DrFoster, I assume you are a doctor of fluid dynamics.
That or I just got an underhanded insult.

The difference between you and me is that I only used my own money.

 

and you have been building Axial flows for years whereas the good Dr. has built..... nothing

 

HA, I guess all the inventors should go home because theres no way anyone can improve on existing technology.

 

I don't want a turbo and I don't like nitrous. I can't afford a 20B. How about someone develop a supercharger?

Something to think about since I'm going to play on the doctor theme. The doctors that have made all the advancements and all the breakthroughs in medicine didn't do it by playing it safe and relying on what they already knew. They went where no one else did or even thought of going and they made huge leaps and learned lots. Some are made to lead and some are meant to blindly follow. If you aren't the lead dog, the view never changes. Think about that one in several different contexts.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

So what you're saying is Dr. Foster is a doctor of proctology?

OH! Looking good RP. Keep up the good work. Any chance of an audio clip of the (or a) compressor humming along at good speed? I'd offer to personally record something if i were closer.

 

Hi Richard,

For what it's worth, RX-8 owners in Spain are following your progress very closely. And personally, I find your work worth funding. Mazda could REALLY use your help.

So much for DrFoster....

 

Man RP, I ... I can't fight the tears.
Seriously though, your are definitely on to something VERY good. Heck, get this man a beer and research funds Mazda.

 

RP did you ever get the new fuel system/ electronics worked out.
See my previous post for link for the ELF and at only $425 its not that expensive compared with other fuel comtrolers out there. Being that its not truly legal in CA is not a problem its so small you can hide it so your inspectors does not see it and it does not effect the OBD-II interface.

 

well commercial aircraft get 2000-3000 hours of flight before service of course a plane flying from florida to europe is a single cycle will have less service than a plane flying from florida to georgia and then texas and nevada. because it has to take off more times which cause more wear and tear. so it will need service more frequently.

rp check you pm

 

RP i have a site call photobucket where you can open and account like opening a email account and it allows you to place codes in site which will show picture and will not steal as much band, you place the picture into the account like and attachment to and email them copy the code from the site and pace it where ever you want and it will show the picture, its free for a limited bandwidth so you can place like 30 picture @ once before it runs out and just keep rotating it there after.

 

DrFoster...
I'm not gonna flame ya, but for the record...
Turbos have a very serious inherent problem with blowing up, blowing out bearings, leaks, and boost loss from half a million reasons. Can be great when they work but it seems all I ever hear is "My turbo died". EDIT: I also understand that Greddy has a zero warranty on their Turbo... Yeah! I want a 3k Turbo that gives about 30 more HP and will last for about 1,500 to 3,000 miles of boost.
NOS and family is as well not so stable. Can and does ignite... No insurance Co. will cover a NOS fire. Also... you cannot use NOS as a constant boost, well not unless you add about 100LBS of weight for a huge NOS cylinder. Always paying to get that boost too.
A supercharger runs full time and possibly could be configured to be disabled with a toggle switch if you did not wanna hot-rod around and save some fuel.
In summation... the supercharger is a very promising option for us and taking time to make it functional and dependable has lots of merit. Most manufactures rush a mediocre product on the market to be the 1st one there and have too many issues due to lack of development and testing.
I know of a few companies working on SC's for the 8. All of them have not rushed the product cause I think they know what is at stake.
I am no wrench monkey… nor do I claim to be a know-it-all. I am a driver who wants more… A SC is more cost effective that gutting the whole motor bay to house the 20B or for that matter the 26B. Yeah I would love to have either one, but let’s face it… only about 4 or 5 users on all these boards can afford such an option. If I am correct the 20B with all the cost it would take to buy and install still does not break the 300 HP barrier? So lets see… bone stock 238 HP versus I do not know how much $$$ to get 60 more HP. I’d rather wait to see what the SC’s can do for me!

 

RP's axial SC will make this car an exotic - post some more teasers Rich

 

Who ever said "the first shall be last, and the last shal be first" hey Richard who ever put first dibbs in on this.. I want in. ..I am here looking into my engine. .wishing I saw that extra piece of design sitting in there keep up the good work...

 

1) Try about 100WHP gain.
2)Mine is approaching 20k miles.
3)I seriously doubt ANY aftermarket FI will come with much of a warranty. There are too many variables in play: installation problems, operator error, etc. The supplier can't control the things leading to most failures. Not a good way to make $.

 

LOL!
I was being a bit of a smart ***... but from Dynos I have seen I did not see a 100HP boost in any part of the band. Obviously, the tuning can make a difference. I am not saying that all turbos die, but just look at these boards and see the complaints about them left and right. I did, as well, mention that they are great when the are performing as specified.
I want sumthing that is more reliable right out of the box. and not a wildcard if I will get the one that has a normal life-span.
I would hope any manufacturer would warranty their product from manufacture defects. Maybe I am wrong here, and I will concede to that as I am no engineer. The 7's turbo(s) had warranties, though not aftermarket.
We cool? I was not attempting to make the turbo sound useless.

 

Hey vice I also read your post, I did not get that idear of you tryign to make the turbo usless,.. all I read in your post was advancement.. am I wrong..

 

Nobody said he was making it out to be useless. He started his post "...for the record..." I just wanted to make sure the record was a little more informed.

 

lighten up people ...hey RP...post a pic to keep us busy in here.. Hmmmm my hood is still open..

