Extractor Hood....
03-30-2013, 10:58 AM
#41
TECH Fanatic
That's insufficient, but I really appreciate any and all input. My goal is 750+ RWHP. I have LSA heads with lightweight valves and good springs ready to top off the forged 416 CID motor. Compression ratio will be 9:1 or 9.5:1--still undecided. Transmission will be a RPM built TR6060 with close 2.66 ratio gearing, mated to my McLeod RXT clutch (1000 HP). Differential will probably be a home brewed 8.8 with 3.31 or 3.55 ratio. Cooling will be through a custom water pump and intercooler. Fuel...probably dual inline Aero 340s. I have an Extreme Composites hood ready to go, but I need to check clearances against the 3.6LC unit.
The motor and blower will be capable of exceeding 900 RWHP--but I want a safe, reliable, sustainable road racer, not a drag car. Ultimately, I want to be detuning the components, not pushing them past their ratings.
The motor and blower will be capable of exceeding 900 RWHP--but I want a safe, reliable, sustainable road racer, not a drag car. Ultimately, I want to be detuning the components, not pushing them past their ratings.
Since an engine is nothing more than an air pump, the purpose of forced induction serves to artificially increase displacement (which is why PD blowers are referred to as "A Big Block in a box"). Mark is correct that the additional cost of increasing actual displacement when using FI typically yields minimal results. FI comes in various forms as we all know, and PD blowers serve to make torque down low at the cost of over heating the charge at higher RPM's. Centripetal units (when sized appropriately) are much better suited to sustained high RPM use and do not heat the charge nearly as much. Turbo units are ideal since they do not induce parasitic losses as crank driven units do (the TVS 2300 averages a parasitic loss of about 120 HP to drive the rotors under boost), although installation requires extensive fabrication work due to our packaging constraints.
If you are going to use FI for long for sustained high RPM/boost use, it would be in your interest to build a short block where the bore/stroke allows for cylinder liners as thick as possible while keeping the ring lands from intruding in the wrist pin area.
Don't get me wrong, a 416 will make more power than a 402 all things being equal, although it's not typically what one would spend to see a difference.
Check this thread out: https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-in...rce-build.html
Spoiler alert: RWHP 724 @ 6500rpm
RWT 866 @ 3700rpm
Apologies for the thread jack...nice lookin hood!
03-30-2013, 12:16 PM
#42
DMM, couple of comments / questions:
1. If I went with a Kenne Bell, I'd pick the 3.6LC (liquid cooled) variant, which is advertised to reduce IATs by 60 degrees, and basically do something similar to your marine bilge pump setup on the cooling system to further enhance its effectiveness.
2. Regardless of whether I do an E-Force or Kenne Bell, I'd definitely be in the market for a 3/8" or 1/2" phenolic spacer, depending on available hood clearance. Have you tried one?
3. I'm pretty set on the 416 CID model, but with oil squirters. Mast Motorsports didn't have a problem with that idea, although they were dubious about how much value it would add versus the cost it'd require to implement.
4. Wouldn't the 3.6LC Kenne Bell be significantly more efficient (and therefore produce less heat) than a TVS2300 trying to push 16 lbs of boost into a 416 CID engine?
1. If I went with a Kenne Bell, I'd pick the 3.6LC (liquid cooled) variant, which is advertised to reduce IATs by 60 degrees, and basically do something similar to your marine bilge pump setup on the cooling system to further enhance its effectiveness.
2. Regardless of whether I do an E-Force or Kenne Bell, I'd definitely be in the market for a 3/8" or 1/2" phenolic spacer, depending on available hood clearance. Have you tried one?
3. I'm pretty set on the 416 CID model, but with oil squirters. Mast Motorsports didn't have a problem with that idea, although they were dubious about how much value it would add versus the cost it'd require to implement.
4. Wouldn't the 3.6LC Kenne Bell be significantly more efficient (and therefore produce less heat) than a TVS2300 trying to push 16 lbs of boost into a 416 CID engine?
