• Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Posted: **Thu May 30, 2013 3:31 pm**

This is one I have wanted to do for a while and I'm hoping I can find enough interest in it to make it worthwhile.
If someone was willing to pay the price I would be more than happy to do these as one offs. If however we can get some people to go in on them then I could do it a lot cheaper.
Once the flanges were designed and made there would be quite a lot of flexibility as far as the design of the system. If people wanted different routing it would be no big deal.
On an SC system everything pre SC is many times more important than post SC so that is the focus of this thread. The primary focus is from the TB to the supercharger.
A basic setup would include a 3" inlet to a 75ish mm TB to 3" piping to the SC.

The price of this kit would depend greatly on what TB was used, if the customer supplied their own, how many people were interested and some other variables.
I will give it a ballpark for now around $300 plus the cost of the TB.

If this one works out well we could start to look at post SC piping, SC14 brackets or other SC related projects.

Posted: **Fri May 31, 2013 12:28 am**

I'll think my brother might be interested. He sometimes complains that the stock inlet from a SC isn't great at all.

I'll send him te link.

Posted: **Fri May 31, 2013 9:01 am**

Intake side is vital on a fixed displacement motor. A pressure drop in the intake side will be multiplied several times on the pressure side. That means lower boost and less power.
Later I'll try to remember to try and find the thread on the MR2OC where there was some testing done and measurable improvements made with modifications to the intake side.

Posted: **Fri May 31, 2013 8:33 pm**

i would be interested, especially if modifications were included in the design to be able to better fit this into a RWD platform such as the AE86.

Posted: **Sat Jun 01, 2013 9:59 am**

supraman10 wrote:i would be interested, especially if modifications were included in the design to be able to better fit this into a RWD platform such as the AE86.

That should be no problem at all.
I don't have access to an AE86. Can you take some pictures of the main areas you think could be improved and make any suggestions you may have for those areas?

Posted: **Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:58 pm**

i will try to take some pics tonight if i can remember to.

Posted: **Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:40 pm**

supraman10 wrote:i will try to take some pics tonight if i can remember to.

I posted about pics in the other thread without thinking about it but lets put them here and bring the intake piping and manifold convo into this thread.

Posted: **Tue Jun 04, 2013 7:45 pm**

sounds like a good idea, lol. I also haven't remembered to take those pics yet either.

Posted: **Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:56 am**

um, sorry to steal your thunder, but toyota already has OEM parts to do this, with the exception of a single piece of 2.5" intercooler piping.

63mm 7mgte throttle body(2.5")>2.5" pipe>s/c>2" piping>FMIC>2" piping>smallport n/a intake (TB butterfly removed)>head.

been running setups like these for years. making almost 200whp. if you do the math on those parts vs. OEM gze parts, its over a 70% increase in flow, w/o causing s/c surge issues.

Posted: **Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:39 pm**

4agshoob wrote:um, sorry to steal your thunder, but toyota already has OEM parts to do this, with the exception of a single piece of 2.5" intercooler piping.

63mm 7mgte throttle body(2.5")>2.5" pipe>s/c>2" piping>FMIC>2" piping>smallport n/a intake (TB butterfly removed)>head.

been running setups like these for years. making almost 200whp. if you do the math on those parts vs. OEM gze parts, its over a 70% increase in flow, w/o causing s/c surge issues.

I don't see why the attitude. This doesn't steal my thunder or change anything at all.

I was planning on using a Toyota TB but I was going to use one off a 1UZ that is something like 72mm.
Most people don't have the time or the skills to make their own flanges, weld their own piping and completely fabricate their own systems. If you do then that's awesome, good for you.
Toyota does not have all the OEM parts. You will need a TB flange to bolt up your new TB. You need a new SC inlet which would either require making a new flange or cutting a flange off the SC inlet and welding larger piping on.

And LOL about surge on a fixed displacement compressor lol.

Posted: **Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:07 pm**

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:
I don't see why the attitude. This doesn't steal my thunder or change anything at all.

I was planning on using a Toyota TB but I was going to use one off a 1UZ that is something like 72mm.
Most people don't have the time or the skills to make their own flanges, weld their own piping and completely fabricate their own systems. If you do then that's awesome, good for you.
Toyota does not have all the OEM parts. You will need a TB flange to bolt up your new TB. You need a new SC inlet which would either require making a new flange or cutting a flange off the SC inlet and welding larger piping on.

And LOL about surge on a fixed displacement compressor lol.

lol, that back fired, no attitude intended bro. but in all honesty a 73mm tb is over kill on the sc12 or 14. and that point you will lose throttle response. now, you could port the s/c housing inlet on the casings, like you would on a 13b, but without increasing rpm's of the s/c significantly you wont see any gain. in order to make the 73mm tb work efficiently you would need to turn the sc12/14 at a greater rpm, than its intended to run. like over 17000 rpms. at that point your melting sh*t.

as for changing the s/c inlet, or oem inlet pipe itself, its already 60mm.....cool thing is the 2.5" (63mm) pipe couples right up to it, with an intercooler coupler. ive en taken the time one time, to hone the opening out to 62mm with a flare to make the air transision smoother, but it proved no real benefit

as for your surge comment, yes, sc12 will surge if you throw huge piping on the blowing side. as well as a huge intercooler.

your setup sounds good on paper, but real world numbers will tell the story. perhaps if you ran say....and eaton m62, id say 72mm throttle body, all day. the sc12/14, nah, not really.

Posted: **Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:08 pm**

on a quick summary, the best power can be made out of the gze, just by cooling temps, and improving flow, without sacrificing velocity.
2" piping
small FMIC
smallport intake
overdrie pulley

ok, think about fluid dynamics. lets make this easy for the newbs as well.

