Miatapower List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Lance Karl Schall" <(email redacted)>


Mark,

I am a qualified engineer with a BSME and emphasis in aerodynamics and
thermodynamics. I also have completed some graduate studies in combustion.
I used to work at various aerospace companies including Garrett with
turbomachinery air systems. I lack the name recognition of some prominent
members of our cyber community. However, I assure you, I do understand the
technology.

I calculated the real temperature, efficiency and horsepower of the Sebring
kit in 1995 before it was widely published on the web. My numbers were
correct. The Eaton website omitted the "adiabatic" efficiency graph (that
an Eaton engineer faxed to me). As an Eaton engineer and I agreed in one of
numerous conversations, the graph was not correct. Far more information is
available from SAE papers an other technical proceedings than you find on
the website.

I have no problem with the engineering of the Sebring kit. It puts out a
reliable, reasonable amount of power for the cost involved. The best
engineering solution rarely involves spending any amount of money to
increase a system's performance to whatever level can be obtained. Usually,
an engineer designs to spend to a target while achieving a defined goal
(horsepower, installation ease, reliability, service cost...).

Are there ways to achieve more power? Certainly. For less money? Yes.
How about nitrous? That's cheap and makes lots of power. You can even get
more power than a Sebring out of an inexpensive Greddy turbo kit. What do
you get from a supercharger that you can't get from any turbocharger? The
feel of a supercharger. Simpler diagnosis of problems. The supercharger is
a simpler system. And you can keep that nifty header.

Can an FMII blow the doors off a Sebring? Yup. But, give me a $50,000
budget and I'll stick a small block V-8 in something and blow the doors off
a $150,000 Ferrari at any track you pick. Look, I'm faster for less. Does
that mean anybody who buys a Ferrari is an idiot?

It's not just a pile of numbers, it's whatever makes you happy.

Lance Schall
Peak To Peak Miata Club
MCA #159

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)


Lance,
I am an unqualified guy who barely graduated high school, I have
worked as a flight analysis programmer on the B-2 bomber and as a
comm/nav/ecm technician on the F-15 Eagle test program. I am glad your
equations were correct however that has little to do with the fact that the
Sebring kit lacks what I consider manditory components in a Forced Induction
system.

Saying that the Sebring kit is a well engineered kit is nonsense. I
think that you totally missed what I was saying. I actually like a lot of
features on the Eaton supercharger, especially that it is low maintenance. I
do know that I would not run a nitrous system without a blowoff valve, a
fuel cutoff switch and a number of other safety features that would prevent
me from accidentally grenading my car. So why on earth would you run a
supercharger without the proper fuel, ignition and anti-knock controls???
Maybe it's my lack of education that has me confused.

Mark

PS - I have been one of the most vocal and ardent defenders of the
supercharger on this list.

>
>
> Mark,
>
> I am a qualified engineer with a BSME and emphasis in aerodynamics and
> thermodynamics. I also have completed some graduate studies in combustion.
> I used to work at various aerospace companies including Garrett with
> turbomachinery air systems. I lack the name recognition of some prominent
> members of our cyber community. However, I assure you, I do understand the
> technology.
>
> I calculated the real temperature, efficiency and horsepower of the Sebring
> kit in 1995 before it was widely published on the web. My numbers were
> correct. The Eaton website omitted the "adiabatic" efficiency graph (that
> an Eaton engineer faxed to me). As an Eaton engineer and I agreed in one of
> numerous conversations, the graph was not correct. Far more information is
> available from SAE papers an other technical proceedings than you find on
> the website.
>
> I have no problem with the engineering of the Sebring kit. It puts out a
> reliable, reasonable amount of power for the cost involved. The best
> engineering solution rarely involves spending any amount of money to
> increase a system's performance to whatever level can be obtained. Usually,
> an engineer designs to spend to a target while achieving a defined goal
> (horsepower, installation ease, reliability, service cost...).
>
> Are there ways to achieve more power? Certainly. For less money? Yes.
> How about nitrous? That's cheap and makes lots of power. You can even get
> more power than a Sebring out of an inexpensive Greddy turbo kit. What do
> you get from a supercharger that you can't get from any turbocharger? The
> feel of a supercharger. Simpler diagnosis of problems. The supercharger is
> a simpler system. And you can keep that nifty header.
>
> Can an FMII blow the doors off a Sebring? Yup. But, give me a $50,000
> budget and I'll stick a small block V-8 in something and blow the doors off
> a $150,000 Ferrari at any track you pick. Look, I'm faster for less. Does
> that mean anybody who buys a Ferrari is an idiot?
>
> It's not just a pile of numbers, it's whatever makes you happy.
>
> Lance Schall
> Peak To Peak Miata Club
> MCA #159
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


At 10:21 PM 11/13/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Lance,
> I am an unqualified guy who barely graduated high school, I have
>worked as a flight analysis programmer on the B-2 bomber and as a
>comm/nav/ecm technician on the F-15 Eagle test program. I am glad your
>equations were correct however that has little to do with the fact that the
>Sebring kit lacks what I consider manditory components in a Forced Induction
>system.

It all depends on how far you want to go... if you're happy with 5psi of
hot boost, you don't need an intercooler. Putting one in would
un-necessarily raise system cost - bad engineering. Ditto for un-necessary
changes to the fuel system, etc.

