Max boost, stock tune? Before codes?

[bsn]

I for one am now convinced he is correct and everyone else is wrong. He is an engineer and a mechanic, he has a one of one car, he post really neat graphs, a guy in England confirmed he was right, GM texted him, he has spoken to Lingenfelter and other tuners and they said sure bring the car in we will tune it. To all the fools that got tricked into thinking they had to change pulleys, injectors, fuel pumps, heat exchangers ECT to run 15lbs of boost, do what I'm going to do and rip that crap off-if you post it for sale online cheap enough some moron will buy thinking it will make their car faster. I for one am going to do both the spring doohickey and the adjustable boost thingy in my "cockpit" so I better invest in allot of tires.

He just joined this forum any chance he is a troll.....................Naw can't be.

[tartagliazl1]

all that money i spent on getting my lsa to spin 17lb of boost, and all i had to do is change the acuator spring. huh aint no way. lol

[bsn]

I put my order in for the spring-the guys are making it now, also found a knob that goes to 11-this thing is going to be fast!!!

[1JEWLDSSRS]

Originally Posted by bsn

Attachment 1142893

Attachment 1142894

I put my order in for the spring-the guys are making it now, also found a know that goes to 11-this thing is going to be fast!!!

This has been a very entertaining thread for sure! Having been in the "boosted" family of cars before, I find it interesting as to what guys think and believe, but bsn, you just made me laugh a good one!! Needed that one to lighten it up.... lol.

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by silversleeper

Now I remember what I'm reminded of, a poster on other forums goes by rubber duck and has lots of pseudo science posts. Not quite applicable to a performance boost or the thread in real life, but refers to some science and if you don't know differently some people think he is a wizard genius lol. e.g. the infamous Bill Nye the "science guy" who real scientists laugh at...let's talk phony global warming....
https://www.blockerandwallace.com/wh...ower-Blog.html
and somehow putting a spring on a bypass valve that is ALREADY OFF, will increase boost at a given rpm lol.
Not to mention the world's only STOCK 2.4" upper pulley and unk lower LSA
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...p&opi=89978449

It’s math and cannot be undone.
Engine: 376 cubic inches @ 6500 rpm
Blower: 115.9 cubic inches @ 16900 rpm
Pulley Ratio: 2.6
Volumetric Efficiency @ 85% for both
14.7 psi atmospheric
Total boost pressure @ rpm = 14.3 psi for stock pulleys.
Where is the extra pressure/cfm from the supercharger going?
Anybody?

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by bsn

I for one am now convinced he is correct and everyone else is wrong. He is an engineer and a mechanic, he has a one of one car, he post really neat graphs, a guy in England confirmed he was right, GM texted him, he has spoken to Lingenfelter and other tuners and they said sure bring the car in we will tune it. To all the fools that got tricked into thinking they had to change pulleys, injectors, fuel pumps, heat exchangers ECT to run 15lbs of boost, do what I'm going to do and rip that crap off-if you post it for sale online cheap enough some moron will buy thinking it will make their car faster. I for one am going to do both the spring doohickey and the adjustable boost thingy in my "cockpit" so I better invest in allot of tires.

He just joined this forum any chance he is a troll.....................Naw can't be.

It’s not uncommon for an industry to take advantage of the ignorance of people. A shirt is made in China for .50 cents, put on a boat and brought here, and sold for $75 because it has a logo on it. It’s not my fault that the world takes advantage of the ignorant.

[silversleeper]

Originally Posted by Dark Sun

It’s math and cannot be undone.
Engine: 376 cubic inches @ 6500 rpm
Blower: 115.9 cubic inches @ 16900 rpm
Pulley Ratio: 2.6
Volumetric Efficiency @ 85% for both
14.7 psi atmospheric
Total boost pressure @ rpm = 14.3 psi for stock pulleys.
Where is the extra pressure/cfm from the supercharger going?
Anybody?

RPM is a red herring in your example because you assume a static efficiency which isn't correct. It also doesn't account for adiabatic expansion or other friction. If we take the example of 1 rotation of the compressor and 1 rotation of the engine and assume it is even 100% efficient the compressor will displace 116cu in times 2.4 or 301 cubic inches trying to fill a 376cubic inch piston displaced air volume so in theory it would be drawing a vacuum just by it's smaller displacement. Then in real world efficiency varies and if you want to actually learn there is a compressor efficiency map I found on the Eaton website to help know much more how this will perform at various pressures temperatures and rpms. You haven't accounted for any frictions of the moving air or expansions of heated gasses e.g. burning fuel in the pistons or the absorption of heat and assuming adiabatic heating of the compressed air or effects of the heat exchanger assuming adiabatic cooling minus friction by the radiator-like intercooler blocking airflow.