(your intended setup)
everybody at one point in time, has eaten at mcdonalds. most cocaine addicts know that mcdonalds has the widest straws, in terms of girth, and flow. now, when you order your large drink of your choice, you fill it up, yada yada yada. your thirsty as f*ck after sucking on those dreadful salty fries. so you grab your drink, and suck in a heaping gulp.

ok, so if you suck hard enough, for any lengthy period, your mouth intakes more than it can swallow.

(oem setup)
same roll, at your local chinese takeout. they have the styrofoam cups, with generic straws. your eating your general tso's chicken, and nab a red chile, just right. again you reach for your drink. now this tiny asian straw doesnt seem to be giving you enough liquid no matter how hard you suck, you cant quite get enough drink. it takes a good long, suck to even get enough to swallow.

(matched setup)
you and your posse, stop in at krystal's (white castle) after a night of strait donkey'ing. you order a few little burgers, which are mostly sodium saturated meat, and huge buns. you eat, it sticks to the roof of your mouth, and again, you grab for the drink. now the krystal's straw will slide over the chinese restraunts straw, yet fit inside the mcdonalds straw. you suck. with little to no effort, you fill your mouth, and swallow, no over abundances to make you slow down and hold some in your mouth, while you swallow a little, to keep from choking. no fish face cheeks from trying to implode the straw. just nice and smooth, just right. you suck, you swallow.

no homo.

the engine is nothing more than an air pump, while you and i both know this (again, keep it simple so the noobs can follow along at home), in this particular case, it displaces 1.6l of air, every 1 rotation.

suck - squish - bang - blow

now, the sc12 is a 1200cc unit. in terms of cfm's, it displaces 900 cfm's for every revolution. that oem 50mm throttle body, its meant to provide a specific velocity per that 900cfm intake cycle. now when you bolt on an underdrive pulley, guess what you still are only getting 900cfms, per revolution. but your getting it more frequently, at a higher rate. this means your velocity increases. you must match this in order to keep your superchargers efficiency on par.

12 psi pulley = 20% increase = 4age throttle body = 55mm = 17% increase in flow. (ported j pipe) - stock intercooler is still sufficient, not efficient.

14 psi pulley = 40% increase = 7mgte throttle body = 63mm = 38% increase in flow (2.5" i/c pipe) - further cooling over stock is needed

16 psi pulley = 60% increase = 1uz throttle body = 73mm = 70% increase in flow (3" i/c pipe) - however.theres an issue at this level:

issue 1. your stock map sensor and ecu are pretty much gonna give you the middle finger after 15 psi.

issue 2. your 385 injectors are at about 90% duty cycle.

issue 3. the rpm at which 16 lbs. will require the sc12 to rotate, the teflon is eating itself, and your sc12 is dying with every rev.

issue 4. the heat produced by the sc12 at this rpm, is gonna need further intercooling, meaning, larger piping, larger intercooler = surge(lag) and spongy throttle responce due to the slow in velocity, due to a drop in static pressure through larger charge piping.

issue 5. even an sc14 dropping 17 lbs. (pretty much the limit like the sc12), revert back to issues numbers 1, 2, and 4. then, you have to equate in the factor with any overdrive pulley, its presents more parasitic drag, the bigger the pulley. add an overdriven sc14 to that, and your better off with an sc12, with the proper plumbing.

again, this is where i was saying "sorry to steal your thunder" or in better words, "sorry to shoot you down" not in a manner to offend or such, but a matter of the physics arent there. by all means, im open to the next idea to extract power from the gze, but i feel your gonna find it boggy, un responsive, loud, and potentially detonating.

Posted: **Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:27 pm**

supraman10 wrote:i would be interested, especially if modifications were included in the design to be able to better fit this into a RWD platform such as the AE86.

depends on what mods are done to the engine, and how far your willing to go.

Posted: **Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:57 pm**

4agshoob wrote:on a quick summary, the best power can be made out of the gze, just by cooling temps,

Gains from this will be minimal. Since it's a fixed displacement compressor you are pumping the same amount of air into the engine. There will be some small gains from lowering the pressure ratio and reducing air slipping past the lobes. Aside from that the only gains would be from being able to run more timing.

Ref Temperature efficiency
http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Common/p ... ciency.pdf

the engine is nothing more than an air pump, while you and i both know this (again, keep it simple so the noobs can follow along at home), in this particular case, it displaces 1.6l of air, every 1 rotation.

suck - squish - bang - blow

now, the sc12 is a 1200cc unit. in terms of cfm's, it displaces 900 cfm's for every revolution. that oem 50mm throttle body, its meant to provide a specific velocity per that 900cfm intake cycle. now when you bolt on an underdrive pulley, guess what you still are only getting 900cfms, per revolution. but your getting it more frequently, at a higher rate. this means your velocity increases. you must match this in order to keep your superchargers efficiency on par.

I assume you left out volumetric efficiencies of the compressor and motor just to "keep it simple for the noobs"?
On the inlet side of the compressor there is no such thing as too big a straw. Inlet pressure drop will be multiplied on the compressor side so ideally you want as little pressure drop as little before the compressor. This will be achieved by the biggest shortest piping possible.

Ref Understanding Boost Pressure

Now after the compressor air velocity does not increase unless you have added VE mods or upped the RPM. Only the density increases. This means unless you are adding VE mods or upping the RPM larger piping isn't needed in the compressor side. This is especially true with the fixed displacement compressor because the air is going to go through no matter what. The most important thing is that there are as few transitions, sharp bends or restrictions as possible. A nice smooth 2" compressor side will be more than enough unless you are building it to spin to FA RPMs.

issue 3. the rpm at which 16 lbs. will require the sc12 to rotate, the teflon is eating itself, and your sc12 is dying with every rev.

