So I have 1050hp motors and after the blower eats 150 , I make 900?? I don`t believe that.

Mike, same heads, same boost?? Compressing air creates heat, Whipples still make heat .

I don't see that being unreasonable . Let's spin one of your huge commercial A/C compressors to 5000 and see how many Horsepower that takes.

nothing changed on the engine,just the supercharger.yes when you compress air you create heat just not as much with the screw blower.not the same boost,you can safely make more boost with the whipple.

Whipple sound like a greats Value ? Less heat so not the need for a inter cooler if not desired and over all more efficient . So what is the downside?



CFM to CFM what does a Roots go for compared to a Whipple?

dan,i would say 150 is probibally pretty close.another way to look at it is you have a 750 hp engine that makes 900 with the blower.i will bet you pick up 30 to 50 hp from the compression increase and the ring seal&valve seal.

Cost...by a ton.

the inner cooler lets you run a little more boost.if you keep the boost at a safe level and have the correct tune up you don,t need an inner cooler.dan made 900 without an inner cooler with iron heads.we are upping his compression ratio so if we leave the boost the same he will make more power.i can,t say but i think he will turn the boost down and stay around 900 hp.

Now we are in Iceededppls realm . Lol

Long as we are on this subject , what are you losing for horsepower or intake flow with a inter cooler ?

imo,nothing,you just turn the blower a little faster to make up for the restriction.it really is not much.if you were to add a boost gauge above the inner cooler i am guessing 1 to 2 lbs more than in the manifold.remember,boost,or pressure is created from resistance to flow.

I will say this, IF you have a NA motor using 500 lbs fuel per hr at .500 BSFC PER HP and the blown motor uses 550lbs perhr at .550 bsfc per hp then the number would be 10%, IE they both make 1000 hp output but the blown motor is using 1100 hp worth of fuel to make that same 1000hp which translates to 100 hp, it also has the HEAT being transferred thru pistons to oil of a 1100 hp motor and 10% more stress on piston and other parts. If bsfc was .575 vs .500 that same 1000 hp example would be using 150 hp worth of fuel and mathmatecially using 150 hp to turn blower. The slower you can turn the blower the less parasitic loss their is. I tested a procharger m-3sc and it used about 50 hp to make 14 psi boost, bsfc went from about .495 to .520 which also translates to 50 hp or so at 1000 hp output, FWIW, Smitty

8000hp parasitic 600hp = 8%

That would mean 72hp parasitic loss on 900 hp. But I`m not pushing 74psi either so my belief is still less than that.

another factor is the more boost the harder the charger needs to work,that means the charger eats more power as boost goes up.smitty,i remember a post that said you were really over driving the 3sc.did you have issues with the drive belt slipping.reason i am asking is i have a 565 with a 3sc going to the dyno soon.

So in a essence by the enter cooler creating a air restriction it is creating boost and heat before the intake charge even goes through the inter cooler.

So to really confuse the matter. Why the resistance to turbo charging .

Back n the day Brownie talks of all the old turbo charged Daytona motors and what a hot package they were.

Than Mercruiser came out with the 454 daul turbo motor that made 475 horse with its tiny non water jacketed housings.

I ran little 300 horse turbo Yanmar diesels that had no lag what so ever . So what is the hold up with turbos?

yes but not much.

In this day and age,nothing,turboes can spool real nice now and self tuning efi can take the fear out of them.price may scare people off as turboes can get up there when needing custom.and no one really wants to buy used turboes,could be a time bomb just waiting to send a compressor wheel thru your intake system.
but I love the power you can get from them.
In a boat,it would solve some of the noise issues associated w/ big hp blower motors.

My guess, would be somewhere in the area of 50-100hp, on something like we have.

A 500HP engine, with 14.7lbs of boost, should theoretically make 1000HP, or double its power. And engine with 7lbs of boost, should gain 50%. So a 500HP, engine , should make 750HP . , with no parasitic losses.

My engine made 800HP with 7lbs of boost, and a roots blower. If the parasitic loss was 150hp, that would mean 950hp without the parasitic loss. With 7lbs of boost, that would mean my engine, n/a , would be making around 635hp. A 468 with dart heads, 9:1, and a 236/245 hyd roller, isn't gonna make 635HP at 6000. My guess would be somewhere around 550-575HP at 6000. That would put me at 850HP theoretical, and 800HP at the flywheel, so say 50HP loss to drive the blower.

50hp makes sense to me. I can't see my little crappy 10 rib drive belt, lasting very long if it had to turn a load of 150HP.

