View Full Version : found one more restriction on the 2009 V


wait4me
12-31-2008, 10:07 AM
The air tube on the top for the airfilter tubing is 4inch but has some wierd sound baffles on it that kind of throws off the look of the engine compartment. I had prevously pulled the air filter off put in a smooth mandrel bent 4 inch 90 which fits into the exact stock location and tried another dynopull to see if there was a gain and there was NOT.... So a different tube really isnt needed.

So, Here are some pics of the airbox assembly. You can see that it is the EXACT same one from a v6 cts???? HMM The filter element is the exact one also but the filter itself dont seem to be the hold up on restricting power.

The inlet for the bottom feeding the filter itself is too small. So if you remove it from the car and look, there is a HUGE area for it to pull air from seperate from the engine compartment. Also you can pull the brake ducting and T it off from that inlet to allow even more air flowing up into the filter. Forced like the brake is.

I removed the sound deadener inside the top filter/maf hat. And cut off the bottom of the air filter assembly as shown. It makes the blower just a little more louder at WOT. I think it sounds better now. Also the response of the car is ALOT more instant. Especially at 5000 and up rpms.

Dyno gained about 4.6 hp by cutting it out. BUT only at 4600 rpms and higher.


So, i guess that shows that the stock box in stock form is a little bit of a bottleneck.. But the way it looks and the amount of room available, an aftermarket box wont make much difference over the stock one with the bottom just cut off.


Ill post pics in a second.

wait4me
12-31-2008, 10:37 AM
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/1IMG_2094.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/2IMG_2095.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/3IMG_2096.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/4IMG_2097.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/5IMG_2098.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/6IMG_2099.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/7IMG_2100.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/8IMG_2101.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/9IMG_2102.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/10IMG_2103.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/11IMG_2104.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/12IMG_2105.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/13IMG_2106.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/14IMG_2107.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/15IMG_2108.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/16IMG_2109.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/17IMG_2110.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/18IMG_2111.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/19IMG_2112.JPG
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/20IMG_2113.JPG

wait4me
12-31-2008, 10:38 AM
http://2009cts-v.com/pictures/21IMG_2114.JPG

wait4me
12-31-2008, 10:38 AM
Im going to start putting all my 2009 stuff in one place at http://www.2009cts-v.com if anyone wants to look at it in more detail.

jerrad
12-31-2008, 02:45 PM
Cool, love those cheap/free mods.

So what hp/tq are you going to stop at?

SilveradoSS500
12-31-2008, 03:19 PM
You are so getting me ready....I love it!!!

adanieljohnson1
12-31-2008, 04:07 PM
Dang..... Thats sick! I wish the 09 V was in my budget!!!! I can't wait to see one to play with... it'll have to be next year!:emb:

DrkPhx
12-31-2008, 08:25 PM
I would imagine replacing the entire inlet tube using a different piece minus the air silencers will help as well.

SebringSilverZ
12-31-2008, 09:19 PM
Nice! I keep looking forward to what you are going to do next with the car. I stopped by a Cadillac dealer here in Houston last night and chatted with the owner who is driving one of the six they are getting. Supposedly they've sold three so far, one for $10K over sticker, one for $6K over and not sure on the third. As awesome as the car is, no way in hell I'm paying over sticker for it.

Just registered for the board too ("TX SS").

wait4me
01-01-2009, 03:10 PM
Thanks guys. Yeah the car has been pretty fun to mess with. The car is alot louder in respect to blower noise with that stuff cut out. It sounds like a regular maggy now. It is amazing how much noise comes back thru the throttle body..


I tried a smooth mandrel bent 4 inch tube in place of that stock one, it made 0, yes zero hp difference one way or the other.... i figured it would gain at least on the top end but it didnt. I guess the air being trapped in those points would just make a air cushin and make the incoming air just flow over it... It did make it a "Little" more louder blower noise though, but i just put the stock one back on and left it that way for now..

Im going to be tracking down a TVS2300 assembly from a zr1 next.. To just see what bolting on the other blower with the more displacement will do..

Then come porting / modifying the tvs1900 i pulled off...

Ill keep modding it till it breaks.. I have a spare 454 ci lsx block blower engine to dump in her when that blows...... "the spare clone from the grey V i havent killed yet"

It should be a fun year for sure... It is nice to finally have a car that can handle the mods without fear of scrap metal flying every where........


I have a few camshafts i might try also. AND i MIGHT even set up and make it a REAL vvt motor.