You don't specify the cause but I will clarify for the noobs.
It's a common misconception that the teflon melts when it gets too hot. Teflon melts at 620f. It would take about 30 PSI at about 30% efficiency to come close to that. That's not even counting the fact that for half the rotation the lobe is in contact with cool air.
It is most likely that the housing and lobes heating up causes the lobes to hit each other or the housing. The guys going for big SC HP add cooling systems to keep the SC cooler.
Even then SC efficiencies go to $#!! above 2:1.
If someone was really set on making power with a SC they would be much better off feeding one charger into another charger splitting the pressure ratio between the two. Then you could make about 32 PSIG while staying in the max rated pressure ratio of the Ogura SCs of 1.8 which is about 65%.

im open to the next idea to extract power from the gze, but i feel your gonna find it boggy, un responsive, loud, and potentially detonating.

Nothing I'm suggesting would cause any of the above.

Posted: **Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:50 pm**

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:
Gains from this will be minimal. Since it's a fixed displacement compressor you are pumping the same amount of air into the engine. There will be some small gains from lowering the pressure ratio and reducing air slipping past the lobes. Aside from that the only gains would be from being able to run more timing.

Ref Temperature efficiency
http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Common/p ... ciency.pdf

not if your overdriving the pulley. over driven, more heat produced. also, isnt running a cooler intake temp a gateway to allow you to run more timing?

4agshoob wrote:the engine is nothing more than an air pump, while you and i both know this (again, keep it simple so the noobs can follow along at home), in this particular case, it displaces 1.6l of air, every 1 rotation.

suck - squish - bang - blow

now, the sc12 is a 1200cc unit. in terms of cfm's, it displaces 900 cfm's for every revolution. that oem 50mm throttle body, its meant to provide a specific velocity per that 900cfm intake cycle. now when you bolt on an underdrive pulley, guess what you still are only getting 900cfms, per revolution. but your getting it more frequently, at a higher rate. this means your velocity increases. you must match this in order to keep your superchargers efficiency on par.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:I assume you left out volumetric efficiencies of the compressor and motor just to "keep it simple for the noobs"?
On the inlet side of the compressor there is no such thing as too big a straw. Inlet pressure drop will be multiplied on the compressor side so ideally you want as little pressure drop as little before the compressor. This will be achieved by the biggest shortest piping possible.

actually i did cover volumetric efficiencies, but i just didnt use the big word (yes for the noobs, lol) exactly my point of losing throttle responce. at the point the throttle is in between WOT, and shut, you are causing huge amounts of cavitation, especially if your pipe is larger than the needed demand of the s/c, depending on it volumetric draw, ie: pulley size/overdriven.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:Now after the compressor air velocity does not increase unless you have added VE mods or upped the RPM. Only the density increases. This means unless you are adding VE mods or upping the RPM larger piping isn't needed in the compressor side. This is especially true with the fixed displacement compressor because the air is going to go through no matter what. The most important thing is that there are as few transitions, sharp bends or restrictions as possible. A nice smooth 2" compressor side will be more than enough unless you are building it to spin to FA RPMs.

confused, so why would you want to modify the tb on an otherwise stock driven s/c? on the larger pipe size, even if its a fixed roots blower, your still increasing s/c rpm in ratio to engine rpm. thus creating more heat,/pressure/velocity/the need for more cooling. but youve repeated what i said in a different wording.

4agshoob wrote:issue 3. the rpm at which 16 lbs. will require the sc12 to rotate, the teflon is eating itself, and your sc12 is dying with every rev.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:You don't specify the cause but I will clarify for the noobs.
It's a common misconception that the teflon melts when it gets too hot. Teflon melts at 620f. It would take about 30 PSI at about 30% efficiency to come close to that. That's not even counting the fact that for half the rotation the lobe is in contact with cool air.
It is most likely that the housing and lobes heating up causes the lobes to hit each other or the housing. The guys going for big SC HP add cooling systems to keep the SC cooler.
Even then SC efficiencies go to $#!! above 2:1.
If someone was really set on making power with a SC they would be much better off feeding one charger into another charger splitting the pressure ratio between the two. Then you could make about 32 PSIG while staying in the max rated pressure ratio of the Ogura SCs of 1.8 which is about 65%.

i didnt say anything about the teflon melting. i have however heard and felt the "knock" of an over heated sc12. it dont take much spirited driving at 14-15 lbs.

correct, because feeding an s/c with boost, multiplies boost. but, at the same time, doing this with the sc12/sc14 is like boosting into a brick wall. without the proper modifications in place to increase the secondary s/c's rpm, it causes a pressure issue with the feeding s/c. thus creating heat. add that to an already over driven secondary s/c, and again, your looking for failure, unless you have the proper cooling system in place. but in the end, who is going to dump that much money and research into a 20+ year old engine, 1.6l at that, when theres better, more powerful options out there for a fraction of the price?
been there done that.....

4agshoob wrote:im open to the next idea to extract power from the gze, but i feel your gonna find it boggy, un responsive, loud, and potentially detonating.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:Nothing I'm suggesting would cause any of the above.

increased pressure without the proper fuel, and at a higher intake temp, will cause detonation. i noticed you left a few things out, that you really dont have an answer too. un-responsive- overly huge tb and s/c inlet, relating back to cavitation, = slowed velocity even for a roots style air pump. loud, because the s/c inlet now has a mega phone, hell the 7m tb i ran with the 2.5" intake, sounded like an air raid siren 1/2 mile away.

put something together, and get it on the dyno. im deffinitly interested in the result.

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:27 am**

1.6l at that, when theres better, more powerful options out there for a fraction of the price

Some guys just like the SC and it is just a wonderfull engine. Yes you can turbo it, buy a V6, do this do that, but people like this engine. I think it's a great engine especially when you compare it to other engines from that year.

Like i did a rebuilt on the blacktop, yes i could've just bought the 3SGTE for my '98 Celica, maybe would've cost me a fraction more but i just like the technique of the 20V's and ofcourse the wonderfull noise.

