I'm trying to find a pic where it shows the rotors. it is infact a twinscrew, screw type supercharger, where they compress the air. the e-force is based on the new Eaton TVS rotors, so its a roots type, where it just moves the air from one place to anothoer, no compression.

never said ur unit was a bad unit. I was happy when LM speed came out with the maggie for the f-bodies, but when its nearly maxed out from the get go. theres not much room to grow. not saying that 600ish whp isnt alot lol. but there are some people who'd want more.

I can c the whipple 2.9L fit under the hood and cowl of an f-body. if dragon managed to fit a massive 3.3 which is significantly bigger in size compared to the 2.9L, and all they used was a 3/4" spacer, the 2.9L should be easier. as it doesnt have all the pullies in the back like the maggie's. I dont c the install being to much more then the current maggie kits.

really its just about ones options. the more options the better.

 

The roots blowers do make compression. If there wasn't compression, there wouldn't be boost. And as I just stated in an earlier post, I have room to grow. My IATs aren't too bad considering the power I'm making.

It's not the pullies that are the issue, the whipple has it's gears as well, but the cowl is the issue and overall engine placement and the cab forward design.

 

I've gotta agree with joblo1978, the lines between roots and twin-screws are getting more and more blurred.



The one on the left looks to me more like a roots setup whereas the one on the right looks more like a twin screw setup.

However, Whipple's website has always had this image as it's background. Go figure.



Here's a pic of the inside of a Kenne Bell supercharger for comparison.

 

I hope they do come thru though. It will be a nice add on..

 

Between the 3 and 4 lobe rotors pictured they are both "roots". The best way to tell the difference between the two types is by looking at the profiles. On a roots the lobes are identical, but on a twin screw the way they mesh is a little different. Almost like there is a positive and a negative rotor.

The twin screws have a tighter mesh and require tighter tolerances, they are also more expensive for this reason. I personally don't believe that the twin screw design is any better, but it may be.

 

Kinda like the black and white picture of the "male" and "female" rotors? As far as Roots VS Twin Screw; I've always heard that roots was cheaper but put out a little hotter charge and was a little slower to boost and twin screw was more expensive but put out a colder charge and made instant boost. However, I read that information years ago from a website I can't remember. I've always assumed that twin screws were better even though I had no hard information to back it up. I guess that shows my ignorance.

 

Screws compress inside the case. Roots compress in the intake.

 

both of those r roots blowers. one is old technology and one is the newer tvs, new newer tvs stuff is crazy good. they put alot of work. its way more efficient then the previous generation roots they had.

I agree the image on the right looks more and more like a twin-screw design.

both roots and twin screws have instant boost, but twinscrews hold boost all they way through. where as roots have tendencies of dying towards the top.

 

So, to clarify, who makes twinscrews and who makes roots?

 

Do you consider this dying at the top?



I don't. Matter of fact it looks like mine makes the most boost around 6200, supposedly where all this heatsoak is supposed to begin.

My powerband is just like stock....just alot higher. Compare the curve of any twinscrew setup to mine and you won't see much difference if any at all.

 

This it true to a point. Ultimately no matter where it's compressed it's going to go into the intake and then through the heads.

Biggest difference between twin screws and roots is this...

Twin-screw, air is drawn in between the rotors and blown into the intake.

Roots, air is forcefully drawn around the outside of the rotors and pumped into the intake.

I don't think the manner in which the air is introduced into the intake is really a big concern.

Both are positive displacement superchargers and boost is boost regardless of how it is made. Boost is nothing more than an absolute measure of pressure inside of the intake.

9 lbs. is 9 lbs. at any given RPM regardles of your supercharging method or turbocharging. it's the efficiency between the methods that will always be up to debate.

 

twin screw low rpm high torque.

 

i think this thread should be taken over to svtperformace where the blower expert's live
i am not an expert on the differences between the two but i do know lots of cobra people
and well at least for them upgrading to a twin screw seems to be worth the 5-6 grand.
and i also understand that a twin screw is much more efficient then roots and twin screws make much more power per pound of boost.

 

but the problem is your running low boost with low hp #s
im sure if you were running like 12# of boost out of that blower that it would be dead at the top
im by no means trying to dog your setup, but for most people is 6# and 500hp is simply not enough especially after you have invested lots of money into a setup

 

typically an eaton blower is roots
and then your aftermarket companies like whipple and kennybell make twinscrews

 

Here's an image of a twin screw, there's a male and female rotor. If you look close, the rotors do not match, this is called asymetrical or unsymetric. This allows for better performance.

 

If you look at the graph, you'll see power fall off. Boost is based off of volumetric efficiency of the supercharger. The later roots designs do not "fall off" in VE, but they drop dramatically in AE (power and heat). Thus, boost climbs, power doesn't. Of course, there are a million variables so its far more complicated, but thats the basic info.

 

Actually, to be correct, both screw and roots trap air in the lobes. The air is trapped between the lobe tips to the housing. No PD SC traps air between rotors.

The roots only compress the air in the manifold, the twin-screw does both, internally in the housing to a pre-designed ratio and in the manifold. Because the air releases at a higher pressure, it has less backflow then a roots. Backflow takes more power and causes more heat.

Not all "boost" are equal. If measuring with a gauge, then heat/density will change the "boost" reading. Therefore, a SC with a hotter discharge temp will in fact show higher boost when compared to one that has cooler air charge. As air heats up, it expands, and when it expands, you get higher boost readings, but less O2 in the cylinder.

Perfect example, if you run a 2010 camaro SC system, 10psi of boost, no matter what SC, with an intercooler, then have an intercooler pump failure, your boost will increase 1-3psi, yet your power will go down 20-30%. The hotter air expands, gives higher boost reading, but has less O2 and makes less power.

There really isn't much discrepency in supercharger design principals. This has been proven over many years. Each have they're respective market and advantages/disadvantages. It really comes down to which one fits your particular need to make your project as successful as possible.

 

Anybody hear if this whipple tuner kit's going to be produced for the fbody still, or is it a lost cause? lol

Just wondering

 

I had an HVT2300 on a 9.0:1 408 GTO. I loved the fact the hood fit on the GTO. I loved everything about it but I could not get the 8 ribbed serpentine belts to stop slipping. I could not maintain 18 lbs of boost consistently. We finally figured that the compressor size of the 2300 was a limiting factor. Here is the 2300 in action

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTgVi...eature=related

Here is the 4.0 Whipple in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXILjvEJXTY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrHjEVLNgok

Who needs a fricken hood , oh yea, we got the HVT to 806/760 at 6300 rpm. The Whipple got to 800/800 at 4500 where the belt let loose. I saw nearly 21 lbs before we had to go to the cogs.