427C5

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27664

BigBronco

iTrader: (2)

Am I blind and I am not seeing any power numbers?

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

Gray, the pics shown above are not on the Camaro. That is a Ford or Mopar or something. Dynos above are just stock baseline pulls.

I saw a Techco blower in person at LMR earlier this week, one for a Hemi I believe. It looked okay, but damn that sucker was HEAVY. Not kidding, I'd guess 100+ lbs by itself. Results will be interesting, looking forward to seeing how they do.

427C5

The long runner assembly is what I think you are referring to. I don't think it will be much heavier, if at all, than the other twin screw blower.

They have already made 600 to the wheels with a 100% stock LS3.

427C5

Watch the video that shows the design and assembly of the Techco.
I think it goes well beyond "OK".

http://techco.vidiac.com/video/652fa...d900bdf550.htm

http://techco.vidiac.com/

Scoggin Dickey

iTrader: (34)

I'm going to have to see more before I am too convinced. I've seen the 510rwhp LS3 on 6psi, and the 548rwhp on 10psi. Maggies are doing that with a 2.3 instead of the 3.0 and are already known for their reliability as well. I look forward to results to see how this pans out and if it becomes a great long-lived competitor, but for now I don't see any advantage to their 2-3k more expensive 3.0 blower setup over a cheaper smaller Maggie making the same power.

I'm not making judgment just yet though as there aren't enough results to build an absolute opinion on, I look forward to future builds to see some results.

BigBronco

iTrader: (2)

Yeah, I knew the blower was on a Challenger and not the Camaro..

Just figured with the thread, there was going to be results.

Johny GTO

this makes me very happy. I own a GTO (if you didnt realize looking at my name), and it always pissed me off the lack of blower options for my car, especially when compared to f-bodies, or mustangs. We didnt even get a twin screw.

This blower looks kick ***, and the fact that it is a 3L twin screw.... lol. I would imgaine with a forged motor, this thing will support a ton of power, i would say upward of 1000rwhp.

427C5

Please stop posting low numbers without the supporting info.
Those numbers were on 91 octane on a 1000% stock car.

Apples to Apples, the Techco will blow the Maggies away.

Scoggin Dickey

iTrader: (34)

I didn't post low numbers, I posted the numbers they made and listed themselves. If that's low numbers, so be it. No need to treat me like a child the same way you do everyone else that doesn't post exactly what you would prefer.

We will know apples to apples when there are more results to compare. From what we have seen so far, neither one blows the other away, and like I said before I can't wait to see more results to see how it goes. I said plain as day that I am ready to see more results.

I did not say anything negative about the techco, nor did I post skewed numbers in anyway.The community could benefit more if you could allow other people to take objective standpoints instead of pushing your passion for the Techco on other people. When the results are in, they will speak for themselves I don't know if I'm happy with what the Maggie will do on my Camaro yet, so I'm ready to see some Techco results. Obviously, I'm not a hater, just objective, as I'd like a better option but haven't seen enough examples of the Techco superiority to be as convinced as you.

427C5

The fact remains when people read those low numbers, they aren't getting the full picture because those numbers were initial runs on a 1000% stock car with 91 octane and people are going to compare those numbers to higher numbers from other systems running 93 octane and other mods.

427C5

No one treated you like a child. Why do you think I posted the angel?
I think you're overreacting a bit.

WECIV

Stout stock numbers. Any break in on that thing?

W

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

So a 1000% stock car is 10 times more stock than a 100% stock car? I'll wait for the real numbers to come out before I make a judgement as well but I haven't seen anything that blows me away yet.

gectek

iTrader: (2)

looks like an edelbrock unit to me with some fancy lettering on it....and as for the "reverse-revolutoin" is that like an anti-coup? Like this is the de-evolution of the supercharger?

Oh and AGAIN according to kenne bell IF a supercharger that is designed as the techco or HIS turns in reverse and does NOT force the air through the middle of the rotors but INSTEAD around the outside of the case, then it is NOT classified as a TVS or Twin screw supercharger. It is in fact then just a roots blower, meaning it has NOT the potential that the TVS/twin screw styles have.

but still good effort anyway

since when does a supercharger need a long runner anyway?
can you explain to us feeble forward minded individuals why a supercharger needs such a long runner?

Johny GTO

I think you have the wrong idea. When they say "Reverse revolution", they dont mean the screws just turn the opposite way, thereby pulling air into the middle of the lobes and pushing it top the outside of the case. Their twin screw works the same as every twin screw in that it compresses the air down the screws. However, what is "reverse" is that the air isnt being sucked in the back, compressed towards the front, and blown out the bottom into the intercooler. The air is being sucked into the front, compressed as it moves towards the back of the case, and gets blown upwards into the intercooler.

Do you follow me?

As far as not having the potential of a TVS or twin screw, that would be incorrect due to the above explanation. Twin screws are extremely efficient, with a lot of potential with this being a large 3 liter unit.

As to why it needs a long runner, it is the same principle as without the super-charger. Longer runners make more torque than shorter runners, regardless of whether the air is moving at normal atmospheric pressure or under 15lbs of boost. It also affects "pressure wave tuning", which is a bit complicated but refers to the "high pressure---low pressure----high pressure" pattern of the air moving inside the runner. This way, you have the runner meet the cylinder head port right in an area of "high pressure", so as to better fill the cylinder with the new air\fuel mixture.

Due to the intake manifold being on top of the blower, and the air coming from the blower up into the intercooler and then entering the runner, the runner is larger as it travels from the top of the setup all the way down to the bottom to the cylinder head's intake ports. With a traditional setup, the blower is on top of the intercooler, the air comes into the blower and pushes down into the intercooler. From there, it only has a short way to go in the runner from the intercooler exit to the cylinder head, which is right below it.


Does this help at all? If i made some errors or mistakes that anybody sees, please feel free to correct my mistakes as i dont want to spread false info, or God forbid.... create more interwebs myth and dogma.

ThisBlood147

Yes, Johny, you pretty much got it right. The Techo guys are applying the same design into this unit that they pioneered on the Series VI unit that they built as part of Saleen. My Series VI is a 2.3 L and made an additional 138rwhp 137lb/ft on only 4.5 psi, so I'm sure this 3 L monster will really crank out the low end torque. Can't wait to see what kind of numbers it puts out.

chrisdacarnut

iTrader: (1)

Any numbers yet?

tomsws6

iTrader: (2)

9k?? wow

gectek

iTrader: (2)

how can they post numbers when the only one installed in the pic is on a dodge product....LOL

yah its technically FAIL....

that is all