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:36 am**

4agshoob wrote:not if your overdriving the pulley.

Please explain the science behind this claim.

actually i did cover volumetric efficiencies, but i just didnt use the big word (yes for the noobs, lol) exactly my point of losing throttle responce. at the point the throttle is in between WOT, and shut, you are causing huge amounts of cavitation, especially if your pipe is larger than the needed demand of the s/c, depending on it volumetric draw, ie: pulley size/overdriven.

I don't think you understand what VE is. It has nothing to do with throttle response or pulley size. I really don't understand the rest of what you are trying to explain here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volumetric_efficiency

When a motor is moving fast enough it doesn't have time to draw in the full volume of air it is specced at. If a 4AGE has a VE of 90% at X RPM that means that the 400cc chamber is consuming 360cc of atmospheric air. In the same way the superchargers lobes are spinning so fast it doesn't have time to consume 1200cc of air per revolution. The VE is the ratio of the volume of air it should consume in a static environment to the amount of air it consumes in an active environment at X RPM.

confused, so why would you want to modify the tb on an otherwise stock driven s/c?

Because the TB is before the SC. Inlet air is trying to travel at ambient pressure and density. You are trying to pull a much larger volume of air through the piping. On the outlet side the air is compressed much denser so it's velocity is much slower. In fact the velocity of the air after the compressor will be very nearly identical to that of it's NA counterpart.

i have however heard and felt the "knock" of an over heated sc12. it dont take much spirited driving at 14-15 lbs.

I won't argue there. The SC12 is about 65% efficient at a PR of about 1.4. It's only rated by the manufacturer to a PR of 1.8. That's 11.76 PSI boost. Even there it's only about 50% efficient. After that it goes off the map so we can only hypothesize.
Even at 11.76 PSI that's 305f. At 15 PSI and probably 45% efficiency you are at 377F.
That said, ICs still don't "make more power" They simply allow you to run more timing without getting knock. So yes indirectly a bigger IC can allow you to make more power but it's not to the degree most people think on a supercharged motor. On a turbo motor it will try to make the same pressure so the cooler the air is the more dense it will be and the more air it will put in the cylinder. This will net you much bigger gains in power.

without the proper modifications in place to increase the secondary s/c's rpm,

Actually if you were running two of the same SCs you would run the second one slower to make the first one create pressure. The second one would move a smaller volume of air at a higher pressure. If they were both geared properly they would split the PR increase.
Of course since the first compressor will be moving a larger amount of air it makes more sense to use a larger compressor. The second smaller compressor moving the same speed would create a pressure increase between the two. If the gearing was right you could split the PR increase evenly between them.

it causes a pressure issue with the feeding s/c. thus creating heat. add that to an already over driven secondary s/c, and again, your looking for failure,

False.
A single SC12 making 20 PSI would be at, let's say 40% efficiency creating an output temp of about 489F.
Split that between two at say a PR of 1.55 and efficiency of 60% gives you 8 PSIG going into the first compressor at 224f times 1.55 gives a final pressure of 20.6 PSI at a temp of 363 F.
Pretty cool huh?

increased pressure without the proper fuel, and at a higher intake temp, will cause detonation.

There won't be increased temp. Compressors function on a Pressure ratio based on absolute pressure.

Let's say you have your SC geared to make 8 PSIG at sea level. Let's say it's at 60% efficiency at that pressure. Let's also say there is enough restriction in the stock IC to create a 2 PSI pressure drop at the compressor inlet. So now at sea level we would have 12.5 PSI at the inlet and a pressure ratio of 1.8:1. Outlet temps at 60% would be 224F.
Now if you got rid of all that restriction you would have 14.5 PSI at the compressor inlet but the compressor would still be working at the same gear ratio and therefore the same pressure ratio so the outlet temps are still 224f however with a higher inlet pressure times the pressure ratio you are now producing 11.6 PSIG at 224F. So you have gained 3.6 PSI boost pressure while maintaining the same outlet temp.

i noticed you left a few things out, that you really dont have an answer too. un-responsive- overly huge tb and s/c inlet, relating back to cavitation, = slowed velocity even for a roots style air pump.

I only left them out because they were so far off the mark I couldn't think of a good way to respond to them.
The TB I plan on using is cammed so light to mid throttle is still controllable.
No idea what you mean by unresponsive. The TB should be just as responsive as the stock setup.

Cavitation is the formation and then implosion of cavities in a liquid. Furthermore cavitation is caused by low pressure zones in the liquid. Having a restriction on the inlet of a pump makes cavitation more likely. So no I'm not worried about cavitation due to decreased restriction in the inlet of the supercharger.

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:46 pm**

at this point your "bench racing". i could take up more of each others time, and show you how in certain ways, your saying the same exact thing i am, and other things such as how higher rpms in the s/c create more heat, at first you say it dont, then in the end you say it does.

simple as this. get out from behind the keyboard, put it together, and lets see some numbers. ive been playing with these engines almost 15 years now, they are finnicky, yet highly reliable at the same time. as for the feeding an s/c with an s/c, i know for a fact it creates an issue, because ive had to rebuild another persons mistake with this setup, that failed because the 1st s/c overheated due to it trying to force air into an equally driven s/c.

looks good on paper, and in half the mathmatics, but i feel your lacking physics and real world variables in you equasions. alot of variables ive endured over the years. as for your very first post,

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:On an SC system everything pre SC is many times more important than post SC so that is the focus of this thread. The primary focus is from the TB to the supercharger.

not in all cases, like the gze for instance. the s/c12 thrives on velocity, for optimal efficiency, and you said yourself:

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:The most important thing is that there are as few transitions, sharp bends or restrictions as possible. A nice smooth 2" compressor side will be more than enough unless you are building it to spin to FA RPMs.

youve contradicted yourself here, again. power gains can be seen, just by replacing the dogleg gze manifold, with a straighter more direct intake, to direct the pressures to the port, and to remove the "sharp bends, and restrictions"

besides, shouldnt you hae this stup on your own personal or shop car, with factual dyno proven results, before trying to sell this setup to the public?