 

I also gained 100hp as of my last dyno with gains all throughout the rev range. I'm hoping for more this time. No offense to anyone, but good luck doing that with a SC. Maybe Axial flow will, I haven't ever known anyone with one, but in general my experience is you get less power out of a SC. I could list many reasons that substantiate this, but I'm sure no one wants to hear them, and of course its not true 100% of the time.

There has been a large number of Greddy turbo failures, I don't know why. But in general a turbo will last 80k or so without problem. The turbo Greddy uses is found on many stock cars and lasts all kinds of abuse from drivers who forget to change the oil, don't let the car cool down, use the wrong oil, etc, and is fine. I think there was, and maybe still is, something wrong with the Greddy turbo kit causing these premature failures. But I'm optimistic that Jeff's wastegate port relocation will correct the problem. Only time will tell though. Either way, it is not correct to make the blanket statement that turbo's aren't reliable and fail.

 

A supercharger is just as capable. It's all airflow.

 

The argument of power potential is sort of moot. Yes, it's all about airflow. Making a blanket statement about "superchargers" verses turbo-superchargers is silly.

Trying telling someone who just witnessed a 4 second pass by a top fueller that the his supercharger makes "less power".

Of all the different types of superchargers, there are 3 basic types of compressors (centrigugal, axial flow, and positive displacement [with variations]), and 2 common ways of driving them (exhaust gas driven, or crankshaft driven)

They all have their different characteristics, advantages and disadvantages. But at the end of the day, you can always make a bigger one for more airflow. Whether is suits the engine size or RPM range characteristics of operation is another matter.

Cheers,
Hymee.

 

I can give a very good reason why we've never seen big gains on a rotary from a supercharger. I've never seen anyone do a supercharger properly on a rotary before. It's as simple as that. I'm excluding Hymee and Richard's projects of course. If you go over to the 7 forum and look for superchargers, you'll see 3 different types.

Atkins (Camden) makes a roots supercharger kit. It uses a roots supercharger with straight cut 2 lobe rotors. These are the single least efficent roots blowers you can get and we all know how efficient a roots setup is compared to other alternatives anyways. Now you're using the worst of the worst. You won't find very impressive numbers with them. I have ridden in a Camden supercharged 1st gen before and it was alot of fun. The car has some great off idle torque but that was it. Nothing on top.

The second type you see is the people using an Eaton M90 roots blower and adapting it to their 2nd gens. There are 3 different generations of M90's and each newer one is an improvement on the previous. The 2 different ones you'll see were the ones from the Thunderbirds. These were first and second generation Eaton M90's. Many are using the first gen blowers and a few use the second gen blowers which are an improvement. However you never see anyone integrate these on nicely. You see alot of things rigged to merely work but at the huge cost of efficency and pumping losses. There was even one conversion that placed the M90 before the stock throttlebody! These blowers are actually nicer than the Atkins units but still only as good as their installation which as of now has not been done well on a rotary. The M90 even done properly isn't sized good for a rotary that wants alot of power. For a sub 160 hp 13B, it can give a noticable gain but will still only be limited to about 275 hp if you do everything right and take alot of things onto consideration. Most of the subpar attempts have only netted in the 220 hp range but as stated earlier they left alot to be desired in terms of how they were installed and setup. Alot of those guys don't believe in proper ecu work but rather add piggyback bandaids, and limited ones at that.

The last type of superchargers you can find on rotaries are the old Nelson/Paxton kits. These used a Novi2000 blower. Sadly these cars could only push them to about 7 psi before overspinning them and power was limited to about 220 rwhp max. It's funny that many can't figure out how this supercharger can do so well on other engines but so poorly on a small rotary. The issue is actually backwards from what most think. Alot of people think the blower is too small. It's actually too big and is always on the verge of compressor surge which is why power is low. It's not sized properly for the job at hand. This is a common issue with supercharger conversions on rotaries.

Now we move on to Hymee and Richard. 2 people doing their homework and both with different designs. They will both succeed where others have failed simply because they both know what size the supercharger needs to be in order to get the power out of it that they want. They both also know how to go slow and do everything properly rather than rigged merely to work. Alot of things are common sense but others are trial and error. Why haven't we seen any blowers produce big gains on a rotary yet? No one has done one properly on a rotary yet. Welcome to the future!

 

I am not taking any comments personal! it is all cool and misinformation or my jabbed misrepresentation being called into question is just. We don't want people believing from my post that Turbos only give ya 30 HP!!! All I wanted to really say was it "Appears to me (the non wrench monkey or Engineer)" that Turbos, (Greddy for sure) are having tons of issues and falling way short of what is represented as far as life-cycle. rkostolni or MadDog... I would love to see your Dyno Graph. (PM me if you would.) don't wanna junk up RP's thread with Trubo charts.

The comments about aircraft turbines n such is what I think RP was noting in the drive behind the SC technology change. I am hoping for less working parts and more compressed air to gain a steady and reliable constant HP boost. With well managed compression I can see the SC going well over 100HP and not having the failure rate as other options, but what do I know? It may be that the stock Apex seals cannot even withstand the power gain! wouldn't that be awesome?!?! None are really out there on the market yet so the development continues.

 

I know this is completely off topic for this thread, but I couldn't find a way to send an attachment in a PM. So here it is. This is before tuning was complete. Once the A/F was dialed in I should have found a few more ponies, but my turbo died during the tuning session. Since then I've added a few more mods and made a couple other changes, so I'm hoping for close to 300whp next time.

 

PM sent