Whipple kit for a vette inside
02-20-2008, 04:25 PM
#21
9 Second Club
They normally bolt it to an engine sitting at 200degF + ?? with no privision for decent intercooling.
Remotely mounted can use a proper intercooler.
TBH, I know which one Id prefer.
Remotely mounted can use a proper intercooler.
TBH, I know which one Id prefer.
02-20-2008, 05:14 PM
#23
I have a little more flexibility on the mount - it will be 3-4" farther forward, and I'll do a 2-sheet SS heatshield above the header (which is ceramic coated and will help a bit). I'm not sure how that takes away the advantage of the twinscrew... with the FMIC and alky I should be in good shape.
You probably wouldn't choose to couple your supercharger to a red-hot exhaust source either. Oh wait, that's a turbo...
I agree it is not optimal but performance design is always full of compromises, and packaging is high on the list of the drivers.
Jim
You probably wouldn't choose to couple your supercharger to a red-hot exhaust source either. Oh wait, that's a turbo...
I agree it is not optimal but performance design is always full of compromises, and packaging is high on the list of the drivers.
Jim
Last edited by DeltaT; 02-20-2008 at 05:20 PM.
02-20-2008, 07:51 PM
#27
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's clear up a bit of ignorance here, as there seems to be a bit of it.
Bypass valves really are not critical at all to a blower's operation. I think it is a very beneficial component, and should be utilized if at all possible. But if you are looking for the advantages of a PD blower, and cannot feasibly include one, it isn't like you'll go bankrupt overnight without the 2-4mpg it gives you. Just ask the thousands of people running around with the traditional PD blown SBC (I'm one of them).
Haha, and true to. I believe all of Whipples new blowers come standard with an integrated bypass valve. Is it enough for a 434" LSX? Honestly, I doubt it. But neither is 1 Whipple when you can have 2 
I'll bite. It's cheaper, lighter, and more reliable than fabricating a new intake manifold. It also avoids getting direct heat soak from the engine, which is by far worse than just being near something hot. As others stated, it also allows the use of a A:A intercooler, or a much more efficient A:W intercooler. I think there are plenty of advantages personally. And I really don't see too many drawbacks, besides the outlet not being that smooth, and the under-hood space it takes up (Imagine doing plugs on that).
I'll agree, and I'm not sure why it sounds like that. The KB's, and every Whipple I've heard prior to this one all sound relatively the same, and almost as good as Paris Hilton in bed. Maybe this is one of the new 3400s?
True, but they are talking bypass valves, very different than a BOV.
Jim, I'm pretty sure the "stock" throttle body is probably gutted, and the one at the blower inlet is the functional piece. This also makes financial sense to do, just rip out the throttle blade and unplug it rather than making the adapter.
So that when he lines up to you, he can kick your a$$. And I wouldn't doubt it with a 3.4l Whipple underhood.
I'm not sure I'd want to pay you to do anything if you believe this. First of all, direct heat soak is by far worse than indirect from air. So where it is at is actually better in that case. Next, once moving, the engine bay has a significant amount of airflow though it stock. Add a hood vent, and it'd be remarkably cooler than where a KB sits. Lastly, does the heat soak eally make that much of a difference? Also remember you are fitting this with the possibility of a very efficient intercooler. So while it might run warmer, you have a great intercooler right there. Next, don't the Vettes have heat shields stock? Add some coated long tubes, wrap them, and if you are still paranoid, build a few heat shields. I think this should be the least of the concerns/dissadvantages.
A) Not really, actually, read the paragraph above this. Place your hand 4" from your stovetop, then put your hand on the stovetop. Get back to me when you get out of ICU.
B) How so? It does not affect any advantage of a PD blower, except that you're adding charge volume, but I doubt that will make very much of a difference.
Except this time making that same wheel run more efficient.
So that when he lines up to you, he can kick your a$$. And I wouldn't doubt it with a 3.4l Whipple underhood.
B) How so? It does not affect any advantage of a PD blower, except that you're adding charge volume, but I doubt that will make very much of a difference.
Except this time making that same wheel run more efficient.
02-20-2008, 08:34 PM
#28
I keep the stock hood so I don't attract attention. Everything for me needs to stay below that. The current T-trim fits and runs great, but I'm thinking about making new brackets and changing to a 3.3 Whipple through the same Bell FMIC. What a torque curve and a solid top end! Alky going on too.