5psi of hot boost is good for alot of cheap ponies.

M
who thinks 12psi of cold boost is more fun, but also alot more expensive.

>
> Saying that the Sebring kit is a well engineered kit is nonsense. I
>think that you totally missed what I was saying. I actually like a lot of
>features on the Eaton supercharger, especially that it is low maintenance. I
>do know that I would not run a nitrous system without a blowoff valve, a
>fuel cutoff switch and a number of other safety features that would prevent
>me from accidentally grenading my car. So why on earth would you run a
>supercharger without the proper fuel, ignition and anti-knock controls???
>Maybe it's my lack of education that has me confused.
>
>Mark
>
>PS - I have been one of the most vocal and ardent defenders of the
>supercharger on this list.
>
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> I am a qualified engineer with a BSME and emphasis in aerodynamics and
>> thermodynamics. I also have completed some graduate studies in combustion.
>> I used to work at various aerospace companies including Garrett with
>> turbomachinery air systems. I lack the name recognition of some prominent
>> members of our cyber community. However, I assure you, I do understand the
>> technology.
>>
>> I calculated the real temperature, efficiency and horsepower of the Sebring
>> kit in 1995 before it was widely published on the web. My numbers were
>> correct. The Eaton website omitted the "adiabatic" efficiency graph (that
>> an Eaton engineer faxed to me). As an Eaton engineer and I agreed in
one of
>> numerous conversations, the graph was not correct. Far more information is
>> available from SAE papers an other technical proceedings than you find on
>> the website.
>>
>> I have no problem with the engineering of the Sebring kit. It puts out a
>> reliable, reasonable amount of power for the cost involved. The best
>> engineering solution rarely involves spending any amount of money to
>> increase a system's performance to whatever level can be obtained.
Usually,
>> an engineer designs to spend to a target while achieving a defined goal
>> (horsepower, installation ease, reliability, service cost...).
>>
>> Are there ways to achieve more power? Certainly. For less money? Yes.
>> How about nitrous? That's cheap and makes lots of power. You can even get
>> more power than a Sebring out of an inexpensive Greddy turbo kit. What do
>> you get from a supercharger that you can't get from any turbocharger? The
>> feel of a supercharger. Simpler diagnosis of problems. The
supercharger is
>> a simpler system. And you can keep that nifty header.
>>
>> Can an FMII blow the doors off a Sebring? Yup. But, give me a $50,000
>> budget and I'll stick a small block V-8 in something and blow the doors off
>> a $150,000 Ferrari at any track you pick. Look, I'm faster for less. Does

>> that mean anybody who buys a Ferrari is an idiot?
>>
>> It's not just a pile of numbers, it's whatever makes you happy.
>>
>> Lance Schall
>> Peak To Peak Miata Club
>> MCA #159
>>
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)



It's also prone to detonation even only at 5 PSI of boost under the right
circumstances.

Oh hell... I give up... :)

Mark


> It all depends on how far you want to go... if you're happy with 5psi of
> hot boost, you don't need an intercooler. Putting one in would
> un-necessarily raise system cost - bad engineering. Ditto for un-necessary
> changes to the fuel system, etc.
>
> 5psi of hot boost is good for alot of cheap ponies.
>
> M
> who thinks 12psi of cold boost is more fun, but also alot more expensive.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>


Does anyone have outlet temps for a 7 psi turbo. People have measured outlet
temps from the Eaton but I havn't seen any published from a turbo Miata.
This is before an IC.

Thanks,

Tom

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)


At 08:29 AM 11/14/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Does anyone have outlet temps for a 7 psi turbo. People have measured outlet
>temps from the Eaton but I havn't seen any published from a turbo Miata.
>This is before an IC.

Point of caution in making this measurement:

if you have an IC in the system, 7psi is much greater volume of compressed
air than 7psi hot (thus the pre IC temps will be higher in a system with
IC, than the same boost in a system without IC).

M

>
>Thanks,
>
>Tom
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>


Hi Mike,

Perhaps this is true. I originally was going to include this thought(no IC)
but I am fuzzy if the thermal efficientcy is a product of temp increase /
psi of boost only, and the amount of air flowing through is a volumetric
efficientcy question.

No matter. What I would like to figure is whether, in practice, the turbo
has drasticly lower temps coming out of it compared to the Eaton.

My stock 1.6 Sebring system was driven to 120 mph indicated and then quickly
stopped. I was able to lay my hand on any part of the intake. It was just
warm. I have a home made CAI. The SC and the related parts are cooled
durring off boost driving. There is a considerable thermal mass presented. I
suspect the engineering figures presented, while true, do not tell the whole
story.

Tom

----Original Message Follows----
From: (email redacted) (Mike Inman)
To: "Tom Graham" <(email redacted)>
CC: (email redacted)
Subject: Re: Eaton Bashing
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:05:38 -0500

At 08:29 AM 11/14/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Does anyone have outlet temps for a 7 psi turbo. People have measured
outlet
>temps from the Eaton but I havn't seen any published from a turbo Miata.
>This is before an IC.

Point of caution in making this measurement:

if you have an IC in the system, 7psi is much greater volume of compressed
air than 7psi hot (thus the pre IC temps will be higher in a system with
IC, than the same boost in a system without IC).

M

>
>Thanks,
>
>Tom
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at hotmail.com