I cant believe no other person is saying anything to gm about it not being a variable valve train motor even though it says it right on the window sticker as being one....

I pulled off all the front end of the motor and looked. there is NO CAM PHASER. So that means we dont have the motor they say....

An LSA motor is not a VVT engine.

VVT=Fun for blowers..

That is really why i wish they would have just used the northstar 4 cam engine and made it more cubes and tougher and put on the tvs1900 on it instead... I like 4 cam control....

jerrad
01-01-2009, 11:49 PM
WAR VTEC!!!
I'm guessing when it warms up in your area you're going to give it a few 1/4 mile runs for us.

Urban Legend
01-01-2009, 11:56 PM
I need this car in my life.

Mikels
01-02-2009, 10:59 AM
I removed the sound deadener inside the top filter/maf hat.

That is not a sound deadener, it's a hydrocarbon absorber (part of evaporative emission control), and removing it can subject you to the penalties for defeating an emission control device. No restriction from this part anyway as it is out of the direct airflow path, so no need to remove.

Cutting base off air box, while allowing more airflow, will increase possibility of water ingestion which can lead to hydralic-lock of the engine. You decide if the few HP is worth the risk.

2c5s
01-02-2009, 11:31 AM
I removed the sound deadener inside the top filter/maf hat.

That is not a sound deadener, it's a hydrocarbon absorber (part of evaporative emission control), and removing it can subject you to the penalties for defeating an emission control device. No restriction from this part anyway as it is out of the direct airflow path, so no need to remove.

Cutting base off air box, while allowing more airflow, will increase possibility of water ingestion which can lead to hydralic-lock of the engine. You decide if the few HP is worth the risk.


You sound like a factory rep nazi.

deedubb
01-02-2009, 11:50 AM
You sound like a factory rep nazi.

That was my first thought too. The same could be said about nearly every mod using that thought pattern :eyes:

ubervette
01-02-2009, 12:00 PM
You sound like a factory rep nazi.

I know. The most basic mod and this guy is complaining. I thought this site was for car nuts, not pussies.

Mikels
01-02-2009, 12:01 PM
Don't misunderstand, I'm all for more power (you can never have too much....), I'm just stating facts.

There are many ways to increase power in the LSA, just don't expect them to come without penalty of decreased durability. However, in my experience, the more power you make, the less time you spend making that power as you just can't keep your foot in it that long.

ubervette
01-02-2009, 12:52 PM
But you stated the 'facts' in a way that sounded like a total buzz kill. Caveating the comments would be okay but all you indicated was that modding the airbox was against the fed laws and you might suck up water. Most us already know the facts and Dr Killjoy is never welcome.

2c5s
01-02-2009, 01:00 PM
Don't misunderstand, I'm all for more power (you can never have too much....), I'm just stating facts.

There are many ways to increase power in the LSA, just don't expect them to come without penalty of decreased durability. However, in my experience, the more power you make, the less time you spend making that power as you just can't keep your foot in it that long.


Well, you sound like you know all the ins and outs of the LSA engine. Why not share some LEGAL (of course) mods?

Did you have a hand in this? http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=gm

Mikels
01-02-2009, 01:29 PM
Yes, I know the ins & outs of the LSA - having spent considerable time with it.

A few tidbits - if someone starts making claims about anything over about 5hp with an exhaust system - raise the BS flag. Same goes for the induction systems (as dyno results above show). Now if sound increase is what your after, go for it. Just don't expect power to come along from changes to these systems.

Obviously, with SC, increasing boost is shortest path to power. If you look at the differences between LS9 & LSA, these are the differences required to maintain durability for a 100K powertrain warranty. If you are willing to 'own' the engine, there is obviously room to grow. How much is dependant on budget and willingness to change supporting systems for higher power levels.

2c5s
01-02-2009, 01:40 PM
Yes, I know the ins & outs of the LSA - having spent considerable time with it.

A few tidbits - if someone starts making claims about anything over about 5hp with an exhaust system - raise the BS flag. Same goes for the induction systems (as dyno results above show). Now if sound increase is what your after, go for it. Just don't expect power to come along from changes to these systems.

Obviously, with SC, increasing boost is shortest path to power. If you look at the differences between LS9 & LSA, these are the differences required to maintain durability for a 100K powertrain warranty. If you are willing to 'own' the engine, there is obviously room to grow. How much is dependant on budget and willingness to change supporting systems for higher power levels.

