has any body done this? If so why havnt more people done this. Ive currently been looking through powerdynes catalog and those things are tiny. Ive been under the hood taking measurements and I see no reason why one of these things couldnt take the place of the air box. It looks like all I need to do is fab up a mounting bracket for da blower keeping it in line with pullys, put a pigiback pully on da ac wheel, and some piping for intake and filter. It needs no oil since its belt, not gear driven. I am a noob and not a mechanik, but I dont think im that far off. wut you guys think
supercharged 240sx
14.5 drift
81 - 99 of 99 Posts
didnt mean to offend ya man but your only gonna be able to creat LOW amounts of boost as a giant pully will be hard as hell for that little motor to turn and bog it down a TON. it'd prolly be better to SC an SR20DE or a KA24DE. thier cheaper and you dont have to pay for something youre gonna take off.
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
Like turbocharging, there are different sized SC's. So with the right sized compressor it wont be taking on any more of a load than a V8. A V8 would be trying to spin a compressor literally twice the size in praportion to its displacement. And since the Sc is giving the motor more power in return its not quite the burdon on the motor as it seems. Its no longer a 30 hp drain on a 150 hp engine, its a 30 hp drain on a 300 hp engine.sonic16 said:
Definatly looking at all possibilities, but i want one of the already tc motors so that I dont have to rebuild internals. Just about every motor set being swapped into the 240 can handle 300 - 350 hp so It wont require a rebuild. Kinda leaning on the possibility of the ca, but really wich ever is the most reliable of the three motors, RB20, SR20, And CA18. Sr is known to be the most finaky and its the most expensive, the rb is known to take a beating but its heavy, and ca is the cheapest highest revving little kick in the pants IMO, but no idea on its reliability
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
Holy shlit, I just saw a picture of an engine bay with a ca18det, and I have decided to go with the ca18det. There is about 7 inches between the block and the radiator, giving me all the room needed to mount an sc any where. Also a guy on nico forum sellin motor sets for like 1100.00. :3hump What more could I ask for
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
Tell that to the mustang cobra's and AMG mercades. Every thing gonna b finesonic16 said:once a gain like i said low drain SC = low top end boost.
high top end boost = engine almost stalling at idle cause it cant turn the pulley
Joined
·
551 Posts
Those cars aren't 4 cylinders either...big difference, bad comparison...14.5 drift said:
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
But the supercharger is made for a 4 cylinder so it is a good comparisonShadyCajun said:
Joined
·
551 Posts
But which is more efficient? A supercharger on a v8, or on a 4 banger? v8...no contest...Ok, so the SC you're talkin about is designed for a 4...it's still more inefficient than a SC on a v8...Granted, SCs aren't bad on a 4 banger either, but IMO it's much more feasible to have a supercharged v8.14.5 drift said:But the supercharger is made for a 4 cylinder so it is a good comparison
I know you've got the supercharger idea ingrained in your head, so I'm not trying to get you to change your mind, if you can get it done, great. But from a practical standpoint, superchargers are more of a pain in the ass, especially if it's never been successfully completed for the car you want to do it to.
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
It's good to see people that are firm in there beliefs, even if it's not as accurate as they like to think, it's better than being shifty or indecisive. Yeah right look at me. I can't even pick out a motor, ca, no ka, now I'm just confused all over again. Sounds like your not hearing me on compressor size so instead of fighting with you until you under stand, or until this thread is closed, I'ma jus look the other way on that last post :happyfing J/K
Joined
·
551 Posts
Hehe...play nice :nono14.5 drift said:
Either way, you'd have a decent increase in horsepower with a SC, so I'd say go ahead with it. My last post was in general, obviously there are exceptions to EVERYTHING, but my main point was that superchargers are "parasitic", but the good outweighs the bad.
Honestly I wouldn't mind supercharging if I had the money, but I'd rather not be the guinea pig...
you are dumb man. you only have two choices.