"show me the money"
-Jerry Mcguire

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 6:16 pm**

4agshoob wrote:at this point your "bench racing". i could take up more of each others time, and show you how in certain ways, your saying the same exact thing i am, and other things such as how higher rpms in the s/c create more heat, at first you say it dont, then in the end you say it does.

Where did I say spinning the SC faster doesn't create more heat?
Technically spinning the SC faster does not create more heat however moving a larger volume of air will change the location on the efficiency map so after the ideal island moving a larger volume of air can create heat but really only if you are also making pressure. To make a blanket statement like any of these create more heat is uneducated. I'll use an Eaton map since I don't have permission to share my Ogura maps.
This map is pretty similar to the SC12 but the M62 is a little more efficient overall.
At a PR of 1.4 the M62 will blow cooler air at 350 M3/hr than it will at 250 M3/hr. Now once you get past the island and the efficiency starts dropping then yes the outlet temps will start rising.

simple as this. get out from behind the keyboard, put it together, and lets see some numbers.

I don't need to. There are plenty of people who have done the research and done the builds. There are dynos and results showing gains from the mods I am suggesting.
On a SC12 pushing 14 PSI there may be negligible difference between 2.5" piping and 3" piping but 3" piping will give the least restriction and best pressure drop.

looks good on paper, and in half the mathmatics, but i feel your lacking physics and real world variables in you equasions.

You keep talking about physics like you know more than me but you have yet to use one equation or one reference to physics of fluid dynamics in your arguments. Any one with the slightest bit of common sense knows that because I said so is not a valid argument and if that's what you use it will be immediately dismissed. I have used forumulas, theories and math to come to my conclusions and have also backed many of my claims using documentation from experts in the field. You fail to even use the right terminology or explain a thought in a way that holds water.
You say a 3" inlet will be inferior to a 2.5 then it's on you to prove it with physics, math, fluid dynamics and or legitimate dyno testing.
All that said, if someone wants a 2.5" inlet then I would be happy to make it for them.

not in all cases, like the gze for instance. the s/c12 thrives on velocity, for optimal efficiency,

Proove it. What exactly are you talking about. What kind of numbers? What is ldeal velocity. Both pre compressor and post compressor.

youve contradicted yourself here, again.

I haven't contradicted myself at all and I have already tried to clarify this once because you didn't get it the first time.
Larger piping is required pre compressor. I am talking about running 2.5 or 3" piping to the inlet of the compressor. On the outlet side the air is compressed denser and travelling slower so you don't need as big of piping.
I am not going to explain that again.

as for the feeding an s/c with an s/c, i know for a fact it creates an issue, because ive had to rebuild another persons mistake with this setup, that failed because the 1st s/c overheated due to it trying to force air into an equally driven s/c.

I have seen many people blow up their motors on under 5 PSI of boost. Therefore any amount of boost will always blow up your motor.
It's easy to fk up an idea. Just because one person does doesn't mean the Idea won't work. If that was the case the Wright brothers would have looked at all the people who had augured a flying machine into the ground and walked away.
People have done twincharged SC and compound turbos for years. Compound SC would be no different and I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find someone who had done it successfully.

besides, shouldnt you hae this stup on your own personal or shop car,

Lol with the money I get from the 4AGE community I can barely afford to do the work I do for it. None of my car projects have gotten an unnecessary dollar spent on them in the last year.

More importantly I don't need to. Plenty of 4AGE owners have made parts and tested setups. On top of that if you know the right information you can optimize components from behind a keyboard.
I am trying to offer what the community wants. Thus the whole point of these threads. If someone wants 2.5" piping i'll make them 2.5" piping. If someone proves that 2.5" piping is better then I'll suggest people go that way but if someone insists on me making them 3" piping then I will.

I am all about trying to learn expand my knowledge and converse with knowledgeable people who can help me do that. I love learning from people who know more than I do and applying that knowledge to future endeavours. I don't feel like that is any sort of a waste of time. I will have an intelligent conversation or even argument with someone for as long as it takes to come to an understanding as long as I feel like I am learning and gaining from the experience.
I however don't feel like you have said anything that actually contains any value and you have not explained the science, fact, math, or shown any sort of proof to back up what you say.
I do not listen to people who say because I said so. Either you can start laying down some substance or you can take your attitude somewhere else.

Posted: **Tue Jun 11, 2013 6:44 pm**

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=50256

http://www.kennebell.net/KBWebsite/SC_p ... ammoth.htm

A engine simply cannot operate at peak efficiency and make max HP if an undersized inlet system is restricting vital air flow to the supercharger. It kills HP and causes boost drop off. If we’ve learned one thing in all our years of supercharger experience, it is the Twin Screw LOVES a big, big unrestricted inlet system. The bigger the better. A straw is a straw. Regardless of how big your mouth is, flow is always limited to the size of the straw.

Posted: **Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:34 pm**

Supraman, I tried messaging you but your inbox was full.

I'd love to talk some about what you are interested in doing for the GZE intake side. I would love to do a GZE full intake system including manifold.
If you want to let me know what you are looking for as far as design, goals, cost and so on we could start trying to make something happen.

