Need BOost Advice with 91 Octane, 8.5:1 & AFR225 Heads
02-10-2008, 07:55 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Need BOost Advice with 91 Octane, 8.5:1 & AFR225 Heads Folks, a long project (about 7 months long) finally came to an end. NOw I have a 3.3L whipple running on a 416cuin block.
The pistons in the car are 8.5:1
Heads are AFR225 which I think they are 72cc ( a bit larger than stock)
91 Octane gas around here in Cali
We are running 12psi. To be honest I think as powderful as it is, its not much more powerful than when I had 10:1 compression with 6psi. I am wondering if I am runnign too low of a boost?
Any advice would be appreciated. The Cams, injectors etc are all pretty good, though the tunning of the motor is still problematic.
Many thanks, Bismarck !
The pistons in the car are 8.5:1
Heads are AFR225 which I think they are 72cc ( a bit larger than stock)
91 Octane gas around here in Cali
We are running 12psi. To be honest I think as powderful as it is, its not much more powerful than when I had 10:1 compression with 6psi. I am wondering if I am runnign too low of a boost?
Any advice would be appreciated. The Cams, injectors etc are all pretty good, though the tunning of the motor is still problematic.
Many thanks, Bismarck !
Last edited by Bismarck; 02-10-2008 at 08:49 PM.
02-11-2008, 10:17 AM
#2
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you elaborate a little on your current tuning? How much tuning work has been done to optimize your new setup? Got any dyno graphs that we can take a look at?
02-11-2008, 10:29 AM
#3
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: new hudson,mi
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i would think you should be more like 15 psi but also depends on how free flowing the exhaust is.The easier the air gets through the system the less boost but u will make same power on lower boost
02-11-2008, 10:35 AM
#5
Not sure how much boost its capable of making but with the lower CR you should definelty crank it up. Thats the whole point of lower CR. With that positve displacement blower I might have aimed for a tad higher CR like 9 or so but I don't know much about them. The tune is one of the biggest factors though and you could probably get away with more timing on the lower CR but I'd defintley let that thing push some serious air and let that big boy breathe!
02-11-2008, 10:55 AM
#6
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a corsa CATBACK on the car with headers, but stock CATs and Y Pipe. I have a bad feeling I went too low on the compression ratio. I was always nervous about the 91 Octane we get out here.
The engine is basically a 416cuin, aluminum block, lunati crank, eagle rods and cermaic coated Diamond pistons. AFR heads and a Crane cam, with good lobe seperation. Thats pretty much the jist of it...
I have it fitted with the 4L80, not sure if I needed it. But the power seems to be on low side. at least for what I have in it. The builder kept saying we should had put one big turbo on it instead of the whipple but I was so happy with the radix 1.*l on the stock motor that I wanted a twin screw. Radix did not have one large enough so we went with a 3.3L whipple.
Maybe I should run more boost, the pulley is getting awefully small though. may have to go to a larger damper.
We do not have a 4 wheel dyno so cannot do a dyno chart. i know thats a bummer.
The engine is basically a 416cuin, aluminum block, lunati crank, eagle rods and cermaic coated Diamond pistons. AFR heads and a Crane cam, with good lobe seperation. Thats pretty much the jist of it...
I have it fitted with the 4L80, not sure if I needed it. But the power seems to be on low side. at least for what I have in it. The builder kept saying we should had put one big turbo on it instead of the whipple but I was so happy with the radix 1.*l on the stock motor that I wanted a twin screw. Radix did not have one large enough so we went with a 3.3L whipple.
Maybe I should run more boost, the pulley is getting awefully small though. may have to go to a larger damper.
We do not have a 4 wheel dyno so cannot do a dyno chart. i know thats a bummer.
Trending Topics
02-11-2008, 08:28 PM
#9
Need details (motor size, cam specs, exhaust specs, other) and chassis stuff. I am thinking of designing one of these onto the side of my 434 SBC and running it through my FMIC, so I'm interested in seeing your setup.
Thanks,
Jim
Thanks,
Jim
05-29-2008, 10:11 PM
#10
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, 18psi is the way to go. Found this very useful article
Almost as fast as a supercharger (or turbo) can be bolted on, the question of how much boost can be run is sure to come up. When building up a motor to be supercharged, you've got the issue of just how much compression to run. Both of these questions relate to essentially the same set of equations. Assuming that all of the other requirements of the motor are satisfied, the compression -vs- boost aspect is not all that difficult.