1. large compressore and large pulley, taking forever to attain high boost ,but eventually getting there.
or
2. small pulley and small compressor, meanign quick boost and low max boost.
its not an opinion if it is a well known fact
1. large compressore and large pulley, taking forever to attain high boost ,but eventually getting there.
or
2. small pulley and small compressor, meanign quick boost and low max boost.
its not an opinion if it is a well known fact
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
damn where do you pick up this bologna. Like a turbo there is different size sc's that flow different amounts of cfm's. A 4 cylender only needs half the air supply a V8 needs so they make cute little half pint super chargers that will work perfect for this application. They make all kinds of pulley and unlike some people think it takes about 4 minutes to change one out. So stop hijacking my thread with your ignorant bs. In fact turbochargers are only 70 - 75% efficient, and the kennebell twin screw claims to be 90% efficient. Looks like its time for a redesign and if you dont like what im doing keep it to your self. Come back with some factual info and weel talk. You guys sound rediculous," ugh supercharger bad, turbocharger good." Hitler had similar views, nothing ever gets accomplished that way.
Joined
·
551 Posts
I know this is gonna sound like I'm being an ass, but honestly I'm not, I just don't know how to put it so it's blunt...If it's so much better, then just do it instead of SAYING how much it's better...then SHOW us...if you're right, then people won't have any way to dispute your claims...14.5 drift said:damn where do you pick up this bologna. Like a turbo there is different size sc's that flow different amounts of cfm's. A 4 cylender only needs half the air supply a V8 needs so they make cute little half pint super chargers that will work perfect for this application. They make all kinds of pulley and unlike some people think it takes about 4 minutes to change one out. So stop hijacking my thread with your ignorant bs. In fact turbochargers are only 70 - 75% efficient, and the kennebell twin screw claims to be 90% efficient. Looks like its time for a redesign and if you dont like what im doing keep it to your self. Come back with some factual info and weel talk. You guys sound rediculous," ugh supercharger bad, turbocharger good." Hitler had similar views, nothing ever gets accomplished that way.
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
maybe your right, but this isnt really the constructive type of discussion I had hoped to find. I wonder if any body else had thought about it, what kind of ideas they came up with, any suggestions for head unit or fitment, Why or why nots, you know. I didnt hope to be cornered by an angry mob of turbocharged enthusiests putting all my ideas down. Either way, Im down to two motors, the ka, and the ca. Pros and cons list.
Ka pros:
came stock in car, ka's in junk yard or in here for cheap, full support from nissan, more displacement.
KA cons: Not boost friendly, requires a rebuild, more displacement (not as good on gas ), heavier, 6k redline.
CA pros:
lighter, boost friendly, big revs, nissan support, great on gas, reliable, tons of space to fit a supercharger.
CA cons:
swap required, rebuid would b smart due to age, less tq.
What you guys think
Ka pros:
came stock in car, ka's in junk yard or in here for cheap, full support from nissan, more displacement.
KA cons: Not boost friendly, requires a rebuild, more displacement (not as good on gas ), heavier, 6k redline.
CA pros:
lighter, boost friendly, big revs, nissan support, great on gas, reliable, tons of space to fit a supercharger.
CA cons:
swap required, rebuid would b smart due to age, less tq.
What you guys think
Joined
·
6,754 Posts
A supercharge car has driving characteristics very similar to that of a powerful na.
Lots of torque on tap at low revs but runs out of puff at top end.
Turbo is just different - you can have the same power but it comes on later for longer.
I drive both a Toyota corolla with the supercharged 4agze from a 92 levin and a 180sx with sr20det.
The sr has more power but the 4a is really fun to drive and has heaps down low. The corolla actually beats the 180 over the first 20 metres then dies top end.
Look at the twin screw supercharger. They are more expensive and harder to fit but they are much more efficient than a turbine or roots charger.
Lots of torque on tap at low revs but runs out of puff at top end.
Turbo is just different - you can have the same power but it comes on later for longer.
I drive both a Toyota corolla with the supercharged 4agze from a 92 levin and a 180sx with sr20det.
The sr has more power but the 4a is really fun to drive and has heaps down low. The corolla actually beats the 180 over the first 20 metres then dies top end.
Look at the twin screw supercharger. They are more expensive and harder to fit but they are much more efficient than a turbine or roots charger.
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
sounds like a roots blower onda corolla. been looking at the whipples, and kenne bell, like you said a bit more skill to mount. The efficiency range is incredible on em, from 3lbs to 30 lbs of boost. Wowzers. Pretty much settled on the ca18det. It will give me lots of room to work under the hood and definate top end throttle. Thanks guys for all yous help. :thumbsup
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
check out the chart center page, boost curve comparisonhttp://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/content.asp?PageID=68
81 - 99 of 99 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