Thanks! Are you part of the warranty police?

ubervette
01-02-2009, 01:51 PM
What is considerable time? How long has it been out? :)

Mikels
01-02-2009, 01:54 PM
Nope, not part of the warranty police.

Having worked in both the aftermarket and OEM and being an enthusiast, I can understand the desire to modify and pursue increased power.

Having said that, I do have a few strongly held views with regard to modifying your ride:

I object to dealers that void your entire warranty just because you modified your powertrain. Having a window switch issue has nothing to do with what was done with your powertrain.

However, I also object to those that modify their engines to power levels beyond what was validated and expecting the OEM's to cover failures related to this modification. The LSA is factory rated @ 556HP with a 5 year 100K warranty, does it make sense for GM to cover it for this duration if power has been increased 10%, 20% or more?

As I stated before, with a SC engine increasing the boost will obviously lead to more power. But this comes with a cost of operating the engine beyond what was designed in and validated for the OEM warranty. If you are comfortable owning your engine, put the pedal down and power up! If you operate the engine within sensible limits, you can operate at increased power levels without drastically reduced durability - but there will always be some level of decrease (a candle that burns twice as bright....).

Mikels
01-02-2009, 02:08 PM
Considerable time is > 2 years....

trukk
01-02-2009, 02:17 PM
Don't feed the troll. His E-Dick is so big, he may try to put it in your mouth.

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/7702/notshokedxk2.jpg

-Chris

ubervette
01-02-2009, 08:27 PM
Are you on the product development team? BTW, fuk a warranty.

Norm '88 GT
01-03-2009, 09:20 AM
As I stated before, with a SC engine increasing the boost will obviously lead to more power.

You don't have to increase boost to make more power. Even lowering boost on an OE setup can result in more power. Peak horsepower is not the only player either.

Something tells me you don't know what Your talking about. Entertaining though. :)

Mikels
01-03-2009, 11:59 AM
You don't have to increase boost to make more power. Even lowering boost on an OE setup can result in more power. Peak horsepower is not the only player either.

Something tells me you don't know what Your talking about. Entertaining though.

Increased cylinder pressure (at the correct crank angle) is what makes more power. So if you are at the knock limit (from spark) and increase cylinder pressure (boost) you will net more power. If you are so knock sensitive that reducing boost pressure allows significant increase in spark timing, yes, you might see an increase in cylinder pressure. Pretty fine line though.... unless you have really crappy mixture motion and poor spark travel, an increase in boost will result in an increase in power.

And by power I am refering to total power under the curve, not just peak.

You are correct though; I am sure my background does not allow me to fully understand what I am talking about. I'll just sit back and enjoy the banter from the 'experts'.

2c5s
01-03-2009, 12:23 PM
increased cylinder pressure (at the correct crank angle) is what makes more power. So if you are at the knock limit (from spark) and increase cylinder pressure (boost) you will net more power. If you are so knock sensitive that reducing boost pressure allows significant increase in spark timing, yes, you might see an increase in cylinder pressure. Pretty fine line though.... Unless you have really crappy mixture motion and poor spark travel, an increase in boost will result in an increase in power.

And by power i am refering to total power under the curve, not just peak.

You are correct though; i am sure my background does not allow me to fully understand what i am talking about. I'll just sit back and enjoy the banter from the 'experts'.


lmao!!

SilveradoSS500
01-03-2009, 03:49 PM
Nope, not part of the warranty police.

Having worked in both the aftermarket and OEM and being an enthusiast, I can understand the desire to modify and pursue increased power.

Having said that, I do have a few strongly held views with regard to modifying your ride:

I object to dealers that void your entire warranty just because you modified your powertrain. Having a window switch issue has nothing to do with what was done with your powertrain.

However, I also object to those that modify their engines to power levels beyond what was validated and expecting the OEM's to cover failures related to this modification. The LSA is factory rated @ 556HP with a 5 year 100K warranty, does it make sense for GM to cover it for this duration if power has been increased 10%, 20% or more?

As I stated before, with a SC engine increasing the boost will obviously lead to more power. But this comes with a cost of operating the engine beyond what was designed in and validated for the OEM warranty. If you are comfortable owning your engine, put the pedal down and power up! If you operate the engine within sensible limits, you can operate at increased power levels without drastically reduced durability - but there will always be some level of decrease (a candle that burns twice as bright....).

Are saying this because: Its one thing to tune a NA motor but once you Tune a FACTORY SC motor, your playing with to much fire???? I know that is why the valvetrain was decreased and I believe the LSA has some Iron in it that the LS9 is all alum......OR are you just saying its BS that GM has to pay for OUR (Aftermarket enthus.) part failures/break downs?