All things being equal, there are only three ways to make more power - increase displacement, increase cylinder pressure, or increase rpm. It is the primary responsibility of a supercharger to increase cylinder pressure, while also, to a degree, increasing the effective displacement of the engine. As the supercharger supplies the motor with a more dense air charge, it allows for the ability to burn additional fuel. By adding a supercharger, additional air should no longer be a problem, which will also help to increase rpm. Ensuring that there will be enough additional fuel to maintain the proper air to fuel ratio, as well as controlling spark timing, will be the key to getting the most from a supercharged combination.
All motors have a static compression ratio based on the components (heads, pistons, etc...) its made of. This is the amount that the air inside the cylinder is compressed. It is a ratio of the cylinder volume at BDC to the volume at TDC. When a supercharger is added, additional air is forced into the cylinder effectively raising the compression ratio. The result of this is called effective compression. The formula for finding the effective compression is very easy:
((boost psi / 14.7) + 1) x motor compression = effective compression.
The effective compression formula allows a supercharged motor to be compared to a normally aspirated motor. For the most part, a supercharged motor with the same effective compression as a (similar) normally aspirated motor with the same static compression should have about the same overall power.
This may bring up the question that if the overall power should be about the same, why go with a supercharger? The main advantage of the supercharger is that it allows for a moderate compression level during normal driving (off boost) while allowing for very high compression levels when needed. Obviously a high compression motor of about 14:1 makes a lot of power, but it would never survive daily driving. A lower compression motor is great for daily driving, but greatly reduces the potential for power. The supercharger allows for higher compression levels than could be used without a supercharger, while still offering the benefits of a standard compression motor. Many street supercharged systems will go beyond 18:1 effective compression under peak boost. Under race conditions, many supercharged race motors will go well beyond 25:1 effective compression. Both of these levels are far beyond what could be done reliably or cost effectively without a supercharger.
This brings us back to the question of just how much boost or compression can, or should be run. Obviously there can't be a simple number that could be used for every application. This is why it's so critical to chose the proper components. It's not necessary to build a low compression motor to use a supercharger, but the correct parts are still necessary. The biggest factors will be in things like head bolts (or preferably studs), gaskets, and the strength of the other engine components. It goes without saying that the incredible power that a supercharger can add, can easily start breaking things. It is very important that as the boost levels rise, the need for a stronger crank, rods, pistons, etc... becomes very critical. Many people forget this as the motor itself is relatively mild, while the supercharger pushes it well beyond the practical limits it was intended for.
Now, back to the compression issue. Anyone who has looked into supercharging has heard that you need a low (static) compression motor. This may have been true once upon a time, when roots type (positive displacement) superchargers and carburetors ruled the land, but it's not so necessary now. The problem with a low compression motor is that it relies heavily on the supercharger for its power. An 8:1 motor is definitely not going to be a power house. Sure, you can throw 18 lbs of boost on it and get some real power, but why? A higher compression motor of 9:1 or even 10:1 will have much more power without the blower. Then, with less boost you could easily have the same overall power - only it would be much more usable. Both of the motors (8:1 with 18 lbs boost and 9.5:1 with 12 lbs boost) will have almost the same effective compression and about the same peak power. The big difference will be where you see the power, and how much of a demand will be placed on the supercharger. Obviously, the 9.5:1 motor is going to have far greater torque and low end power as the boost is only starting to come in. It is also going to be much easier to find a blower to survive at only 12 lbs of boost -vs- one that would have to put out 18 lbs of boost. It is now very easy to see why a higher compression motor with lower boost is becoming so popular.
Please understand that when I say higher compression and lower boost, there are limits to each. Going over about 10:1 will make the amount of boost that is usable drop quickly to the point that the supercharger is somewhat wasted. In my opinion, anything less than 8 lbs of boost is a waste of a supercharger. Going over 10:1 will also make daily driving with pump gas much more difficult. In this same way, compression levels much under 9:1 will require substantial boost levels to make massive power gains. This would require boost levels that are very demanding of a supercharger. This is truly unnecessary. This isn't to say that the lower compression / higher boost set-up doesn't have a slightly higher potential for power, because it does. A lower compression motor has the ability to contain more volume. This can be an advantage, but is such a minor one that it's not necessarily worth the effort - unless it's for an all out race motor. Even then there are limits for the same reasons as the street / strip motor.