Most roots blowers have big cog tooth belts. Lots of marine guys run a 16 rib belt to drive their 871, 1071, etc. It works for that. I would not try running a 16 rib serpentine belt, in a blown alcohol engine, making 30 plus pounds of boost, because at that level, you need the big cog belt to drive the blower, as its taking a lot more HP than it is at say, 7lbs.

Heres a comparison of a centrifugal vs roots on Vortech's website. They are showing a "best selling roots', whatever that is, to be consumimg 69hp, while their centrifugal is consuming 48hp. About a 20hp difference. I'm guessing thats a pump gas low boost comparision.

A roots style blower is an air compressor...a whipple is an air mover and does not compress the air like a roots. That's why they run so much cooler and take less power.

I think you have that backwards scott. A roots moves air and does not compress it within the case, where as a whipple does compress it .

I belive a screw has less drag due to the much finer tolerances and no contact of rotor stripping , etc .

You are Correct.

Totally wrong
Best go read whipples website

What I see is the complexity of them. new exhaust manifolds, Correct oil drainage, new exhaust pipes, heat shields over the turbos. Plus turbos dont have that muscular sound at idle. My boat is really quiet at idle. Even at speed it is quieter that other boats, and when you get into boost all you pretty much hear is the whistle. There is no universal bolt on turbo system available. Hardin Marine was developing a twin turbo kit stage 1 kit for the 525 EFi
that would boost the power to 775 HP. It had a starting price of $12K, but it seems like the project stalled. http://speedonthewater.com/in-the-ne...-in-miami.html

I'm guessing for $12K you can buy a blower for much cheaper and be able to bolt it on in a weekend with minimal amount of fabrication and achieve similar power levels

this is correct but both roots and screw blowers do the same thing,pack air into the cylinders.the screw blower just does it more efficiently.on another note,nitrous oxide does the the same thing in a different way,it puts oxygen in the cylinder.

I agree Joe, my friend's engines were built by a guy named Norm---his business is called "Ultratech" in Indiana close to the Michigan border near South Bend, Michawaka or something like that. Whether it was 750hp or only 700hp I honestly don't know, but I still think those supercharged engines of his should have beat me easily.

Anyway, my 565cid NA's made something like 660-670 lbs of torque....and I still believe my friend's boat should have kicked my arss from the torque alone with those Superchargers---especially from 3500rpm up. I surely thought he would have pulled away from me as we both climbed to 5600rpm, but he couldn't do it---we tried several times on different days.

True HP from Dave's dyno---yes,... and that was with all the belts and pullies, and there has to be something said about how the drives were set up on my boat too.

Bill, you could be right about the power of his engines not truly making 750hp, again, maybe only 700hp, I really don't know, but I still think he should have whipped me from the midrange 3500rpm on up with those superchargers.

Mild, that chart has quite an intake temp... 241*? Wow, is that with a barbecue grill cooking some hot dogs on a 100* day above the intake?
:lolhit:

That 16/71 was not a high helix was it?

no.

I was thinking it but you said it! LOL

Worked on a 557 with 10/71 intercooled 10lbs 0f boost and a hydraulic cam made 850hp this was a ex 900sc. Thought it was lame. If it was mine it would of had a solid roller back in it.

i 100% like a solid roller over a hyd but for some applications [like mine]the headers need to be removed to access the valve covers so more work than it is worth.

You have shaft rockers? If I had to pull headers I would have hydraulic lifters.

no shaft rockers.

Yep...I wrote that bassackwards. Just in a hurry this morning...sorry. Thanks for catching it.

Depends on how much boost your trying to make, a m3sc is getting small on even a 540, a 565 even worse, a 12 rib drive gave me 8 to 10 psi w no slip, going to 14 psi and turning it 60,000 created all kinds of slip issues, what kinda boost are you thinking? I was using the mpi 502 brackets which bent and flexed, had to weld strong backs to bracket to get it tight enough to not slip, a 4"upper pulley gave 10 psi on.my 540 and slip wasnt a big issue, a 3.85 gave 12 to 13 psi and had to be real tight which wore out tensioner fast, the 3.70 had to be stupid tight to work. I was building a extra idler to help wrap belt better w 3.70 when i bought my 33avs and put blown 540 off to the side for now

Bsfc on dyno would give you a good idea

i have a pulley coming so i can get more contact area on the charger pulley.i am pretty sure i will need to speed it up so thanks for your past pulley information.i would like to see 11 or 12 lbs boost.i want to spin the engine to around 6700 rpm.