I love my warranty! I had 3 T-56 rebuilds in 5k mils on my C5 Z06 last year......no questions asked.........I love GM.......

Norm '88 GT
01-03-2009, 05:16 PM
If your adding more heat along with the boost eventually you'll be off the compressor's most efficient area and not gaining anything with more boost but just adding heat which will decrease power. Depending on the application stalling compessor could end with compressor parts in the engine.

With your resources you should backing up your key board theories with some visual aids. :)

Increased cylinder pressure (at the correct crank angle) is what makes more power. So if you are at the knock limit (from spark) and increase cylinder pressure (boost) you will net more power. If you are so knock sensitive that reducing boost pressure allows significant increase in spark timing, yes, you might see an increase in cylinder pressure. Pretty fine line though.... unless you have really crappy mixture motion and poor spark travel, an increase in boost will result in an increase in power.

And by power I am refering to total power under the curve, not just peak.

You are correct though; I am sure my background does not allow me to fully understand what I am talking about. I'll just sit back and enjoy the banter from the 'experts'.

Mikels
01-03-2009, 11:20 PM
Sorry, Norm, I should be more specific. When I speak of boost increase, I am speaking of density ratio increase (not pressure ratio increase).

So yes, if you increase pressure ratio, but adiabatic efficiency of the blower increases temperature to such an extent that density ratio drops, your will not make more power (less power if additional power to drive blower is not made up for by increased power).

To complicate it more, you also have to factor in the efficiency of the intercooler (if so equiped). More boost will always mean more heat (unless blower is changed). Intercoolers also create a pressure drop across the heat exchanger. Getting the correct 'balance' of pressure drop to temperature drop requires effort to do correctly.

If you want to make it real simple, spray face of the ICHE (intercooler heat exchanger) with nitrous when under boost. Density ratio will increase and power will go up. No other changes required.

Speed limits for superchargers are usually dictated by rpm limits of componants more so than compressor stall (like a turbocharger). Also, adiabatic efficiency of the blower will start to fall off as blower speed increases. Which leads to....another reason for the 2300 blower on the LS9 vs. the 1900 blower on the LSA. Running a higher boost level with the 2300 requires less rpm (and better adiabatic efficiency) than the same boost level with the 1900. Both are 6.2L engines, but differences are what was deemed neccesary to go from 556hp to 638hp and maintain required durability for 5 year 100k warranty.

ubervette
01-04-2009, 12:40 PM
If you want to make it real simple, spray face of the ICHE (intercooler heat exchanger) with nitrous when under boost. Density ratio will increase and power will go up. No other changes required.

LMMFAO :rice

deedubb
01-04-2009, 12:48 PM
so it's rice to yield more power now? Yikes, I'm going to sell my V for a bicycle.

ubervette
01-04-2009, 12:54 PM
You are correct though; I am sure my background does not allow me to fully understand what I am talking about. I'll just sit back and enjoy the banter from the 'experts'.

Ok, <signs from boredom> what's your background. Let us in on the inner secrets. I know I know, you have been working on the LSA for 2 years. Must mean you are on the engineering team for GM since it have only been shipping to the public for 7 weeks. Are you adding in 'knowledge' from your supercharged mini cooper days or tossing in stuff from previous versions of the LSx? What is the maximum blower efficiency RPM of the 1900?

As you can see I just joined this month so I know nothing. (If you believe that, I have a nice bridge to sell you in Iraq). (Followed by on-liner from resume.) I am one of the original posters on this board from over 10 years ago and have owned LSx motors since inception. They weren't even making anything after-market for these motors yet. Too bad I moved so I don't have access to my old email and have no idea what that password was.

Tony, can you break out some pictures from back in the day of el es Juan?

ubervette
01-04-2009, 12:55 PM
so it's rice to yield more power now? Yikes, I'm going to sell my V for a bicycle.

It's totally a ricer trick. Ever been to the track and watch them pull off this engineering feat? :D

deedubb
01-04-2009, 01:00 PM
Isn't the same concept behind a CAI? To lower the temps of air going into the engine? I'm not saying its a high horsepower additive, but probably offers more than racing stickers do.

ubervette
01-04-2009, 02:41 PM
Isn't the same concept behind a CAI? To lower the temps of air going into the engine? I'm not saying its a high horsepower additive, but probably offers more than racing stickers do.