Once again, the compression -vs- boost issue. For a car that will see the streets (actually for most applications), the best thing to do is start with a motor compression that is high enough to make the horsepower you want for normal driving. Don't rely on your supercharger to make all your horsepower. With a good motor compression, add as much boost as is safe for your particular application. Decide on a final effective compression, and work your way back through the formula to find your maximum boost level: ((effective compression / motor compression) - 1) x 14.7 = boost. With the proper fuel system and related engine components, an effective compression of 16:1 to 18:1 should be more than workable. For heavily modified cars, effective compressions over 20:1 should be very carefully considered. Remember, even Indy cars only run about 18 Lbs of boost and reasonable static compression levels. Technology has come a long way and modern day supercharging should take full advantage of this.
While these opinions are not exactly the most popular, they are based on facts and real world performance. While there will always be those who continue with tradition and stick with what was done in the past, it is those who reach for something more that are winning races. Often times, some of the best advice can be found from those who have done what you want to do. All too often it is those who know the least that offer the most advice. After having been involved in supercharging for many years, I have heard it all. Most of it was worthless. It was often the least mentioned things and trail and error that have been the most rewarding. Hopefully this information will help to explain some of the most misunderstood aspects of supercharging.
Almost as fast as a supercharger (or turbo) can be bolted on, the question of how much boost can be run is sure to come up. When building up a motor to be supercharged, you've got the issue of just how much compression to run. Both of these questions relate to essentially the same set of equations. Assuming that all of the other requirements of the motor are satisfied, the compression -vs- boost aspect is not all that difficult.
All things being equal, there are only three ways to make more power - increase displacement, increase cylinder pressure, or increase rpm. It is the primary responsibility of a supercharger to increase cylinder pressure, while also, to a degree, increasing the effective displacement of the engine. As the supercharger supplies the motor with a more dense air charge, it allows for the ability to burn additional fuel. By adding a supercharger, additional air should no longer be a problem, which will also help to increase rpm. Ensuring that there will be enough additional fuel to maintain the proper air to fuel ratio, as well as controlling spark timing, will be the key to getting the most from a supercharged combination.
All motors have a static compression ratio based on the components (heads, pistons, etc...) its made of. This is the amount that the air inside the cylinder is compressed. It is a ratio of the cylinder volume at BDC to the volume at TDC. When a supercharger is added, additional air is forced into the cylinder effectively raising the compression ratio. The result of this is called effective compression. The formula for finding the effective compression is very easy:
((boost psi / 14.7) + 1) x motor compression = effective compression.
The effective compression formula allows a supercharged motor to be compared to a normally aspirated motor. For the most part, a supercharged motor with the same effective compression as a (similar) normally aspirated motor with the same static compression should have about the same overall power.
This may bring up the question that if the overall power should be about the same, why go with a supercharger? The main advantage of the supercharger is that it allows for a moderate compression level during normal driving (off boost) while allowing for very high compression levels when needed. Obviously a high compression motor of about 14:1 makes a lot of power, but it would never survive daily driving. A lower compression motor is great for daily driving, but greatly reduces the potential for power. The supercharger allows for higher compression levels than could be used without a supercharger, while still offering the benefits of a standard compression motor. Many street supercharged systems will go beyond 18:1 effective compression under peak boost. Under race conditions, many supercharged race motors will go well beyond 25:1 effective compression. Both of these levels are far beyond what could be done reliably or cost effectively without a supercharger.
This brings us back to the question of just how much boost or compression can, or should be run. Obviously there can't be a simple number that could be used for every application. This is why it's so critical to chose the proper components. It's not necessary to build a low compression motor to use a supercharger, but the correct parts are still necessary. The biggest factors will be in things like head bolts (or preferably studs), gaskets, and the strength of the other engine components. It goes without saying that the incredible power that a supercharger can add, can easily start breaking things. It is very important that as the boost levels rise, the need for a stronger crank, rods, pistons, etc... becomes very critical. Many people forget this as the motor itself is relatively mild, while the supercharger pushes it well beyond the practical limits it was intended for.