Jim
Jim
02-21-2008, 02:08 AM
#30
FieroZ34, some good points there mate!
one of the big problesm with the KB on the vette is you cant run a decent sized chargecooler. the ford guys get it better. RJW on here once wrote that on his maggy setup up after a few hard pulls on the dyno the intake tmeps would be though the roof, but the resavour for the a2w would only just be warm! this is why he spent soo much time and effort coming up with a new idea that worked soo much better.
now on this setup all those problems have gone as you can run A2A if you want. or you could run a decent sized and efficent A2W setup which would bypass all the bad points.
also worth noting that this more remote mounting is what was used on the R53 mini.
cheers
Chris.
one of the big problesm with the KB on the vette is you cant run a decent sized chargecooler. the ford guys get it better. RJW on here once wrote that on his maggy setup up after a few hard pulls on the dyno the intake tmeps would be though the roof, but the resavour for the a2w would only just be warm! this is why he spent soo much time and effort coming up with a new idea that worked soo much better.
now on this setup all those problems have gone as you can run A2A if you want. or you could run a decent sized and efficent A2W setup which would bypass all the bad points.
also worth noting that this more remote mounting is what was used on the R53 mini.
cheers
Chris.
02-21-2008, 02:08 AM
#31
I have seen the kit many times in person. Peter has designed the kit well. The big advantage to mounting the unit like that is that it can have an effecient cooler. On Peter's test car, he has a nice A2W intercooler installed.
Keith
Keith
Last edited by ls1290; 02-21-2008 at 05:08 AM.
02-21-2008, 02:22 AM
#32
FormerVendor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: "Sin City" Las Vegas
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without spending an hour responding to your post, unfortunately almost EVERY single bit of information you posted is incorrect. I mean no disrespect, because I can see that where you live you are probably affiliated in some way with them.
But having 100000% first hand experience in testing/R&D'ing PD blowers on corvettes, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty, that the information you provided is VERY far stretched.
Again, I mean no disrespect, and would love to sit down and discuss our differences in opinions, but I have dealt with EVERY single scenario you have discussed, as well as pressure tested, heat tested, noise tested, and efficiency tested EVERYone of those configurations, and not ONE of them was better than the traditional configuration. (I stand corrected, with a large enough air/air I/C, the recovery times were faster.. Oh yea, and the fact that you get to keep your stock hood)
But having 100000% first hand experience in testing/R&D'ing PD blowers on corvettes, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty, that the information you provided is VERY far stretched.
Again, I mean no disrespect, and would love to sit down and discuss our differences in opinions, but I have dealt with EVERY single scenario you have discussed, as well as pressure tested, heat tested, noise tested, and efficiency tested EVERYone of those configurations, and not ONE of them was better than the traditional configuration. (I stand corrected, with a large enough air/air I/C, the recovery times were faster.. Oh yea, and the fact that you get to keep your stock hood)
Let's clear up a bit of ignorance here, as there seems to be a bit of it.
Bypass valves really are not critical at all to a blower's operation. I think it is a very beneficial component, and should be utilized if at all possible. But if you are looking for the advantages of a PD blower, and cannot feasibly include one, it isn't like you'll go bankrupt overnight without the 2-4mpg it gives you. Just ask the thousands of people running around with the traditional PD blown SBC (I'm one of them).
Haha, and true to. I believe all of Whipples new blowers come standard with an integrated bypass valve. Is it enough for a 434" LSX? Honestly, I doubt it. But neither is 1 Whipple when you can have 2
I'll bite. It's cheaper, lighter, and more reliable than fabricating a new intake manifold. It also avoids getting direct heat soak from the engine, which is by far worse than just being near something hot. As others stated, it also allows the use of a A:A intercooler, or a much more efficient A:W intercooler. I think there are plenty of advantages personally. And I really don't see too many drawbacks, besides the outlet not being that smooth, and the under-hood space it takes up (Imagine doing plugs on that).
I'll agree, and I'm not sure why it sounds like that. The KB's, and every Whipple I've heard prior to this one all sound relatively the same, and almost as good as Paris Hilton in bed. Maybe this is one of the new 3400s?
True, but they are talking bypass valves, very different than a BOV.