Posted: **Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:56 pm**

4agshoob wrote:at this point your "bench racing". i could take up more of each others time, and show you how in certain ways, your saying the same exact thing i am, and other things such as how higher rpms in the s/c create more heat, at first you say it dont, then in the end you say it does.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:Where did I say spinning the SC faster doesn't create more heat?
Technically spinning the SC faster does not create more heat however moving a larger volume of air will change the location on the efficiency map so after the ideal island moving a larger volume of air can create heat but really only if you are also making pressure. To make a blanket statement like any of these create more heat is uneducated. I'll use an Eaton map since I don't have permission to share my Ogura maps.
This map is pretty similar to the SC12 but the M62 is a little more efficient overall.
At a PR of 1.4 the M62 will blow cooler air at 350 M3/hr than it will at 250 M3/hr. Now once you get past the island and the efficiency starts dropping then yes the outlet temps will start rising.

nothing alike. maybe size, thats about it. also your basing all your numbers for mathematic equasions off of "new sc12" expected numbers. please show mw a new sc12, 20-25 years later (today) there goes your efficiency numbers. also, please tell me what happens when you compress oxygen.....especially with friction.

4ashoob wrote:simple as this. get out from behind the keyboard, put it together, and lets see some numbers.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:I don't need to. There are plenty of people who have done the research and done the builds. There are dynos and results showing gains from the mods I am suggesting.

for example like mine did. but with a 3" inlet, and 72mm throttle body? wouldnt you want to know the behavior of something your gonna sell to the general public, and have your reputation out there?

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:On a SC12 pushing 14 PSI there may be negligible difference between 2.5" piping and 3" piping but 3" piping will give the least restriction and best pressure drop.

so now your looking into the relativity of the 2.5" piping? before you said nothing is too large. so tell me this..... if you have an overly large inlet, and a proper air bypass valve fitted to the s/c, what happens to the driver of an ae86 is doing some spirited driving at high speed, and tries to brake, and heel toe the accelerator? uh oh.....your vacuum booster isnt seeing vacuum in time, because of CAVITATION. so are you going to sell a brake upgrade kit with this 3" design too?

this one of the "real world variables" im speaking of. also, im not noticing ambient temp or atmospheric pressures in any of your equasion, again "real world variables". or the fact that, the sc12 is over 20 years old with wear and tear, you cant know exactly what a 20 year old , used roots compressor is capable of. even then, you said it yourself:

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:superchargers lobes are spinning so fast it doesn't have time to consume 1200cc of air per revolution.

4agshoob wrote:]looks good on paper, and in half the mathmatics, but i feel your lacking physics and real world variables in your equasions.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:You keep talking about physics like you know more than me but you have yet to use one equation or one reference to physics of fluid dynamics in your arguments. Any one with the slightest bit of common sense knows that because I said so is not a valid argument and if that's what you use it will be immediately dismissed. I have used forumulas, theories and math to come to my conclusions and have also backed many of my claims using documentation from experts in the field. You fail to even use the right terminology or explain a thought in a way that holds water.
You say a 3" inlet will be inferior to a 2.5 then it's on you to prove it with physics, math, fluid dynamics and or legitimate dyno testing.
All that said, if someone wants a 2.5" inlet then I would be happy to make it for them.

no, im not a physics major, nor a mathmatician, or dictionary, for that matter. probably because i prefer to spend my time under the hood looking for power, then put it on a dyno, to test my theory. im a hands on kinda guy. im not trying to proove proof, from "because i said so", im just saying i know what ive tried, and your putting up an argument, so by all means, please try it for yourself(before selling it to consumers blindly, based on "numbers"). where you have used formula's and math, ive used parts, and wrench time, backed with theory's. as for dyno testing.....whats not legitamate on my end? i know what 2.5" piping, and a 63mm throttle body will do, im also aware of the greatest power upgrade seen on a dyno, was by changing the intake manifolds, and not the t/b. im sorry, but fluid dynamics is also used in flow characturistics as far as air to, kinda like head porting, and aerodynamics. volumetric efficiency, and static pressures was something i had to take as part of my day to day job, training. fluid dynamics is something i personally research from doing port work, such as rotaries, heads, intakes, etc.

as for me not using math, i guess you missed this:

4agshoob wrote:now, the sc12 is a 1200cc unit. in terms of cfm's, it displaces 900 cfm's for every revolution. that oem 50mm throttle body, its meant to provide a specific velocity per that 900cfm intake cycle. now when you bolt on an underdrive pulley, guess what you still are only getting 900cfms, per revolution. but your getting it more frequently, at a higher rate. this means your velocity increases. you must match this in order to keep your superchargers efficiency on par.

12 psi pulley = 20% increase = 4age throttle body = 55mm = 17% increase in flow. (ported j pipe) - stock intercooler is still sufficient, not efficient.

14 psi pulley = 40% increase = 7mgte throttle body = 63mm = 38% increase in flow (2.5" i/c pipe) - further cooling over stock is needed

16 psi pulley = 60% increase = 1uz throttle body = 73mm = 70% increase in flow (3" i/c pipe) - however.theres an issue at this level:

along with several other references......

4agshoob wrote:]not in all cases, like the gze for instance. the s/c12 thrives on velocity, for optimal efficiency,

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:Proove it. What exactly are you talking about. What kind of numbers? What is ldeal velocity. Both pre compressor and post compressor.

turbo's are cfm machines, an unefficient s/c like the sc12 is solely dependant on velocity. what further explanation is needed? i know theres not a graph or chart to show you that, but look into it.

4agshoob wrote:youve contradicted yourself here, again.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:I haven't contradicted myself at all and I have already tried to clarify this once because you didn't get it the first time.
Larger piping is required pre compressor. I am talking about running 2.5 or 3" piping to the inlet of the compressor. On the outlet side the air is compressed denser and travelling slower so you don't need as big of piping.
I am not going to explain that again.

dude, i beyond get it, trust me, and yeah you have, you wrote it yourself:

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:On an SC system everything pre SC is many times more important than post SC so that is the focus of this thread. The primary focus is from the TB to the supercharger.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:The most important thing is that there are as few transitions, sharp bends or restrictions as possible. A nice smooth 2" compressor side will be more than enough unless you are building it to spin to FA RPMs.

