video of the man who probably knows more about FI than anyone else.

Hopefully You'll enjoy it.

Edit: Better links,

Part 1: Roots, Twin Screw, and Centrifugal Superchargers
http://www.bankspower.com/videos/show/2



Part 2: Nitrous, Turbos, and Diesels
http://www.bankspower.com/videos/show/3



I really enjoyed his take on the future of musclecars. Very cool.

Last edited by GTAHVIT; 08-18-2008 at 09:53 AM.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 09:08 AM   #2
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,038
Ooo... This looks pretty good. Thanks!
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 10:02 AM   #3
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
I totally get the Turbo thing. If Mr. Banks says it's the way to go then so be it.

But I'm looking for 600 RWHP, and I love the sound of a twin screw supercharger. I'm gonna have trouble getting 600 to the ground anyway. For the kind of power I'm talking about I don't really want all the complications of Turbo. Having said that, if I were to go 700 plus and money was no object... I'd have a small block Banks TT setup without question.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 12:10 PM   #4
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 21,866
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
I remember watching that. Very informative for beginers
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 01:12 PM   #5
smike07
 
smike07's Avatar
 
Drives: 1998 convertible Camaro RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 220
It certainly gives me something to contemplate. I like both turbos and SC, but mine will have at least 500 horses before I tack on any type of forced induction stuff. There's plenty of time for everyone to give feedback and total HP numbers, as well as problems before I invest in either. It's still exciting.
smike07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 03:34 PM   #6
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
I totally get the Turbo thing. If Mr. Banks says it's the way to go then so be it.

But I'm looking for 600 RWHP, and I love the sound of a twin screw supercharger. I'm gonna have trouble getting 600 to the ground anyway. For the kind of power I'm talking about I don't really want all the complications of Turbo. Having said that, if I were to go 700 plus and money was no object... I'd have a small block Banks TT setup without question.
+1 I'd prefer the sound of a supercharger, ease of installation, reliability, and tunablility, opposed to the complicated design and nature of turbos. There's no question that Banks knows his stuff though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3 View Post
I remember watching that. Very informative for beginers
I thought that looked familiar. The narator sounded familiar then I saw the introduction on the second video and remembered seeing it.

Good information nonetheless!!!
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2008, 11:16 PM   #7
Kyle2k
LVL 50 Troll Stomper
 
Kyle2k's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 3,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
+1 I'd prefer the sound of a supercharger, ease of installation, reliability, and tunablility, opposed to the complicated design and nature of turbos. There's no question that Banks knows his stuff though.



I thought that looked familiar. The narator sounded familiar then I saw the introduction on the second video and remembered seeing it.

Good information nonetheless!!!
Can anyone please tell me what's so complicated about turbochargers? Or is that if you have to know like what size of turbo to use etc?
__________________
Kyle2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 06:23 AM   #8
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
I guess complicated may be the wrong word. I'm just not a fan of all the plumbing that comes along with it. But, my biggest concern is the oil requirement for the turbos. Most bolt on Blowers don't need oil while the turbos do. It just makes me a little more comfortable when I shut down the motor, everything is shut down. While turbos will continue to spin and will require oil to cool them off. If I'm not mistaken some turbo kits won't let you shut off the motor until the turbos are cool enough. Things like this make me more of a blower guy. And the sound.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 09:51 AM   #9
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,038
Complicated isn't the right word; my bad. I should've said, IMHO, it's just more complex and, for me, not entirely necessary when you have a simpler blower you can bolt onto the top of the engine. I think the plumbing for the turbo(s), like coolant and/or oil, exhaust temperature, exhaust plumbing, bigger intercooler to fight higher IATs, and such just make it less desirable on a street car that's expected to put down good power, reliably, repeatedly. Don't get me wrong, TRs and GNs were flippin' bad@$$. I just believe there is more mechanical control over a supercharger, therefor, easier not to allow to get out of hand (overboost, creep, etc.)