The 2.4inch upper pulley is 3.25 ratio which is the entire reason to change pullies.

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by FASTFATBOY

Bypass valve door is shut, lack of vacuum at WOT shuts the door. This is why you adjust the boost bypass valve to shut the door 100% with the car off so it simulates zero vacuum on the bypass valve.


When I left off the gas to shift, notice how fast boost is dropping as the bypass door opens when vacuum comes back up.

So the bypass actuator is vacuum operated on one side and pressure operated on the other, WOT there’s no vacuum and the spring in the actuator pushes the butterfly closed and hence builds pressure in the intake. Ok got it. Now as the pressure increases from the supercharger in the intake, what regulates the pressure? What is the pressure side of the actuator doing if it only opens during vacuum? That factory bypass actuator is set at 10 psi and opens the butterfly to maintain that pressure at 10 psi. So everyone spinning the supercharger faster to make more boost with the stock actuator, are doing nothing more than opening the butterfly more, recirculating air in the supercharger, building heat. No one sells a bypass actuator that matches the boost psi for the pulleys. 14psi boost=14psi actuator spring, 17psi boost= 17psi actuator spring. I don’t know why everyone in all these years has not seen this. A 10 psi actuator spring under 17 psi of boost, opens the bypass butterfly even more, and heating up the air charge because it’s circulating in the supercharger. Isn’t the whole idea to making boost to do it with lower supercharger speeds, cooler air, and efficiently?

[Fanch1LE]

Why do yall keep feeding the troll?

Pretty sure 1 post Rolexdev from India is the troll's creation. Lol.

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by silversleeper

RPM is a red herring in your example because you assume a static efficiency which isn't correct. It also doesn't account for adiabatic expansion or other friction. If we take the example of 1 rotation of the compressor and 1 rotation of the engine and assume it is even 100% efficient the compressor will displace 116cu in times 2.4 or 301 cubic inches trying to fill a 376cubic inch piston displaced air volume so in theory it would be drawing a vacuum just by it's smaller displacement. Then in real world efficiency varies and if you want to actually learn there is a compressor efficiency map I found on the Eaton website to help know much more how this will perform at various pressures temperatures and rpms. You haven't accounted for any frictions of the moving air or expansions of heated gasses e.g. burning fuel in the pistons or the absorption of heat and assuming adiabatic heating of the compressed air or effects of the heat exchanger assuming adiabatic cooling minus friction by the radiator-like intercooler blocking airflow.

The 2.4inch upper pulley is 3.25 ratio which is the entire reason to change pullies.

It’s 94 cubic inches per revolution,(376 divided by 4) that 301 cubic inches is filling. Hence the pressure, the engine is 4 strokes. And I have looked at the supercharger map. It’s rated at isentropic efficiency and not volumetric efficiency. Different.

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by Fanch1LE

Why do yall keep feeding the troll?

Pretty sure 1 post Rolexdev from India is the troll's creation. Lol.

So if I prove all this is indeed correct what does that make me? Or what does that make everyone else for not seeing it? I can make a simple video to show this and how it works. Or I can do a connect the dots drawing also. It is a simple thing and NO ONE see it.

[Dark Sun]

Ok, so if I make the world’s first variable boost supercharged LSA engine that can make 2-14 psi on stock pulleys, I’d be famous!
Challenge Accepted! Give me a week.

[Dark Sun]

Originally Posted by silversleeper

RPM is a red herring in your example because you assume a static efficiency which isn't correct. It also doesn't account for adiabatic expansion or other friction. If we take the example of 1 rotation of the compressor and 1 rotation of the engine and assume it is even 100% efficient the compressor will displace 116cu in times 2.4 or 301 cubic inches trying to fill a 376cubic inch piston displaced air volume so in theory it would be drawing a vacuum just by it's smaller displacement. Then in real world efficiency varies and if you want to actually learn there is a compressor efficiency map I found on the Eaton website to help know much more how this will perform at various pressures temperatures and rpms. You haven't accounted for any frictions of the moving air or expansions of heated gasses e.g. burning fuel in the pistons or the absorption of heat and assuming adiabatic heating of the compressed air or effects of the heat exchanger assuming adiabatic cooling minus friction by the radiator-like intercooler blocking airflow.

The 2.4inch upper pulley is 3.25 ratio which is the entire reason to change pullies.

At any given point in the rpm range, only 94 cubic inches are being filled or filling, the rest are either in compression, power stroke, or exhaust stroke as a continuous cycle. Your math is off, it’s not one 376 cubic inch piston.