SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
#51
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bayside, NY
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
WOW one post started a whole debate, hope alot of people learned from this, cuz i did. thanks alll. so in other words i shouldnt get a supercharger. thanks
#54
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Staunton,
VA
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
I have a point of view maybe you guys can argue about aswell,but here go's...
Heres what I feel is the truth about the super chargers.... I build real life drag cars and I know what a super charger does and how everything works...So with that said,heres the ups of a two stroke super charger.... The fact is that the little super chargers do work,and I know because I have a few...So anyhow,a previous statement that a super charger causes increased heat is not intirely true....As a mater of fact when you have a engine suplied right with the proper amount of fuel it actualy cools the engine on a two stroke.... Not always true with 4 strokes due to long strock factors in 4 increments....Anyhow,the little sc's also force more air and fuel into the carb .And to answer the fuel lag myth,the closed force tube increases fuel pull through the Ex.pipe presure line aswell... The whole idea of a super charger is to get bottom end surge at medium RPM's and increase the compresion through the roof there for emiting more power more quickly than a engine naturally asperated could produce...And about turbos...The reason that you dont see turbos in topfuel is because they only produce power at high RPMs and by the time high RPMs are reached the topfuely has already shifted to a lower gear....There for useless for RC unless top speed is desired and not torque increses like needed most for RC use... Im not knocking turbos by no means realizing the fact that they are the super power of boost...But bsides that,the average power increace is at most 10% increaced on a rc super charger.... The best thing to do if you want more power without the bulk and money involved,is to just port and polish the engine sleave and lose the spacer ring under the engine head.... It bumps compresion and allows more flow.
Heres what I feel is the truth about the super chargers.... I build real life drag cars and I know what a super charger does and how everything works...So with that said,heres the ups of a two stroke super charger.... The fact is that the little super chargers do work,and I know because I have a few...So anyhow,a previous statement that a super charger causes increased heat is not intirely true....As a mater of fact when you have a engine suplied right with the proper amount of fuel it actualy cools the engine on a two stroke.... Not always true with 4 strokes due to long strock factors in 4 increments....Anyhow,the little sc's also force more air and fuel into the carb .And to answer the fuel lag myth,the closed force tube increases fuel pull through the Ex.pipe presure line aswell... The whole idea of a super charger is to get bottom end surge at medium RPM's and increase the compresion through the roof there for emiting more power more quickly than a engine naturally asperated could produce...And about turbos...The reason that you dont see turbos in topfuel is because they only produce power at high RPMs and by the time high RPMs are reached the topfuely has already shifted to a lower gear....There for useless for RC unless top speed is desired and not torque increses like needed most for RC use... Im not knocking turbos by no means realizing the fact that they are the super power of boost...But bsides that,the average power increace is at most 10% increaced on a rc super charger.... The best thing to do if you want more power without the bulk and money involved,is to just port and polish the engine sleave and lose the spacer ring under the engine head.... It bumps compresion and allows more flow.
#55
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Clinton,
NC
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
ORIGINAL: Baroncowboy
I have a point of view maybe you guys can argue about aswell......*snip*......... I build real life drag cars....*snip*
I have a point of view maybe you guys can argue about aswell......*snip*......... I build real life drag cars....*snip*
The left over 1%:
Now I’m just curious here, not checking credentials or anything of the sort nor questioning your experience, merely curious.
You work for/own a speed shop or a factual race car building shop? When you say “build real life drag carsâ€, could you be a little more specific? I mean even in the shop I work at, we,more often than not, will purchase a rail chassis frame to build off of instead of building one from scratch (though we have done it, just too much hassle and effort now-a-days). Do you guys deal mostly in bracket racing and street performance or do you build cars for customers for NHRA/IHRA too? We do mostly bracket and street stuff, but a lot of Sportsman Class stuff also (Stock Eliminator, SuperStock, SuperStock Modified, SuperGas, HotRod, SuperRod, etc) and gotta throw in the round track guys too.
You may have some names of customers I’m familiar with, dunno.
For instance, my immediate boss (Jeff Warren) was ’99 IHRA HotRod world champion. Our business founder (Bobby Warren (bosses father)) is an NHRA SuperStock Champion a few times over and inducted into the Don Garlits drag racing hall of fame in ’95.
I just think it’s cool to have another “drag guy†on the board.
#56
Senior Member
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
Guess maybe nobody feels like posting back after they find out someone knows more huh Billyman? Wheres Puch and Baron with a reply?
#57
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Clinton,
NC
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
I was thinking about this very thing last night.
I was all like "dang, musta skeered him off".
I don't know man.
*shrugs*
*continues to eat nachobellgrande*
I was all like "dang, musta skeered him off".
I don't know man.