Now, back to the compression issue. Anyone who has looked into supercharging has heard that you need a low (static) compression motor. This may have been true once upon a time, when roots type (positive displacement) superchargers and carburetors ruled the land, but it's not so necessary now. The problem with a low compression motor is that it relies heavily on the supercharger for its power. An 8:1 motor is definitely not going to be a power house. Sure, you can throw 18 lbs of boost on it and get some real power, but why? A higher compression motor of 9:1 or even 10:1 will have much more power without the blower. Then, with less boost you could easily have the same overall power - only it would be much more usable. Both of the motors (8:1 with 18 lbs boost and 9.5:1 with 12 lbs boost) will have almost the same effective compression and about the same peak power. The big difference will be where you see the power, and how much of a demand will be placed on the supercharger. Obviously, the 9.5:1 motor is going to have far greater torque and low end power as the boost is only starting to come in. It is also going to be much easier to find a blower to survive at only 12 lbs of boost -vs- one that would have to put out 18 lbs of boost. It is now very easy to see why a higher compression motor with lower boost is becoming so popular.
Please understand that when I say higher compression and lower boost, there are limits to each. Going over about 10:1 will make the amount of boost that is usable drop quickly to the point that the supercharger is somewhat wasted. In my opinion, anything less than 8 lbs of boost is a waste of a supercharger. Going over 10:1 will also make daily driving with pump gas much more difficult. In this same way, compression levels much under 9:1 will require substantial boost levels to make massive power gains. This would require boost levels that are very demanding of a supercharger. This is truly unnecessary. This isn't to say that the lower compression / higher boost set-up doesn't have a slightly higher potential for power, because it does. A lower compression motor has the ability to contain more volume. This can be an advantage, but is such a minor one that it's not necessarily worth the effort - unless it's for an all out race motor. Even then there are limits for the same reasons as the street / strip motor.
Once again, the compression -vs- boost issue. For a car that will see the streets (actually for most applications), the best thing to do is start with a motor compression that is high enough to make the horsepower you want for normal driving. Don't rely on your supercharger to make all your horsepower. With a good motor compression, add as much boost as is safe for your particular application. Decide on a final effective compression, and work your way back through the formula to find your maximum boost level: ((effective compression / motor compression) - 1) x 14.7 = boost. With the proper fuel system and related engine components, an effective compression of 16:1 to 18:1 should be more than workable. For heavily modified cars, effective compressions over 20:1 should be very carefully considered. Remember, even Indy cars only run about 18 Lbs of boost and reasonable static compression levels. Technology has come a long way and modern day supercharging should take full advantage of this.
While these opinions are not exactly the most popular, they are based on facts and real world performance. While there will always be those who continue with tradition and stick with what was done in the past, it is those who reach for something more that are winning races. Often times, some of the best advice can be found from those who have done what you want to do. All too often it is those who know the least that offer the most advice. After having been involved in supercharging for many years, I have heard it all. Most of it was worthless. It was often the least mentioned things and trail and error that have been the most rewarding. Hopefully this information will help to explain some of the most misunderstood aspects of supercharging.
11-09-2008, 04:22 PM
#11
Teching In
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we're buliding a turbo LS1 and trying to figure out the best compresion to boost ratios. Any experiance on guides, formulas to use in determining the compression/boost ratio to run on a 91 octane daily driver would be appreciated. HP tuner at the ready to dial it in.
11-12-2008, 09:34 AM
#14
I am turbo but went 9.5 to 1. I see no problem being able to run in the 15psi to mabye 20psi range if needed with alc injection or e85. I agree with this theory even if its talking mostly about superchargers. Its nice to have the higher compression off boost just as its nice to have more displacement for off boost.Its also good to get the same power with the bigger motor or higher compression at lower boost. even though many turbos can boost literally forever in terms of psi its still better for head gaskets not not have to go skyhigh on the boost.
It might sound more macho to say you are boosting 15psi or 20psi versus 12psi but all the really matters is what actual power the vehicle puts out.
Too bad they don't have e85 everywhere.Likely we could run 10 to 1 or even higher .
It might sound more macho to say you are boosting 15psi or 20psi versus 12psi but all the really matters is what actual power the vehicle puts out.
Too bad they don't have e85 everywhere.Likely we could run 10 to 1 or even higher .
01-04-2009, 11:00 PM
#15
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, if its for all out power, then you want the lowest compression, maybe 8.0:1 with a 5.0L blower and 25psi of boost. Basically cramming as much in the combustion chamber as you can. But for street use, I am finding its way more practical to go with 9.5:1