Jim, I'm pretty sure the "stock" throttle body is probably gutted, and the one at the blower inlet is the functional piece. This also makes financial sense to do, just rip out the throttle blade and unplug it rather than making the adapter.
So that when he lines up to you, he can kick your a$$. And I wouldn't doubt it with a 3.4l Whipple underhood.
I'm not sure I'd want to pay you to do anything if you believe this. First of all, direct heat soak is by far worse than indirect from air. So where it is at is actually better in that case. Next, once moving, the engine bay has a significant amount of airflow though it stock. Add a hood vent, and it'd be remarkably cooler than where a KB sits. Lastly, does the heat soak eally make that much of a difference? Also remember you are fitting this with the possibility of a very efficient intercooler. So while it might run warmer, you have a great intercooler right there. Next, don't the Vettes have heat shields stock? Add some coated long tubes, wrap them, and if you are still paranoid, build a few heat shields. I think this should be the least of the concerns/dissadvantages.
A) Not really, actually, read the paragraph above this. Place your hand 4" from your stovetop, then put your hand on the stovetop. Get back to me when you get out of ICU.
B) How so? It does not affect any advantage of a PD blower, except that you're adding charge volume, but I doubt that will make very much of a difference.
Except this time making that same wheel run more efficient.
Bypass valves really are not critical at all to a blower's operation. I think it is a very beneficial component, and should be utilized if at all possible. But if you are looking for the advantages of a PD blower, and cannot feasibly include one, it isn't like you'll go bankrupt overnight without the 2-4mpg it gives you. Just ask the thousands of people running around with the traditional PD blown SBC (I'm one of them).
Haha, and true to. I believe all of Whipples new blowers come standard with an integrated bypass valve. Is it enough for a 434" LSX? Honestly, I doubt it. But neither is 1 Whipple when you can have 2
I'll bite. It's cheaper, lighter, and more reliable than fabricating a new intake manifold. It also avoids getting direct heat soak from the engine, which is by far worse than just being near something hot. As others stated, it also allows the use of a A:A intercooler, or a much more efficient A:W intercooler. I think there are plenty of advantages personally. And I really don't see too many drawbacks, besides the outlet not being that smooth, and the under-hood space it takes up (Imagine doing plugs on that).
I'll agree, and I'm not sure why it sounds like that. The KB's, and every Whipple I've heard prior to this one all sound relatively the same, and almost as good as Paris Hilton in bed. Maybe this is one of the new 3400s?
True, but they are talking bypass valves, very different than a BOV.
Jim, I'm pretty sure the "stock" throttle body is probably gutted, and the one at the blower inlet is the functional piece. This also makes financial sense to do, just rip out the throttle blade and unplug it rather than making the adapter.
So that when he lines up to you, he can kick your a$$. And I wouldn't doubt it with a 3.4l Whipple underhood.
I'm not sure I'd want to pay you to do anything if you believe this. First of all, direct heat soak is by far worse than indirect from air. So where it is at is actually better in that case. Next, once moving, the engine bay has a significant amount of airflow though it stock. Add a hood vent, and it'd be remarkably cooler than where a KB sits. Lastly, does the heat soak eally make that much of a difference? Also remember you are fitting this with the possibility of a very efficient intercooler. So while it might run warmer, you have a great intercooler right there. Next, don't the Vettes have heat shields stock? Add some coated long tubes, wrap them, and if you are still paranoid, build a few heat shields. I think this should be the least of the concerns/dissadvantages.
A) Not really, actually, read the paragraph above this. Place your hand 4" from your stovetop, then put your hand on the stovetop. Get back to me when you get out of ICU.
B) How so? It does not affect any advantage of a PD blower, except that you're adding charge volume, but I doubt that will make very much of a difference.
Except this time making that same wheel run more efficient.
02-21-2008, 12:24 PM
#33
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without spending an hour responding to your post, unfortunately almost EVERY single bit of information you posted is incorrect. I mean no disrespect, because I can see that where you live you are probably affiliated in some way with them.
But having 100000% first hand experience in testing/R&D'ing PD blowers on corvettes, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty, that the information you provided is VERY far stretched.