4agshoob wrote:as for the feeding an s/c with an s/c, i know for a fact it creates an issue, because ive had to rebuild another persons mistake with this setup, that failed because the 1st s/c overheated due to it trying to force air into an equally driven s/c.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:I have seen many people blow up their motors on under 5 PSI of boost. Therefore any amount of boost will always blow up your motor.
It's easy to fk up an idea. Just because one person does doesn't mean the Idea won't work. If that was the case the Wright brothers would have looked at all the people who had augured a flying machine into the ground and walked away.
People have done twincharged SC and compound turbos for years. Compound SC would be no different and I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find someone who had done it successfully.

reffering to the lead s/c failed, not the engine. ive done a t/c setup, sc14 feeding a t3/t4... yes, there was a drifter that ran dual nissan pulsar s/c's in compound in an ae86.

4agshoob wrote:besides, shouldnt you have this stup on your own personal or shop car,

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:Lol with the money I get from the 4AGE community I can barely afford to do the work I do for it. None of my car projects have gotten an unnecessary dollar spent on them in the last year.

so why should the consumer? sure, you keep posting graphs and links, and etc. but zero of them are of an sc12/14 on a gze. if the gze ran a kennebell, or whipple, then sure, throw a 90mm bbk on it, and be done. but the sc12 doesnt really share any caracturistics with any of thise setups, remote vs. blow thru vs. t/b on s/c vs. remote t/b,,,,and so on.

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:More importantly I don't need to. Plenty of 4AGE owners have made parts and tested setups. On top of that if you know the right information you can optimize components from behind a keyboard.
I am trying to offer what the community wants. Thus the whole point of these threads. If someone wants 2.5" piping i'll make them 2.5" piping. If someone proves that 2.5" piping is better then I'll suggest people go that way but if someone insists on me making them 3" piping then I will.

so where are the links to this relevant information your claiming?

yoshimitsuspeed wrote:I am all about trying to learn expand my knowledge and converse with knowledgeable people who can help me do that. I love learning from people who know more than I do and applying that knowledge to future endeavours. I don't feel like that is any sort of a waste of time. I will have an intelligent conversation or even argument with someone for as long as it takes to come to an understanding as long as I feel like I am learning and gaining from the experience.
I however don't feel like you have said anything that actually contains any value and you have not explained the science, fact, math, or shown any sort of proof to back up what you say.
I do not listen to people who say because I said so. Either you can start laying down some substance or you can take your attitude somewhere else.

this is where i say your confusing yourself. and again i tell you, do it, dyno it, prove it. because right now it looks like "snake oil" to the consumer. im not saying anything because "i said so" as a matter of fact, im encouraging you to try it before others buy it. but i will say, like ive said before and above in this post, ive been around the 4agze for quite some time, and ive tried alot, and have been successful, and ive failed. but from that, ive gained knowledge in the behavior of the engine. if nothing i have said doesnt contain any value, then please, by all means ignore it, try your setup, then give it some thought. i have zero attitude, i said also earlier in this thread, i too am just as willing as the next guy to see the further step for gze improvement, but all variables, just cannot be explained in math, thats why i just hypothesize, perform, test the theory, and then analyze the outcome, and try to improve upon it. what did you really expect trying to sell a setup, that you, yourself havent even ran, or tested yet? of course theres questions, and how does that look to the guy with $300 bucks in his hand looking for the next bang for the buck mod on his gze?

Posted: **Fri Jun 14, 2013 9:07 am**

You really are committed to this aren't you.

4agshoob wrote:nothing alike. maybe size, thats about it.

I have compared the two maps side by side. They are nearly identical. The efficiency islands move around a little bit but the overall efficiency at x flow and x pressure are almost identical with the M62 generally being just slightly better. The M62 is also rated to 2:1 PR wheras the SC12 is rated to 1.8:1.

please show mw a new sc12, 20-25 years later (today) there goes your efficiency numbers.

Unless it's damaged there is no reason it wouldn't.

happens when you compress oxygen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_process

.especially with friction.

http://www.stealth316.com/2-adiabat1.htm

if you have an overly large inlet, and a proper air bypass valve fitted to the s/c, what happens to the driver of an ae86 is doing some spirited driving at high speed, and tries to brake, and heel toe the accelerator? uh oh.....your vacuum booster isnt seeing vacuum in time, because of CAVITATION. so are you going to sell a brake upgrade kit with this 3" design too?

Whoa, so not only do you not know how the supercharger works from a physics standpoint, you don't even understand how the induction system works from a mechanical standpoint.

The ABV moves air from the pressure side of the SC to the inlet side of the SC. In our clutched SC cars it's most important purpose is actually under cruise allowing the air an easier bypass route around the supercharger so the motor doesn't have to pull air through the SC. Both sides of the ABV are post throttlebody and this mod would have no effect on how much vacuum it pulled or how well the brakes worked.

because of CAVITATION

WTF? I already tried to explain this.
Cavitation happens when gas bubbles form in a liquid. There is absolutely no way cavitation is possible. If our engines ran on water or motor oil maybe. Even then as I already said, inlet restriction causes pressure drop and pressure drop is what causes cavitation sooooooo a more restrictive inlet would be more likely to cause cavitation.

im not noticing ambient temp or atmospheric pressures in any of your equasion

As is standard practice in the scientific, engineering and compressor design communities my calculations have been based at sea level. I can run numbers for you at any elevation or pressure.
For temps all my calculations assumed a 100 degree under hood temp. Again I can run numbers at any temp but it's irrelevant. As long as comparison numbers are all run at the same temp.

the sc12 is over 20 years old with wear and tear

If this is the case then you should replace your supercharger.
Unless you are running it too hot there should be no wear or tear that effects efficiencies and even if it did I don't see how that changes anything I have said.

i know what 2.5" piping, and a 63mm throttle body will do

And I haven't argued with that. What you haven't proven is that 2.5" is ideal or that 3" will decrease performance.

as for me not using math, i guess you missed this

I meant math that actually means something. Math that actually backs your claims and supports your theories.

guess what you still are only getting 900cfms, per revolution

First off CFM is cubic feet per minute. The per minute part cannot be used along with your per revolution especially when your math is wrong.
1200cc is 73.2 cubic in. I have no idea where you got 900 CFM but the SC12 would have to spin at 21,000 RPM at 100% VE to hit 900 CFM.
So anyway the supercharger puts out 73 cubic in per revolution, or since we are working with a whole system designed in metric WTF not just stay in metric.

