Here is my theory....The current blower on our trucks is inefficent.....The volume of air needed by the engine far exceeds what the blower can produce creating an extremely hot intake charge. To cure the efficiency problem Ford opts for an intercooler in an attempt to regain a denser/cooler charge. The intercooler in turn is thermo stressed to the point it begins weeping at its weakest point....the soldered link of the core.
The roots type blower seems to be more of a heat pump rather than an efficient air compressor....Try finding one mustang competing with a roots type blower... a la Kenne Bell.

By adding a high boost pulley, would it be safe to say the efficiency limits of the blower are even far more exceeded....forcing the need for chip makers to dial out timing and maxing out injector duty cycle to compensate for detonation?

If anyone has cfm ratings or a pound per minute rating on the eatons please post.

Does this sound outrageous?

 

Uh, I guess so....?

[This message has been edited by TampaSVT (edited 05-11-2001).]

 

As I understand it compressing air creates heat... The engine may be able to "take" more air but it is not working in a vacuum. High compression turbos and superchargers are likely to have intercoolers. either air to air or water to air. Cooling the air charge helps any time. Since compressing from both turbo and super chargers add heat through compression it makes sense to try to remove as much of the added heat as possible.

Doug

[This message has been edited by Silver_2000_! (edited 05-11-2001).]

 

Why would Ford resdesign the intake and intercooler again on the 2002 model and put a more efficient supercharger on it? From what i have read the 2002 makes 385 HP where as the 2001 makes 380... Why would they go through all of that for 5HP?

Weird

 

Nostromo,

Are you asking how efficient our blowers (Roots) are heat-wise compared to centrifugal and Whipple style (and turbos for that matter)? If so, I'd like to hear the answer too.

All forced induction systems are inefficient when it comes to heat...intercoolers help reduce the heat somewhat (certainly better than nothing).

----------------
Martyr
2001 Silver Lightning

 

Yeah i knida messed up when i wrote the above....intercooling does help in any forced induction system...but what i was really reffering to was the efficiency of the blower itself.

 

As far as what may have read about the 2002, I beleive these articles have mistakenly said 2002 instead of 2001. Every article I have read has related mostly to Autoshows for the new vehicles, and they have been 2001. These writers should really check the facts before writing.


------------------
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
PFA
2001 WHITE LIGHTNIN'
353.4 HP STOCK
Best of 3 runs--13.87--700 miles
2001 Windstar Sport

SOLD-with $4K from FORD!
'99 WHITE LIGHTNIN'
#0873--1 of 866--

 

I know that every time ford ups the HP and adds a few new goodies, I want it. I had a hell of a time talking myself into staying with my 00". Ford might only up the HP by 5 or 10 every year but it is a sales tool and besides it gives the SVT engineers something to do all year long. I probably wont buy a new truck now until 2003. By then they should be close to 400 HP stock. I did buy the 01" intake, intercooler and 90mm MAF for my truck, mostly because I am a sick person and felt I had to have the extra 10 or 20 HP.

What you said about the pulley's affect on the intercooler is probably true, but damn are they a kick in the pants. They might only make 5 or 7 more HP on the top end, but low and mid range power goes up a bunch.
Dale

 

Here's those ratings:
http://www.eaton.com/supercharger/M112.html

 

Roxanne Shepard has run 11's with her 99 roots blown GT.

------------------
01 Silver Lightning-no mods yet!
00 S281 Speedster - 312 rwhp 383 rwtq
98 GSXR-750 - 123rwhp

 

There are so many weird statements in your post, I am only going to answer some. To define something as inefficient, you have to say what was the purpose in mind. The current blower is very efficient in creating instant, low rpm boost. It is also quite good in getting people to pay a lot more for very little extra hardware...

If the engine could suck down more air than the blower can pump, the manifold would run under vacuum, not boost.

This type of blower is not designed for high rpm (just like the engine). It is very reliable, and can handle stop and go better than a centrifugal blower. In short, it is designed primarily for the street, not the track.

[This message has been edited by BlackLight (edited 05-12-2001).]

 

I can name plenty of cars that run GMC 6-71 roots type blowers. Even top fuels run roots type blowers. And as for thermal efficient, whats the deal? The internal combustion engine is only +\- 2% 26% thermal efficient.



------------------
2001 Black L.

 

BlackLight is right. For what these S/C do they are efficient. They are meant to gain *instant* boost at lower rpm's. From what I've been told and read about, root type charges more larger volumes of air into the engine.

Turbos and the compressor type S/C like paxton and vortech are made to be high spinning blowers. They are made to work in high rpm applications and their impellors and blades spin at speeds much more then roots type. That is what creates the compressed air.

Look at it this way:

roots moves large volumes of air into the engine and creates instant boost

centrifugal - more of an air compressesor, the air that leaves the compressor is under pressure.

So centrifugals are more *efficient* blowers, but not more suited to our application. A centrifigal is great on an engine that could redline at 5000+ rpms with ease. The roots is better for our trucks because alot our optimimum power output is under 5000rpm, and we need all that power increase right away, not waiting for the S/C to *spool* up to make power.

 

If you want to see a blower efficiency map, you can get it on the Eaton website. They have mapped the boost vs. temp for each of the blowers that they make.

------------------
Red 00"
Pro-M mass air
Swanson Chip
Aluminum Driveshaft
Jay Lincoln Homemade Traction Bars
*******'s bed cover
Wet Okoles

http://www.zing.com/album/?id=4292716723

 

Originally posted by NOSTROMO:

Okay, the '99 and '00s have 360hp and the '01s have 380 (this is all factory ratings). The s/c wasn't redesigned on the '01s it was the inlet system and the intercoolers (amongst other things). The Eaton s/c is pretty efficient from Eaton.

We really need to be spinning these things around 12k to 12.5k rpms. They are safe to 14k str8 from Eaton's mouth.

BfB