Again, I mean no disrespect, and would love to sit down and discuss our differences in opinions, but I have dealt with EVERY single scenario you have discussed, as well as pressure tested, heat tested, noise tested, and efficiency tested EVERYone of those configurations, and not ONE of them was better than the traditional configuration. (I stand corrected, with a large enough air/air I/C, the recovery times were faster.. Oh yea, and the fact that you get to keep your stock hood)
But having 100000% first hand experience in testing/R&D'ing PD blowers on corvettes, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty, that the information you provided is VERY far stretched.
Again, I mean no disrespect, and would love to sit down and discuss our differences in opinions, but I have dealt with EVERY single scenario you have discussed, as well as pressure tested, heat tested, noise tested, and efficiency tested EVERYone of those configurations, and not ONE of them was better than the traditional configuration. (I stand corrected, with a large enough air/air I/C, the recovery times were faster.. Oh yea, and the fact that you get to keep your stock hood)
I'm not sure you can argue with most of my points, it's very common sense stuff. As for the intercooling, it's common knowledge that despite being A:W, the traditional sandwich intercoolers are not very efficient at all. They have a very low internal surface area, and virtually no airflow. Whereas an external A:W has much more internal and external surface area, so it not only radiates heat to the water, it also radiates heat to the air that flows by it.
03-04-2008, 07:48 PM
#34
Bypass valves really are not critical at all to a blower's operation. I think it is a very beneficial component, and should be utilized if at all possible. But if you are looking for the advantages of a PD blower, and cannot feasibly include one, it isn't like you'll go bankrupt overnight without the 2-4mpg it gives you. Just ask the thousands of people running around with the traditional PD blown SBC (I'm one of them).
Jim: You need a bypass on this for sure if you are going to set it up through an A2A intercooler with the throttle past the output of the FMIC. When you close the throttle on this baby at 6200rpm, it will keep pumping air and needs someplace to dump it - so the bypass needs to be large and setup for dumping right back into filtered air supply before the Whipple.
Haha, and true to. I believe all of Whipples new blowers come standard with an integrated bypass valve. Is it enough for a 434" LSX? Honestly, I doubt it. But neither is 1 Whipple when you can have 2
Jim: No, they have no built-in bypass in the W200AX.
I'll bite. It's cheaper, lighter, and more reliable than fabricating a new intake manifold. It also avoids getting direct heat soak from the engine, which is by far worse than just being near something hot. As others stated, it also allows the use of a A:A intercooler, or a much more efficient A:W intercooler. I think there are plenty of advantages personally. And I really don't see too many drawbacks, besides the outlet not being that smooth, and the under-hood space it takes up (Imagine doing plugs on that).
Jim: If you do a virtual blow-through system, like mine or the Dragon system shown in the pictures, you need to plan for A) Either the FMIC needs to be strengthened to handle vacuum as well as pressure (cycling can make the end tanks work harden and crack) or B) Design some valving to prevent the FMIC from seeing vacuum. I chose B and am designing a 2-bypass system.
I'll agree, and I'm not sure why it sounds like that. The KB's, and every Whipple I've heard prior to this one all sound relatively the same, and almost as good as Paris Hilton in bed. Maybe this is one of the new 3400s?
Jim: From what I can tell, the W200AX and W210AX are the same guts but a slightly different housing, similar to the KB 'S' (Standard pressure ratio) and 'H' series (Hi-pressure ratio) blower options:
All they do is keep the charge contained slightly longer with a case machining option, which yields a higher internal pressure ratio and is supposed to be more efficient on hi-boost systems. I picked the W200AX because I only plan to run 12-15# depending on the conditions and gas quality. This housing change also explains why the Mustang guys call theirs a 3.4, because the case holds slightly more air during the compression cycle.
True, but they are talking bypass valves, very different than a BOV.
Jim, I'm pretty sure the "stock" throttle body is probably gutted, and the one at the blower inlet is the functional piece. This also makes financial sense to do, just rip out the throttle blade and unplug it rather than making the adapter.
Jim: In this case there are actually 2 throttles - the regular one at the motor and one before the blower. They did this mostly for safety and liability - if any piping blew off and the engine throttle was 'gutted', the motor would be instantly WOT. Bad news. Also the 2nd throttle on the blower keeps the noise way down when not boosting. I need to set up an e-Throttle before the blower too.
So that when he lines up to you, he can kick your a$$. And I wouldn't doubt it with a 3.4l Whipple underhood.