Here is where I expected some real math to back up your claim.

that oem 50mm throttle body, its meant to provide a specific velocity per that 900cfm intake cycle.

Who is to say that 50mm TB provides ideal velocity? What is ideal velocity?
The engineers may have designed it with other factors like efficiency, economy, emissions, etc in mind and not ideal velocity for performance.
Prove that there is an ideal velocity for supercharger intake systems, then do the math and tell me what size your intake piping needs to be.
I have already provided two sources that support the theory that velocity is unimportant and that there is no such thing as too big a straw. You want to take in as much air as possible so the bigger the straw the better.

turbo's are cfm machines, an unefficient s/c like the sc12 is solely dependant on velocity. what further explanation is needed? i know theres not a graph or chart to show you that, but look into it.

I have spent the last 12 years working with forced induction cars and the last 5+ studying turbos, superchargers and induction theory. If your explanation was sound there would be a graph or chart to validate it.

sure, you keep posting graphs and links, and etc. but zero of them are of an sc12/14 on a gze. if the gze ran a kennebell, or whipple, then sure, throw a 90mm bbk on it, and be done. but the sc12 doesnt really share any caracturistics with any of thise setups, remote vs. blow thru vs. t/b on s/c vs. remote t/b,,,,and so on.

Actually they are all the same in principal. None of the things you mentioned above change the base level physics that they all operate on .
Even a twinscrew is still a fixed displacement pump and aside from some small differences in VE and adiabatic efficiency they all function essentially the same as far as the air flowing into them and out of them is concerned.

so where are the links to this relevant information your claiming?

I'm not going to try to search through the 10 years of three different forums to find information for you. I thought this was generally known and accepted knowledge in the 4AGE community.

Posted: **Fri Jun 14, 2013 10:01 am**

you still arent answering any of the question im posing, so this is going no where. also, it seems your the one getting offended.

GLWS.

"Show me the Money"
-Jerry Mcguire

until you design, and run this setup your self with a base dyno run, and then a results dyno run, on an other wise stock, unmodified gze, with only the intake and TB changed, you have zero arguement. instead, it seems like all your presenting is "heresay",and some "equasions" with no further real world experiance. as for your other comments, all i can say is LOL. i know how bypass valves work, i also know how the braking system works, and also know the gze inside and out. you cant seem to further explain that, and dont really care for you too, because the gze is also not the only s/c applications im around as well.

so again i say, get under the hood and make it happen, and stop the "google professor-ing". get some real world numbers, and people might be interested. im done wasting time.

Posted: **Fri Jun 14, 2013 10:08 am**

4agshoob wrote: im done wasting time.

Lol thank god

Posted: **Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:04 pm**

If you could make a reverse supercharger outlet with connections for the Stock ABV that would help swaps greatly.

Posted: **Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:09 pm**

Pogipoints619 wrote:If you could make a reverse supercharger outlet with connections for the Stock ABV that would help swaps greatly.

Just tonight I was talking about that with supraman.
This would be very easy to do and I will be looking into making it happen pretty soon.
Would you be interested in buying one if I made it?
Demand makes it much easier for me to justify supply

I believe I already have those flanges drawn up somewhere. just gotta find them.
I wonder if we could find a more compact solution for the ABV.
I believe most OEM recirc BOVs operate the same way. It should be open under vacuum and then closed under atmos pressure to boost.
That stock ABV takes up a lot of space. I wonder if it's designed to move a larger volume of air than the BOV.

Posted: **Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:57 am**

I was going to just cut off the outlets and reweld them facing forward,but I'd definitely be interested in one if you could have one fabbed asap and if it was decently priced.

Posted: **Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:18 pm**

I'm still trying to find my old ABV for those interested in keeping the stock one.
Played around with some ideas today though.
This is pretty much what I was thinking for the piping for FR applications.
I just need to know exactly how much room there is between the SC and the passengers side fenderwell. If someone could get me a top down pic with some measurements that would help a ton.
Also if we went with this LS400 TB the throttle cable would have to reach to that bracket by my thumb. Would that be feasible?

It could be possible to run the intake piping above or below the outlet pipe as well if that fit better.

Supraman was interested in an intake manifold as well so here's my idea. There is plenty of room if I do a small bend and then taper the plenum up above the SC brackets. I would then weld mounting brackets to the runner for the SC and add some reinforcement around it if necessary.
The first pic is just a u bend of the right diameter piping. It would be cut at the minimal angle to clear the SC as represented by some other scrap metal I had shown in the second pic.

There could be a flange on this side of the plenum for a FMIC or the flange could be put in the middle of the plenum or wherever was most ideal for the particular build.

Posted: **Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:34 pm**

Pogipoints619 wrote:I was going to just cut off the outlets and reweld them facing forward,but I'd definitely be interested in one if you could have one fabbed asap and if it was decently priced.

If you are still interested. For the first one how about $100? That way I can make one and get a feel for cost in materials and time. After that they will probably be closer to $150.
I could have it done within a week to two weeks depending on how urgently you need it.

Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread

Re: Interest in bigger 4AGZE intake piping and TB thread