Rice or redneck it up however you want I guess. It's good for a laugh, no matter how much power you think it adds. Next we'll be adding the weed blower to the intake again.

deedubb
01-04-2009, 02:43 PM
Rice or redneck it up however you want I guess. It's good for a laugh, no matter how much power you think it adds. Next we'll be adding the weed blower to the intake again.

No. The intake tornado works well enough.

raven154
01-04-2009, 04:50 PM
Personally if you think spraying the intercooler is rice than your stupid. On the street yeah thats rice but on the track on a hot day, the spray can net a lot of extra hp whether you believe it does or not. All its doing is making the intercooler more efficient. Whats so rice or redneck about that? Why do race cars ice there intercoolers? Why do they ice the fuel? Because they think it looks cool? I suppose you think all power adders are rice? I guess nitrous is rice and my cold air intake is redneck because all the fast and the furious cars have it too?

Norm '88 GT
01-04-2009, 05:17 PM
With air-to-air intercoolers the superficial spray would work great. Spraying air-to-water would have much less effect. But better to ice the holding tank.

GM must be testing twin turbo setup and he had a mental slipped up. :)

Since there is only a few hp gain with filter and intake assembly it looks like the pressure ratio is about 1.6 which puts it in the heart of the map. Add 3 psi and the most effiecient area is off the peak with a 1.8. You'll see more torque but not much hp gain during longer full throttle runs when the intercooler fluid heats up.

raven154
01-04-2009, 05:25 PM
With air-to-air intercoolers the superficial spray would work great. Spraying air-to-water would have much less effect. But better to ice the holding tank.

Thats what I was getting at. Centrifugal blowers or turbos have an air to air intercooler were the spray would be beneficial. A roots type that uses an air to water type would need the ice. Both can benefit from the cooler charge.

ubervette
01-04-2009, 07:36 PM
Personally if you think spraying the intercooler is rice than your stupid. On the street yeah thats rice but on the track on a hot day, the spray can net a lot of extra hp whether you believe it does or not. All its doing is making the intercooler more efficient. Whats so rice or redneck about that? Why do race cars ice there intercoolers? Why do they ice the fuel? Because they think it looks cool? I suppose you think all power adders are rice? I guess nitrous is rice and my cold air intake is redneck because all the fast and the furious cars have it too?

Yeah, keep believing you look cool having your half retarded friend run up there to the starting line with his drawers near his ankles spraying NAWS on your FMIC. When he smiles you can see his fake gold fronts too. There are a lot better ways to make power than looking like you're on welfare. And you differentiating between using it on the street and the track to justify one as being rice yet the other as some kinda 'sweet setup' is downright laughable.
In this scientific method of tuning by blasting NAWS to cool the FMIC, how much and for how long netting how much power?
There IS a difference between making good power while building a good setup vs retards, rednecks, and rice that drift up to the line, shoot NAWS out into the atmosphere, flash a g-unit sign and yell "yeah yeah." So to answer your question , no, not all power adders are rice. If you can't get past that then end of discussion. There is no help for you.

ubervette
01-04-2009, 07:39 PM
Thats what I was getting at. Centrifugal blowers or turbos have an air to air intercooler were the spray would be beneficial. A roots type that uses an air to water type would need the ice. Both can benefit from the cooler charge.

So say it than and don't wait for Norm to help. :D I thought you wanted to spray down a air to water IC??

I think the next gen of this will be to rig up a car wash type scaffold that sprays NAWS all up in the IC, hanging out in front of the car like, yeah, in the shape of a carrot. The driver could hit the button, have 10 bottles open up on his rigged up scaffolding rack while chasing the carrot all the way down the 1/4.

2c5s
01-04-2009, 07:50 PM
Yeah, keep believing you look cool having your half retarded friend run up there to the starting line .....

Is there such a thing as half retarded?? Like kinda being pregnant.

Your writing style sounds familiar.....

raven154
01-04-2009, 08:20 PM
They do have a spray bar that mounts to the front of the intercooler that spays CO2 on the front of the intercooler. It looks very tasteful and is not at all rice. However you do see it more often on ricers as they are the prominent turbo market. On a track car it is a sweet setup because you dont have to worry about heat soaking the intercooler. I would never go out and spray the intercooler with a bottle of NO2 whether it is a street car or a race car. That dose look very stupid.

