 |
|
  |
 |
10-30-2005, 03:44 PM
|
#1
|
  |
|
Supercharged 16V Hybrid
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holt, Mi
My Ride: 1981 Triumh TR7
Engine: none!
Induct: S/C
1/4: 999.999
|
I am building a toy for the Grassroots Motorsports $2006.00 Challenge and I think a few on this forum might like it (a few will likely hate it as well) but the basics are pretty simple. I have collected a bunch of parts from other peoples Challenge trips and am in the process of building a fun lightweight autocrosser that can be driven 24/7.
Basically I have a 2.2L T2 short block that is currently getting a 420A head with Neon cams. Instead of turbocharging it I intend to supercharge it using an Eaton M90 and a Thunderbird Super Coupe intercooler. A Megasquirt w/ EDIS control package will squirt 92 octane through 70 lb injectors. A custom header will be made because I am waaaay too smart to try and use a Dakota manifold for this project  . A Dakota bellhousing will be modified (and spaced) to accept a Mustang T5 transmission which has a Pro 5.0 shifter. The driveshaft is going to need to be modified to accept the Triumph rear axle.
Yes I said Triumph. Specifically a 1981 Triumph TR7 DHC (Convertible) that has had a majority of the big issues worked out of it and is in the minor need of a winters long ass whoopin to get it into shape!
So there you have it. A Ford supercharged Dodge powered little British car... wait for the updates as they come in... I promise they will be sick.
John
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-30-2005, 06:35 PM
|
#2
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1986 Plymouth Horizo
Engine: 2.2 Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 11.705
|
I dont want to knock what you are doing... but why not use a turbocharger?
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-30-2005, 07:12 PM
|
#3
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Gresham, Oregon
My Ride: '89 plymouth voyager
Engine: 2.2 TII
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 16.800
|
sounds awesome, make sure you take pictures. How much did you pay for the M90?
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-30-2005, 08:53 PM
|
#4
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holt, Mi
My Ride: 1981 Triumh TR7
Engine: none!
Induct: S/C
1/4: 999.999
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by contraption22
I dont want to knock what you are doing... but why not use a turbocharger?
|
  |
Two reasons, it will primarily be an autocross car. Since I am not running SCCA events I can run it at PCA and AROC events in Michigan without having the noses thumbed at me. In a RWD car with a very light rear I would prefer to tune out the snap oversteer from when the boost comes in. The second reason is because the turbo has been done, why not see what a bunch of junkyard parts can do!
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tkelly27
How much did you pay for the M90?
|
  |
I paid $75.00 for a complete wrecked car with title, I sold the engine for $500.00 minus SC I sold the SC to a buddy for HIS GRM project car, he nuked two fresh engines (QUAD4s) before leaving the SC in my garage two years ago! I made about $1100.00 on the car before the SC came back.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-30-2005, 11:27 PM
|
#5
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
Well, unless you are a professional driver, a supercharged car is a lot easier to handle on the track, and is a lot less stressful. Novice drivers really need to worry about the track and not micromanaging the gas pedal.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 05:57 AM
|
#8
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holt, Mi
My Ride: 1981 Triumh TR7
Engine: none!
Induct: S/C
1/4: 999.999
|
The target is 200 rwhp with the ability to upgrade a lot in the future. For now consistency and repeatability is key.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 12:53 PM
|
#10
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
I would say, that using a not so great m90.....you might as well just go with a 8v motor. 16 v deserves a much better screw blower.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 01:34 PM
|
#11
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1991 Daytona Shelby
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.000
|
16valve is good. I think m90 is going to work well. It will be potent in a triumph. I would say though that you can do two things. Do an air to water intercooler with the SC intercooler. With autocross, the air cooling for an intercooler isnt as good. With an Air to Water setup, you could use a motorcycle radiator in the front with two small fans to assist. I would also suggest that you go with 4 52lb hr injectors, and then trigger a secondary sprayer for alky injection at the upper boost limits where extra fuel is required. With the hot charge of a SC, espeically in a triumph, the alky will help prevent predetonation. Just my two cents.
Frank
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 08:06 PM
|
#12
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holt, Mi
My Ride: 1981 Triumh TR7
Engine: none!
Induct: S/C
1/4: 999.999
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frank
16valve is good. I think m90 is going to work well. It will be potent in a triumph. I would say though that you can do two things. Do an air to water intercooler with the SC intercooler. With autocross, the air cooling for an intercooler isnt as good. With an Air to Water setup, you could use a motorcycle radiator in the front with two small fans to assist. I would also suggest that you go with 4 52lb hr injectors, and then trigger a secondary sprayer for alky injection at the upper boost limits where extra fuel is required. With the hot charge of a SC, espeically in a triumph, the alky will help prevent predetonation. Just my two cents.
Frank
|
  |
Shhhhh! You're giving away my surprises!
I intended to build a "cooler" for the TB intercooler and run icewater in it. I had a lot of luck with it in my Merkur and it was plenty easy if you know what to buy (and how to weld) Literally a 30* tank for the intercooler to sit in. The 70lbers are here and paid for, since I have a total budget of $2006.00 I can't make the car perfect but rather I must flex around the pieces I find. We used these same injectors on a 2.0L Alfa Turbo engine and outside of a little loading up on cold idle it worked well.
If I were to run a SOHC head it would be a "normal" car and the last thing you want during this excersize is a normal car. As it stands I am concerned that a RWD supercharged DOHC hybrid will not turn ENOUGH heads in the concourse.
As far as running a "not so great M90" I will only say that any compressor will help make the combination better. Wether screw, helix, turbine, roots, centrifugal as long as you are able to operate within the superchargers CFM range. An M90 is large for a "Normal 2.2L engine", a M62 is better suited for the CFM requirements of one. Add in the 16V head, the bigger injectors, the better (non EPA strangked) fuel map and ignition curve, and the fact it is all but free you must agree it is the perfect blower for MY application.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 08:29 PM
|
#13
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
yes, free does work well. Id be impressed to see you pull off the 16v for so cheap including all the fitment issues.
Im just not a fan of the roots blower efficiencies. I would suggest spraying some alky before the rotors. You will see a decent efficiency increase because it will close up the gaps between blades, and it will actually run a tiny bit higher on boost.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 08:59 PM
|
#14
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holt, Mi
My Ride: 1981 Triumh TR7
Engine: none!
Induct: S/C
1/4: 999.999
|
That is one of the neat thing about being me  I have worked in the salvage industry for a few years now and I have a pretty decent machine shop at my disposal. I agree with the inefficiencies of the roots blower but it is in no way any different than the inefficiencies of a turbo. Let's face it, using heat to power the intake charge is pretty nuts but it works! Like I said I am using this iteration as a starting point and IF I only pull off a true 200 RWHP I will be happy. We all know that the combination even with the Roots has the capability of laying down a big number in both HP and torque, so if I keep my mindset a little low I can be pleasantly surprised when it gets strapped to the dyno and lays down a 3 instaed of a 2!
Besides it's not like 200hp in a 1900lb car sucks! Oh man a 1900 lb 300 hp car would be cool and the more power the cooler the car becomes!
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
10-31-2005, 09:11 PM
|
#15
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Salt Lake & Seattle
My Ride: 92 Duster
Engine: 3.0
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.700
|
I still suggest spraying some alky before the rotors. an m90 is something like 50% efficient at best????
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
 |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Quick Nav |
|
» Quick Tech |
|
» Market Place |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|