Miatapower List Archive

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


Whipple/Sprintex/Autorotor, Who splits hair's here? HA, HA, HA! One
is a marketing name, two are manufacturer's names.

Are we taking ourselves too seriously here? I think so.

Eric

Beau Randall wrote:
>
> Question - what's bad about the term whipple? Isn't Autorotor,
> afterall, just the name of the manufacturer? If I say Autorotor
> to a V8 guy I get a blank stare, but if I say whipple he's my compadre.
> - Beau
>
> --- (email redacted) wrote:
> >
> > Corky,
> > I stand corrected, I really did not mean to say "whipple".
> >
> > Twenty lashes for the idiot that said "whipple"....
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 99-11-05 00:48:29 EST, (email redacted) writes:
> > >
> > > << I have had my little 323 GTX for a week and I have a honest
> > > idea of the difference between Turbo and Supercharging. You turbo guys might
> > > not like what I have to say all that much. >>
> > >
> > > Hi Mark,
> > > While you cannot be called wrong in your views, and much of what you say is
> > > quite valid regarding the Autorotor (please avoid the title "whipple"), I
> > > feel you need a little broader perspective than a singular vehicle
> > > experience. The rapid response and under 2500 rpm punch of the fixed
> > > displacement compressor is hard to beat, but a good FM will soon take over.
> > > The FM's fifteen psi in the low 3 thous is equally hard to beat.
> > >
> > > There are, of course, many other aspects to consider specifically regarding
> > > the Autorotor. Economy, durability, throttle response.....................
> > > even down to the question of; did the designer do a good enough job on the
> > > system? Probably not.
> > > Corky
> > >
> >
> >
>
> =====
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Bid and sell for free at auctions.yahoo.com

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


Malcolm -

4 also had a larger turbo housing (as said, spool up did not happen until
4500). 5 has gone back to original housing. I think that makes much more of
a difference than the engine controllers.

I don't know the differences in performance between TEC and Link. Haven't
yet heard anything definitive.

Clearly, in setup 4 it was the larger turbo housing that had the most to do
with poor performance. One reason the 3rd generation RX-7 has such
blistering performance is its first stage small turbo and second stage
larger one. While you may ultimately have more power with a large turbo,
it's really a waste of time and money if you can't get it spooled up. The
turbo Corky uses for the BEGI stage IV (FMII) is an excellent compromise,
and the Link is an ideal controller for it.

I also would expect a larger K&N to help our turbos' spool up (better
breathing). Bill's FMIII addresses this. The exhaust I have on mine helps,
too (no muffler - 2-1/2" all the way). If I were to shorten the exhaust even
more, it would probably get better (to a point - maybe it's already there).
I seem to have a very quick spool up.

It's time for the dyno.

Does anyone have any comparison info about Tec and Link?

Mel
------------------------------------------------------------
Mel Hoagland ((email redacted))
"Wheezy" black 96 FMII vrrooommmm


----- Original Message -----
From: Malcolm Gray-Stephens <(email redacted)>
To: Mel Hoagland <(email redacted)>; <(email redacted)>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 1999 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: Turbo vs. Supercharger (Why Not Start That AGAIN!)


> Compare 4 to 5 .. different turbo .. but similar to 3.. anyway the other
> reason was the Shiv was getting so much out of his T-bird IHI turbo car
> many years ago.. must be some good reason for the low down boost he was
> getting with respectable top end...
>
> Malcolm G-S
>
>
> > OK, I'll bite. Where does it say the TECII beats the Link so well?
> > Mel
>
> Stage 3 stock 1.6, FM II, 17 psi boost
>
> Stage 4, rebuilt 1.6 - 323 GTX components ( pistons, rods, valve springs,
> exhaust cam ), FM II, oversize turbo housing
> Going to stage 4 - car became a great hi way vehicle. At 50 mph on, it
was
> great. But is was a dog, because spool up did not happen until 4500 rpm
or
> so and the low compression pistons hurt the bottom end.
>
> Stage 5, same rebuilt 1.6, TEC II, back to original housing ...
> Going to stage 5 - bottom end picked up a lot. The Tec II seems to have
> technology that is overcoming these low compression pistons ( that and
> Lester & Gibb's tuning abilities ). The hi end is strong also - maybe more
> than stage 3, but it's to hard to tell.
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Ray & Cindy Ayala <(email redacted)>


Mel Hoagland wrote:
> .... Does anyone have any comparison info about Tec and Link?

We may never find anyone willing to swap ECUs at all, let alone
without changing anything else in the process. - Ray

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


From: Tom Graham <(email redacted)>
> One of my favorite descriptions of a turbo system used an oversized turbo
> and a small shot of nitrious just to get the turbo up to speed. The owner
> said the nitrious lasted a long time. I have not been a fan of nitrious
but
> this 'system' reportedly worked really well, the nitrous covering the one
> flaw with the big turbo. I believe the shot was automatic but I'm not sure
> how it was acomplished.

If you check out NOS' web site <nosnitrous.com/> you will find
various things for their system <nosnitrous.com/page31.html> that
allows you to do cool things. Like only inject nitrous if boost is below 5
PSI (adjustable) and throttle position is above Y % (you have to moddify
their throttle position sensor to do this because normally it's set to only
work at full throttle). This allows a quick pulse of nitrus right as you
hit the throttle but then turns it off as soon as the turbo is up to speed.

Cheers,
Mark

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


Mel Hoagland wrote:
> One reason the 3rd generation RX-7 has such
> blistering performance is its first stage small turbo and second stage
> larger one.

FWIW, the RX-7 used two identical Hitachi HT-10 turbochargers. Once tweaked (intake,
downpipe, re-mapped ecu, IC, and cat-back), its turbo response is unreal.

--
Shiv Pathak
Blackhawk, CA