But as I said on a hot summer day yeah heat soak is an issue, the CO2 charge on an air to air intercooler can net a substantial amount of hp.

verbs
01-07-2009, 04:21 PM
Yeah, keep believing you look cool having your half retarded friend run up there to the starting line with his drawers near his ankles spraying NAWS on your FMIC. When he smiles you can see his fake gold fronts too. There are a lot better ways to make power than looking like you're on welfare. And you differentiating between using it on the street and the track to justify one as being rice yet the other as some kinda 'sweet setup' is downright laughable.
In this scientific method of tuning by blasting NAWS to cool the FMIC, how much and for how long netting how much power?
There IS a difference between making good power while building a good setup vs retards, rednecks, and rice that drift up to the line, shoot NAWS out into the atmosphere, flash a g-unit sign and yell "yeah yeah." So to answer your question , no, not all power adders are rice. If you can't get past that then end of discussion. There is no help for you.

I'd just like to say from a long time racer that you're clueless.

ubervette
01-09-2009, 07:25 PM
I'd just like to say from a long time racer that you're clueless.

Easy there Jethro, lest we drop the verbal BS and you step to only to get crushed by my time slips. :gtfo:

V-seriesTech
01-14-2009, 08:02 PM
Is there such a thing as half retarded?? Like kinda being pregnant.

Your writing style sounds familiar.....



Yo pimpin...I see as always,....drama in the LAC forums.

lol.

wait4me..great OP man. Great info.

idoitforv
01-14-2009, 08:36 PM
Yo pimpin...I see as always,....drama in the LAC forums.

lol.

wait4me..great OP man. Great info.

Man you said it best. Why dont all of the other people posting useless info create your own post call it "I like to waste my and your time... alot" and let wait4me give real info to the people who want it, otherwise stop :hijack:

2c5s
01-15-2009, 08:41 AM
Yo pimpin...I see as always,....drama in the LAC forums.

lol.

wait4me..great OP man. Great info.


:pimp::chug:

jmilz28
02-26-2009, 03:58 PM
So if one wanted to put an LSA in an f-bod, LPE has handled the reluctor and harness conversion issues - and others are coming. Wet sump makes it easier for us too.

Only issue left I can see is intake/TB. Obviously, with the TB angle, you'd have to do some intake tract fabbing, but with some good silicone tubing and LSA airbox, or maybe an LT1 lid, it looks do-able. Would it be easier/more viable to use the DBW TB and just use a DBW gas pedal or to fab up a linkage for a cable actuated TB?

FreddyG
03-11-2009, 01:59 PM
Sorry, Norm, I should be more specific. When I speak of boost increase, I am speaking of density ratio increase (not pressure ratio increase).

So yes, if you increase pressure ratio, but adiabatic efficiency of the blower increases temperature to such an extent that density ratio drops, your will not make more power (less power if additional power to drive blower is not made up for by increased power).

To complicate it more, you also have to factor in the efficiency of the intercooler (if so equiped). More boost will always mean more heat (unless blower is changed). Intercoolers also create a pressure drop across the heat exchanger. Getting the correct 'balance' of pressure drop to temperature drop requires effort to do correctly.

If you want to make it real simple, spray face of the ICHE (intercooler heat exchanger) with nitrous when under boost. Density ratio will increase and power will go up. No other changes required.

Speed limits for superchargers are usually dictated by rpm limits of componants more so than compressor stall (like a turbocharger). Also, adiabatic efficiency of the blower will start to fall off as blower speed increases. Which leads to....another reason for the 2300 blower on the LS9 vs. the 1900 blower on the LSA. Running a higher boost level with the 2300 requires less rpm (and better adiabatic efficiency) than the same boost level with the 1900. Both are 6.2L engines, but differences are what was deemed neccesary to go from 556hp to 638hp and maintain required durability for 5 year 100k warranty.

Is that why a blower car will make more power with the decreased outside temperatures?

Kaptain Kirk
03-11-2009, 08:28 PM
Yeah, keep believing you look cool having your half retarded friend run up there to the starting line with his drawers near his ankles spraying NAWS on your FMIC. When he smiles you can see his fake gold fronts too. There are a lot better ways to make power than looking like you're on welfare. And you differentiating between using it on the street and the track to justify one as being rice yet the other as some kinda 'sweet setup' is downright laughable.
In this scientific method of tuning by blasting NAWS to cool the FMIC, how much and for how long netting how much power?
There IS a difference between making good power while building a good setup vs retards, rednecks, and rice that drift up to the line, shoot NAWS out into the atmosphere, flash a g-unit sign and yell "yeah yeah." So to answer your question , no, not all power adders are rice. If you can't get past that then end of discussion. There is no help for you.


Just stop talking. Please.