I'm not sure I'd want to pay you to do anything if you believe this. First of all, direct heat soak is by far worse than indirect from air. So where it is at is actually better in that case. Next, once moving, the engine bay has a significant amount of airflow though it stock. Add a hood vent, and it'd be remarkably cooler than where a KB sits. Lastly, does the heat soak eally make that much of a difference? Also remember you are fitting this with the possibility of a very efficient intercooler. So while it might run warmer, you have a great intercooler right there. Next, don't the Vettes have heat shields stock? Add some coated long tubes, wrap them, and if you are still paranoid, build a few heat shields. I think this should be the least of the concerns/dissadvantages.
Jim: I pretty much agree here. Shielding should work fine - it's not as bad as some people think.
All the rest is me:
Anyways, pulled the trigger a week ago Monday on the Whipple, black, with a 3.5" pulley to start (I have a 7", 8-rib crank pulley) and a direct drive setup to mount the pulley on the blower.
I'll need to fab up new brackets and make an e-throttle to choke off the blower when I'm not using it. If it gets no air it is virtually out of the circuit in normal driving.
More to follow - it should be here late next week.
Jim
03-04-2008, 09:05 PM
#35
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim: You need a bypass on this for sure if you are going to set it up through an A2A intercooler with the throttle past the output of the FMIC. When you close the throttle on this baby at 6200rpm, it will keep pumping air and needs someplace to dump it - so the bypass needs to be large and setup for dumping right back into filtered air supply before the Whipple.
http://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/...sp?ProdID=1210
Secondly, by design most superchargers should not be setup like you are saying. Since lag and throttle response are such non-issues on superchargers, as they flow enough air to build boost at any rpm, there is no point in putting the throttle blade after the blower. Thus you put it before the blower, and then a blowoff valve of which you are describing would be functionally useless. However a bypass valve, as I described above, would still be useful. But necessary, not.
Jim: No, they have no built-in bypass in the W200AX.
Jim: If you do a virtual blow-through system, like mine or the Dragon system shown in the pictures, you need to plan for A) Either the FMIC needs to be strengthened to handle vacuum as well as pressure (cycling can make the end tanks work harden and crack) or B) Design some valving to prevent the FMIC from seeing vacuum. I chose B and am designing a 2-bypass system.
Jim: In this case there are actually 2 throttles - the regular one at the motor and one before the blower. They did this mostly for safety and liability - if any piping blew off and the engine throttle was 'gutted', the motor would be instantly WOT. Bad news. Also the 2nd throttle on the blower keeps the noise way down when not boosting. I need to set up an e-Throttle before the blower too.
03-04-2008, 09:55 PM
#36
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CANADA!
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add.... I e-mailed the company. About all they could say is that both of the throttle bodies are fully functional and apparently gives a more crisp throttle response? Thats all they told me.
03-04-2008, 10:03 PM
#37
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It makes sense, it just seems redundant to worry about throttle response on a Whipplecharged LSX. The thing is going to have boost the second you touch the throttle anyways. Now why they would still use the pre-blower throttle body is confusing, as there would be no use for it. It would not alleviate the need (Well, usefulness) of a BOV, as there would still be pressure in between the compressor and the second TB upon throttle closing.
Weird.
Weird.
03-05-2008, 01:57 PM
#39
Jim, you do know what a bypass valve is correct? Because by your writing, it is quite evident that you do not. You are confusing it with a blowoff valve. A bypass valve has a very different function, and it does not function as a method of pressure relief or control. A bypass valve is in a pipe between the blower inlet and outlet. At idle and partial throttle conditions, the valve is open, and the engine pulls air through the pipe, effectively bypassing the blower. Otherwise the blower spins, compresses this small amount of air, then dumps it into the engine. But with the engine demands at low/part throttle, it does not build boost, just wastes the power you spent spinning the blower. So they bypass the blower, allowing for near N/A like gas mileage. It has absolutely nothing to do with pressure relief.
BTW, here's my current setup with a Mondo Bypass Valve. Since I've never used a BOV in my life, and I fabricated all this stuff up to work together (632rwhp at 11.7#), I figure I know what a Bypass valve is for. Imagine this same approximate layout with a Whipple 3.3 in place of the Vortech:
Secondly, by design most superchargers should not be setup like you are saying. Since lag and throttle response are such non-issues on superchargers, as they flow enough air to build boost at any rpm, there is no point in putting the throttle blade after the blower. Thus you put it before the blower, and then a blowoff valve of which you are describing would be functionally useless. However a bypass valve, as I described above, would still be useful. But necessary, not.
http://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/...dimensions.pdf
They chop the drawing a bit for security reasons, but they did send me the .pdf - PM me if you'd like it. As you can see, there is no built-in bypass.