*shrugs*
*continues to eat nachobellgrande*
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pawhuska, OK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
ive got arguments true the detroit had valves although only exoust valves it had cut sleeve to let air in. infact thats when they made the 6.71 blower to help put air to it
a deisal will run without forced air look at a non turbo deisal pickup no forced air
it would help with cooling as your puting more fuel faster through the engine not much gain but a gain nonthe less
my dad has over 25 years ex with deisal trucks and 10 with high performance engines
so nitro addict raed before you write
a deisal will run without forced air look at a non turbo deisal pickup no forced air
it would help with cooling as your puting more fuel faster through the engine not much gain but a gain nonthe less
my dad has over 25 years ex with deisal trucks and 10 with high performance engines
so nitro addict raed before you write
#62
Senior Member
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
Well,he's right,and thats the point I've been trying to make the whole time.I don't care about diesiel engines,gas engines,4 strokes or any other crap that doesn't have to do with the one currently manufactured supercharger for RC use with nitro.IT HAS ADDED FUEL PRESSURE FITTINGS!!! Now I wonder if anyone has even read the site.Puchinator took the time to draw lame ass arrows but didn't look 1 inch up?!?!?[:@]
#63
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Clinton,
NC
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
As to the current rc market, nitrofreak74 is correct. But he generalized and made an assumption.
It’s the generalization that gets me at times.
Besides, I don’t care what’s already on the market. I’m designing for tomorrow.
It’s the generalization that gets me at times.
Besides, I don’t care what’s already on the market. I’m designing for tomorrow.
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort McMurray, AB, CANADA
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
that was no assumption "smart guy" i know it would because that is what a supercharger is designed to do,and i dont think they would sell a product to make your rc slower. i dont know what Nitroaddict was thinking, saying it will only work on four strokes and that it would just make it leaner, a "turbo charger would only work on 4-strokes(big difference between super and turbo). He may be the moderator but that doesnt mean he knows everything. \
If i had the money i would buy one in a heart beat and then show nitroaddict that he was wrong.
If i had the money i would buy one in a heart beat and then show nitroaddict that he was wrong.
#65
Senior Member
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
Damn,thats almost word for word what I would post..with the exeption of the smartguy part,lol.I'll get one some day when I get some extra cash.
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
What everyone still fails to realize is that during the intake stroke on an rc engine, the exhaust port is open. if positive pressure is created by a supercharger, than the fuel/air misture will just blow out the exhaust port prior to combustion. for those who work better with photos, here is a nice diagram of the porting and timing process of a nitro engine:
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
Yes but what you are missing nitroaddict is that positive pressure is already made by the action of the piston coming down. The ONLY time the port on the crankshaft is open is when the piston is moving UP. this allows the piston to draw in the fuel air mix and then on the downward stroke the piston pressurizes the mix so that when the intake port opens the fuel air mix rushes into the piston sleeve. as with any 2 stroke you have some intake mix that just blows through but the engine runs at such a high RPM that the compressed air from a SC/TC will not have enough time to expand back to original conditions. One thing I just thought of is that you can not make the compression too high or else you will stop the piston on the downstroke (too much pressure under the piston=can not compress the mix any further).
#68
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Clinton,
NC
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
ORIGINAL: nitrofreak74
that was no assumption "smart guy" i know it would because that is what a supercharger is designed to do,and i dont think they would sell a product to make your rc slower.
that was no assumption "smart guy" i know it would because that is what a supercharger is designed to do,and i dont think they would sell a product to make your rc slower.
That’s all I was saying.
Party on.
#74
RE: SUPER CHARGER OR TURBOCHARGER??????
HA! I kinda lost track of this post..
Frankly.. I dont quite understand what your saying. Especially the first line
To be honest with you I kinda discounted the fact that 1) air/fuel is let in from the bottom and not the top (like it is with valves).
But I know that a fuel mixture is highly compressible.. Were not even going close to how much they compress here.
I was thinking that a higher pressure in the crank will lead to better "misting" and lead to a better mixture in the cylinder.
Now I'm wondering.. why dont they have forced induction in 4 stroke airplane engines? Given the fact that they fly (lower atmospheric pressure).. the forced induction should definitely help. And we wont have to worry about pressure leaking.
Hey LASER.. hows your project going ? I remember reading smoewhere that you blew it up...
Billy: I say it again.. nice avatar
ram
Yes but what you are missing nitroaddict is that positive pressure is already made by the action of the piston coming down. The ONLY time the port on the crankshaft is open is when the piston is moving UP. this allows the piston to draw in the fuel air mix and then on the downward stroke the piston pressurizes the mix so that when the intake port opens the fuel air mix rushes into the piston sleeve. as with any 2 stroke you have some intake mix that just blows through but the engine runs at such a high RPM that the compressed air from a SC/TC will not have enough time to expand back to original conditions. One thing I just thought of is that you can not make the compression too high or else you will stop the piston on the downstroke (too much pressure under the piston=can not compress the mix any further).
The ONLY time the port on the crankshaft is open is when the piston is moving UP
But I know that a fuel mixture is highly compressible.. Were not even going close to how much they compress here.
I was thinking that a higher pressure in the crank will lead to better "misting" and lead to a better mixture in the cylinder.
Now I'm wondering.. why dont they have forced induction in 4 stroke airplane engines? Given the fact that they fly (lower atmospheric pressure).. the forced induction should definitely help. And we wont have to worry about pressure leaking.
Hey LASER.. hows your project going ? I remember reading smoewhere that you blew it up...
Billy: I say it again.. nice avatar
ram