I'm not arguing what's better, just what I prefer more
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 02:42 PM   #10
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
Complicated isn't the right word; my bad. I should've said, IMHO, it's just more complex and, for me, not entirely necessary when you have a simpler blower you can bolt onto the top of the engine. I think the plumbing for the turbo(s), like coolant and/or oil, exhaust temperature, exhaust plumbing, bigger intercooler to fight higher IATs, and such just make it less desirable on a street car that's expected to put down good power, reliably, repeatedly. Don't get me wrong, TRs and GNs were flippin' bad@$$. I just believe there is more mechanical control over a supercharger, therefor, easier not to allow to get out of hand (overboost, creep, etc.)

I'm not arguing what's better, just what I prefer more
Dude! Did you cut and paste my post??? The More I read your posts the more I think we were separated at birth.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 07:16 PM   #11
KILLER74Z28
MOD SQUAD
 
KILLER74Z28's Avatar
 
Drives: 2G1FT1EW9A9100666
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 5,656
Lots of good info; learned a lot of new things I was unaware of… Great post
__________________

Who cares about the Blue Oval crowd and their little Ponys? We're getting our Camaro back-and it'll be Supercharged!-MDAII
Team LS3
KILLER74Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 11:11 PM   #12
TFord
Camaro Fanatic
 
TFord's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Z28
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 1,812
Send a message via Yahoo to TFord
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
Complicated isn't the right word; my bad. I should've said, IMHO, it's just more complex and, for me, not entirely necessary when you have a simpler blower you can bolt onto the top of the engine. I think the plumbing for the turbo(s), like coolant and/or oil, exhaust temperature, exhaust plumbing, bigger intercooler to fight higher IATs, and such just make it less desirable on a street car that's expected to put down good power, reliably, repeatedly. Don't get me wrong, TRs and GNs were flippin' bad@$$. I just believe there is more mechanical control over a supercharger, therefor, easier not to allow to get out of hand (overboost, creep, etc.)

I'm not arguing what's better, just what I prefer more
Ditto,....(dude get out of my head)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit
Dude! Did you cut and paste my post??? The More I read your posts the more I think we were separated at birth.
Thats what I think of both U guys!!! well you know what they say great minds think alike!
__________________
TFord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:17 AM   #13
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by TFord View Post
Ditto,....(dude get out of my head)



Thats what I think of both U guys!!! well you know what they say great minds think alike!
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:18 AM   #14
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
YOU KNOW IT!!! SHAKE AND BAKE!!!
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 07:56 AM   #15
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
For the kind of power I'm talking about I don't really want all the complications of Turbo. Having said that, if I were to go 700 plus and money was no object... I'd have a small block Banks TT setup without question.
You're actually backwards. For quick and simple power, it's about bolting on a little S/C and away you go...but that's as good as it's gonna get for you. No upgrading once you hit the limits of that S/C (smallest pulley possible). For large numbers it's turbo for "simplicity".
Quote:
Originally Posted by smike07 View Post
...but mine will have at least 500 horses before I tack on any type of forced induction stuff.
If you're making changes that boost your HP n/a then you may be making your engine less capable of high numbers from forced induction. Remember, you are limited by octane and engine strength, and if you're already making changes (Heads/pistons/cams/valves) that are upping the stresses then FI will do nothing because you don't have farther to go. To get real improvement from an FI engine, you actually do the opposite...make the engine have less power so you can exponentially add more with FI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
It just makes me a little more comfortable when I shut down the motor, everything is shut down. While turbos will continue to spin and will require oil to cool them off. If I'm not mistaken some turbo kits won't let you shut off the motor until the turbos are cool enough.
Urban legend brought about by F&F. Think about any turbo application factory car ever. Have you EVER heard of a factory car needing cooldown time? No, because it's a farce. The only exception is if you're stupid enough to make a WOT throttle run for 5 minutes (road race for example) then just shut down without idling and letting all the temps cool down. But that's going to effect more than just the turbo(s), so it's just common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
I just believe there is more mechanical control over a supercharger, therefor, easier not to allow to get out of hand (overboost, creep, etc.)
There's actually ZERO mechanical control of a S/C. It spins the same speed no matter what and there's no way to control the amount of pressure it is punching into the engine. You get what you get every time, period. Sounds fine at a glance, and will be to most...but not this tuner.

