just a thought, do they make a supercharger for 2.3s

[Wicked_Sludge]

i fully understand what your suggesting. its not a matter of comprehension...its a matter of skepticism. there are certain factors designed to compensate for the very force your refering to (eg, crankshaft counter weights). the problem of which you suggest would occure if a 4 banger had identical counter weights to the v-6...but it doesnt. they are sized and located in order to transfer the sudden acceleration of the piston into angular momentum. this deadens any sudden acceleration to nill.

 

[AllanD]

Fastpakr is absolutely correct

a four cylinder even producing less torque tends to hammer on
the trans because the power pulses (two per revolution) are
received by the transmission as a series of hammer blows.
with a long inverse torque lag (the compression stroke for
the next cylinder in order)

a six cylinder is much smoother to the transmission than you'd
think just two extra cylinders would make it.

The power pulses (starting every 120degrees) ALMOST overlap but the torue drops off between pulses but not to zero or a negative torque like a 4cyl does.

and 8cylinder engine actually has power pulses that overlap!
an 8cyl fires every 90degrees of crank rotation and the useful
power pulse lasts nearly 120degrees!

I doubt I need to extend the discussion to 10, 12 and 16cylinder engines...

Turbo-charged four cylinder engines are particularly abusive to
driveline components.

Another factor aside from engine torque is downstream resistance.

a vehicle with 3.08 gears will SCREW STUFF UP while an IDENTICAL
vehicle with 4.10's will break parts, but DIFFERENT parts.

numerically higher ratios transfer breakage from the transmission
transfercase and driveshafts to parts AFTER the ring and pinion
the spider gears and axle shafts.

Vehicle weight and traction are also a factor.

a vehicle that spins it's wheels and sprays gravel usually
won't break stuff. a vehicle loaded with gravel will send
a spray of driveline parts at the ground...

Some things in engineering are counter-intuative

IF a trans is designed for a high powered 4cyl and installed
behind a six it'll hold up well.

OTOH if you design a trans for a 200hp V8 then stick it behind a 200hp
turbocharged four you'll reduce it to rubble.

I'm NOT talking about a theoretical abstract here...
I have a real world example: The Borg-Warner WC-T5.

They hold up decently behind the V8and especially well behind the 3.8 Vs
But 4cylinders? Turbocharged or not they get beaten to pieces

Of course it probably doesn't help that unlike the Mazda transmission
used in ford Rangers which has forged gears welded to the synchro "dogs"
the Gears inside a T-5 are made by a special casting process (I.E. powdered metal!)

as for blowing shit up? my truck is currently apart for a blown gearbox.

Yep, me "Dr.Mazda" BLEW UP an M5OD-R1, but it isn't your usualy failure.

I Broke ONE part of the transmission, my output shaft SNAPPED OFF.

When? Fat part of the torque curve at 80% throttle in 1st gear
with the clutch completely engaged on dry pavement.... it went "BANG"
and I was coasting.

In a 4.0 4x4 supercab Ranger with an empty rear fuel tank and nothing
in the bed.

On the four cylinder thing here's a phrase to look up:
"Torsional stress reversal"

It should be enlightening.



AllanD

 

[Davis]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davis View Post
didn't hold up[/b]
stock tranny (it holds up fine for some, for others it doesnt)
you arent going to get 28 PSI out of an eaton M90. so im not sure what your point was here. noone here was talking about 28 PSI.

I killed that one on an IHI turbo, sorry for the confusion. My point is that the M5OD is NOT indestructible.

I'm all for people doing things differently, don't get me wrong. But I get tired of all the talk when that's all it is. Talk.

250ft-lbs from a 4 cylinder is the same amount of force as 250ft-lbs from a v-6.

It's the same amount of AVERAGE force.

What's next, you'll tell us that a 300 hp 4 has the same stresses as a 300 hp v8?

 

[feellnfroggy]

power production can be controlled in a turbo charged setup by a couple simple devices called the wastegate and boost controllers. If you opverpowering many componets you can turn the boost down with the change of a spring/ wastegate arm adjustment/ and or controll of a knob or button on a controller.

If your using a boost controller and wastegate your essentially running lower boost. Hence what the guy above said about keeping his pressure below 10 PSI. i personally would have recommended no higher than 5PSI, but thats me.