I highly doubt this, but I'll entertain it. Let's imagine it's setup like I think, gutting the second housing. And a charge pipe blows off. The engine is receiving an unregulated amount of airflow. The engine will be fine, as the MAF sensor will still have accurate readings because of its location. However the PCM thinks the throttle is closed, via the electronic throttle control. Now what it will do with timing/fueling here I don't know, but I'd imagine GM would have it cut fuel pretty quickly, if the throttle blade read closed and the MAF sensor was reading WOT airflow and the engine was climbing RPMs that quickly.
DRAGON RACE ENGINEERING FAQ: What is the purpose of two throttle bodies and how does that work?
The system utilizes two throttle bodies for a couple of reasons: Safety and Drivability. By utilizing a throttle body in front of the manifold in the factory location idle characteristics, plenum airflow dynamics, throttle response, etc stay near stock so that the vehicle does not become laborious or difficult to drive. The nature of the side mounted positive displacement blower means that the equivalent plenum volume associated with the pluming, intercooler, intake, and manifold make airflow dynamics very difficult to control. Port fuel injection makes it possible to run the supercharger with a huge plenum volume effectively but throttle response especially on an electronically controlled throttle vehicle becomes spongy and noticeably slower to respond. In testing we found that without the manifold throttle body the car was noticeably different to drive and lacked the inherent safety factors of having a throttle body in front of the manifold. Without a throttle body connected to the manifold any blown hose or hose coupler can result in the car going to uncontrolled wide open throttle. Obviously we weren't comfortable with a product that had that kind of potential hazard. While the system should not ever blow any couplers off the pipes the nature of mail order systems means we cannot control the proper installation of all hoses and couplers. The factory location throttle body was deemed necessary and easier to deal with.
This of course begs the question; Why the second throttle body in front of the supercharger? While this throttle body is not entirely necessary (base $6500 kit does not include it), it does provide several drivability enhancements. By shutting down airflow in front of the supercharger the entire supercharger effectively goes to vacuum, and when coupled with the recirculation valve from the pressure side of the blower, results in very quiet and near loss-less drive on the supercharger. This means the supercharger is nearly inaudible at high vacuum cruising conditions and does not significantly affect power or fuel economy. It takes only ~1-3HP to idle/cruise the supercharger.
The sequential throttle bodies are controlled wit Dragon's own proprietary electronics and wired into the factory harness.
The base system doesn't have a throttle body in front of the blower, how does that affect the performance?
There is no performance detriment or advantage to having the second throttle body in front of the blower. The nature of the positive displacement blower is relatively simple...its going to move X amount of air per revolution and changes to outlet design, intercooled or non intercooled, etc is nearly irrelevant. By having the inlet of the supercharger open to the filter only with no potential for vacuum means noise will be generated by the supercharger compressing the air constantly although this is much quieter at idle. However, the system is significantly louder than a system with a throttle body in front of the blower and is audible at all times. The blower will run just as cool if not cooler but the fact is everybody will hear you coming and going. This is the recommended setup for those that wish to race the car and the sound of the blower at idle or cruise is almost irrelevant. In race setups this also allows the inlet to be much larger rather than being restricted to the maximum 90mm of the electronic throttle body.
IMO you need to let go of some of the traditional layout rules and thinking are envision what I am trying to do here. My priorities are in this order:
1) Safety
2) Reliability
3) Stealth (noise, retain flat stock hood, etc.)
4) Performace
5) Ability to run pump gas with methanol injection
My Whipple will be here next Tuesday and I'll start fabricating brackets to mount it off to the side of my new 434. I'm looking at using 2 Bypass valves - one prior to the IC and the Mondo in the current position but dumping back prior to the e-Air Door I need to fab.
Jim
My Site: http://home.mindspring.com/~jim_fisk/id1.html
03-05-2008, 04:45 PM
#40
9 Second Club
I guess if you want to be really pedantic about it, a Mondo isnt a bypass, but a BOV. As the air doesnt actually bypass the blower. It goes thru it, then gets dumped.