My Supra had a shitty EBC (Electronic Boost Controller), which I hated, but only because the model I was using was bad. That being said, the neatness of it was the settings I had for it. If I were using a serious build, and was at the track often where I had access to 116 octane, I could up my boost to tune the car to levels that were attainable with such high octane fuel. At the push of a button I could let the turbo spool up to 30 PSI and make 700+ rwhp. Then when I was done, just press it again and the EBC opens the wastegate nice and early and I'm making a subtle 550 rwhp again on 20-22 PSI on pump gas. I can also tune how sharp my torque curve was (handy for Supras with light asses that can't get traction) so I could incorporate creep into my boost so the HP/TQ curve wasn't as sharp and I could get traction...or I could just have it spike and hold and control it with throttle (which admittedly is horrible on a turbo application).

The point of all that madness is none of it it possible with a S/C. As far as preference, that's all up to you, and I'm not trying to sway you (ok maybe a little, but I'm a turbo junkie)...but if you're just wrong about how you think turbos work, I'm obligated to correct it.

MerF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 10:18 AM   #16
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,722
Bold.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
I'm looking for 600 RWHP, and I love the sound of a twin screw supercharger. I'm gonna have trouble getting 600 to the ground anyway. For the kind of power I'm talking about I don't really want all the complications of Turbo. Having said that, if I were to go 700 plus and money was no object... I'd have a small block Banks TT setup without question.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MerF View Post
You're actually backwards. For quick and simple power, it's about bolting on a little S/C and away you go...but that's as good as it's gonna get for you. No upgrading once you hit the limits of that S/C (smallest pulley possible). For large numbers it's turbo for "simplicity".

Uhh I think we agree. I thought you and I said the same thing? Except for the I got it backwards part. I didn't say that....

Urban legend brought about by F&F. Think about any turbo application factory car ever. Have you EVER heard of a factory car needing cooldown time? No, because it's a farce. The only exception is if you're stupid enough to make a WOT throttle run for 5 minutes (road race for example) then just shut down without idling and letting all the temps cool down. But that's going to effect more than just the turbo(s), so it's just common sense.

I totally get this and I didn't correctly characterize this scenario in my earlier post.
Can you help me understand why you say
Quote:
For large numbers it's turbo for "simplicity".
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 07:05 PM   #17
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
Can you help me understand why you say
Basically once you start getting into superchargers that make big numbers, you're gonna end up paying a lot more and once again you get what you get. A turbocharged car can be tuned that with the flip of a button on the dash it is as mild as the factory car next to it (by not allowing the turbo to spool up), or to go all out and make huge numbers if the time is right. A SC is the same no matter what, and if you want to make 700 rwhp you're gonna need 93+ Octane in it all the time because it's always going to make that power when you floor it.

So in essence, the turbo is "simpler" in that it can make a wide range of horsepower with one setup, where you'de need several setups in a SC to accomplish the same.
MerF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 07:37 PM   #18
Kyle2k
LVL 50 Troll Stomper
 
Kyle2k's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 3,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerF View Post
A SC is the same no matter what, and if you want to make 700 rwhp you're gonna need 93+ Octane in it all the time because it's always going to make that power when you floor it.
That is true, unless of course you want to change the S/C pulley...fun fun.
__________________
Kyle2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 07:40 PM   #19
CamaroSpike23
Mr. Nitpicky
 
CamaroSpike23's Avatar
 
Drives: anything I can get my hands on
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: anywhere and everywhere
Posts: 22,861
Send a message via Yahoo to CamaroSpike23
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerF View Post
You're actually backwards. For quick and simple power, it's about bolting on a little S/C and away you go...but that's as good as it's gonna get for you. No upgrading once you hit the limits of that S/C (smallest pulley possible). For large numbers it's turbo for "simplicity".