I had at one time an 84 Turbocoupe. And I know well enough what I am saying when referring to anytype of boost. I may not get the wording right everytime, but the point gets there.

Wicked I appreciate the defense, but I'm not sweatin it too much. See with all these posts, what is said will eventually be proven right or wrong by someone. I know what I know, I didnt go to schoolfor it. I learned it in the driveway.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

when i called the 2.3 high revving, i meant when compared to turbo cats 4.0.

there are whipple 3.0 guys putting down the better part of 240 HP at the wheels through the stock M5OD....and yes its the same internally as the 2.3 unit. you arent getting that much power to the wheels with a 2.3 without nearly 23lbs of boost. the transmission is about the LAST thing you will need to upgrade in a squeezed application.

The can put A LOT more power than 240whp down with 23psi, even on a stock longblock....

You sir underestimate the 2.3T.....

 

[fastpakr]

The can put A LOT more power than 240whp down with 23psi, even on a stock longblock....

You sir underestimate the 2.3T.....

I come up with ~240hp max at that pressure level as well (assuming you aren't changing some other factor, like camming it to peak much higher).

 

[rangerpimpn84]

im not being a skeptic but ive heard that with only 15 psi boost that the 2.3 can up to atleast 250whp but i could b wrong

 

[fastpakr]

Run the math. 15 psi is roughly doubling atmospheric pressure. Assuming everything else stays the same (meaning you ignore air temperature, etc), that would double the volume of air being pumped.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

No offense, but regardless if what the "math" says, its been done countless times.

The best thing I could do would be to point you in the direction of the proven combos thread on Turboford.net.

 

[Davis]

True you can make pretty big power without big boost, but it requires head work and a decent cam.

caroth made 325hp on 17 psi.

I'm guessing I made about the same at roughly 10# more. It's not all about boost, it's about how many oxygen molecules you can coax into your cylinders every revolution.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

True you can make pretty big power without big boost, but it requires head work and a decent cam.

caroth made 325hp on 17 psi.

I'm guessing I made about the same at roughly 10# more. It's not all about boost, it's about how many oxygen molecules you can coax into your cylinders every revolution.

Exactly.

 

[Ric]

There are so many variables to increase output without increasing boost.
-In the SR20det that I'm well versed in, we see crazy improvements by tuning with E85. This lets us run much more timing, which then, allows us to see vast improvements without increasing boost. Of course we need huge injectors.
-Yes you can fit a supercharger to a 2.3, but like most things, it will require fabrication
-Some folk will claim that parasitic loss is too great for the lowish torque typical of a 4 cyl




How about we get back on topic.

 

[fastpakr]

True you can make pretty big power without big boost, but it requires head work and a decent cam.

caroth made 325hp on 17 psi.

I'm guessing I made about the same at roughly 10# more. It's not all about boost, it's about how many oxygen molecules you can coax into your cylinders every revolution.

Exactly.

Run the math. 15 psi is roughly doubling atmospheric pressure. Assuming everything else stays the same (meaning you ignore air temperature, etc), that would double the volume of air being pumped.

Seems like we're all saying the same thing. Without major head work (valves, cam, etc), the maximum power you'll see at a given boost level is directly proportional. 15psi is almost double atmospheric pressure so you're looking at 200hp with a converted Lima long block. Once you start playing with the internals to allow better cylinder filling and higher RPM, the numbers can change immensely.

 

[Davis]

Run the math. 15 psi is roughly doubling atmospheric pressure. Assuming everything else stays the same (meaning you ignore air temperature, etc), that would double the volume of air being pumped.

I like to think of it as dubling density... (stick-poke)

 

[anupaum]

-Some folk will claim that parasitic loss is too great for the lowish torque typical of a 4 cyl


How about we get back on topic.

I disagree that parasitic losses are too great. When I crack the throttle on my truck, I've got INSTANT power. It feels like a really strong V6 or a mild V8. Also, there's a "coolness" factor that often results in what I call the "supercharger discount." (Some vendors think what I've done is SO COOL they actually charge me less for work I need done! I kid you not--it's almost as effective as being a beautiful girl!!!)

The ability to get going with the bed loaded down, or the power to climb hills has been well worth the hassle!