If you're making changes that boost your HP n/a then you may be making your engine less capable of high numbers from forced induction. Remember, you are limited by octane and engine strength, and if you're already making changes (Heads/pistons/cams/valves) that are upping the stresses then FI will do nothing because you don't have farther to go. To get real improvement from an FI engine, you actually do the opposite...make the engine have less power so you can exponentially add more with FI.

you dont HAVE to do the opposite, but if you are building a motor for FI, dont expect a lot of power N/A... unless you are GM and you have an LS9. with s/c= 650, w/o s/c=535

Urban legend brought about by F&F. Think about any turbo application factory car ever. Have you EVER heard of a factory car needing cooldown time? No, because it's a farce. The only exception is if you're stupid enough to make a WOT throttle run for 5 minutes (road race for example) then just shut down without idling and letting all the temps cool down. But that's going to effect more than just the turbo(s), so it's just common sense.

true point, but how many times do you (maybe not you personally, but someone you ride with) jump in a turbo'd car in a hurry, fire it up, and scoot off? or come home after cruisin around and park it and shut it off. without giving it any time to idle and cool? tho it might not need a lot of time to cool on a stock setup, the bigger you go, the more care needs taken when operating. me for instance, i start my car up before i go to work and i let it idle till it comes out of open loop

There's actually ZERO mechanical control of a S/C. It spins the same speed no matter what and there's no way to control the amount of pressure it is punching into the engine. You get what you get every time, period. Sounds fine at a glance, and will be to most...but not this tuner.

the mechanical control over the s/c that he's talking about is the fact that when you let off the pedal, the s/c slows down at the same rate as the motor. which brings me to my next point, a s/c does not spin the same speed no matter what, if it did, then it wouldnt be worth a damn, at low rpms, you would overload the motor with too much air, or at high speed you wouldnt get enough air. a s/c spins at a speed proportional to engine speed.... its driven off the engine belt... period. it is fine, because as your rpms climb so does your boost. you arent running full boost at idle in a s/c car. trust me.

My Supra had a shitty EBC (Electronic Boost Controller), which I hated, but only because the model I was using was bad. That being said, the neatness of it was the settings I had for it. If I were using a serious build, and was at the track often where I had access to 116 octane, I could up my boost to tune the car to levels that were attainable with such high octane fuel. At the push of a button I could let the turbo spool up to 30 PSI and make 700+ rwhp. Then when I was done, just press it again and the EBC opens the wastegate nice and early and I'm making a subtle 550 rwhp again on 20-22 PSI on pump gas. I can also tune how sharp my torque curve was (handy for Supras with light asses that can't get traction) so I could incorporate creep into my boost so the HP/TQ curve wasn't as sharp and I could get traction...or I could just have it spike and hold and control it with throttle (which admittedly is horrible on a turbo application).

boost controllers rock dont they? btw, could you pm me (or post up here) your specs on your supra. and yes, im serious. i love seeing how import tuners build their motors when they are pushing that kind of power.

The point of all that madness is none of it it possible with a S/C. As far as preference, that's all up to you, and I'm not trying to sway you (ok maybe a little, but I'm a turbo junkie)...but if you're just wrong about how you think turbos work, I'm obligated to correct it.

the point is, have you ever driven a car with a serious s/c? i know you are a turbo junkie, but i think you need to do a little more reading about s/c's and not just turbos. nearly everything you run with a turbo is possible with a s/c.
__________________
Never race anything you can't afford to light on fire and push off a cliff
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogwinters View Post
Read that link that Spike posted, it'll tell you everything you need to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WheelmanSS View Post
Post count is truly an accurate measure of how cool someone is on the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Norris View Post
I piss excellence
and fart awesomeness
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.
"You can think I'm wrong, but that's no reason to quit thinking.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overflow View Post
But not all people were born awesome like you, Spike.
CamaroSpike23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 07:51 PM   #20
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,537
I sold the car years ago...I've posted vidoes of it here and there and I'll PM you that link. The set-up on my personal car was basic (sorta)...in Supra terminology, it was an APU+ car.
MerF is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Forced Induction Stamm316 4th Generation Camaros 4 04-13-2008 07:47 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.