so here's the rub...if we think the cam isn't so bad whats gonna cause such high IAT's? heads have great flow chars (Richard @ WCCH chimed in earlier), where else but the blower will we generate heat? I'm not pointing fingers, just looking to check all the angles.

 

Blowers are compressors and compressing air generates heat. The more you compress it (boost) the more it heats up. The intercooler's purpose is to remove that heat before it enters the engine. If it can't keep up (or isn't functioning properly), then you have high IATs.

 

so if the I/C is workin correctly, isn't then an engineering issue?

 

or low voltage input to the IC pump. Lots of theories! I don't care what any of you big wigs say, troubleshooting online ROCKS!!! lmao...let's see that dyno sheet with AFR and IAT. I don't think it will solve anything, just an interesting read, hurry up to, i gotta go to the b/r.

 

I think the problem is still to small a supercharger and over spinning it. Lets take the 2.4 Kenne Bell for example. On a stock 4.6 Cobra motor the pulley combination that was producing 6 lbs of boost on my engine produces 23-24 lbs on the Cobra. It is clear that additional cubic inches, better flowing heads, intake manifold, larger camshaft, less exhaust restriction, larger intake runner volume and lower compression ratio all require more air from the supercharger in order to maintain a level of boost.
Kenne Bell will tell you that you can spin the 2.4 supercharger up to 21,000 rpm or so, but they don't tell that according to the manufacturer(AutoRotor) anything over 13,000 starts to really heat up the intake charge. This became quite apparent on mine. Any increase in blower speed above twice crank speed would give better off idle power and torque, but as soon as the rpm's started to climp, the power would fall off dramatically.
On my first dyno run the supercharger discharge air temp was 270 degrees and the intercooler dropped it to 102, quite amazing. On repeated runs however, now that everything was becoming heat soaked, the intercooler could only drop the temp to 160 and then 210 on the third run. Rear wheel hp had now dropped by 45. I really think the twin screw chargers being supplied in kit form are for stock engines. Even the 3.3 Whipple on a stock SRT-10 truck only produces 5 lbs of boost at 1.8 times crank speed. With 505 cubic inches it would not take much in the way of mods to have the 3.3 Whipple over spinning as well. I guess I am now a turbo fan until there are some much larger twin screws in kit form.

 

I don't think 'engineering' is the term I'd use. The system was engineered for a smaller displacement motor with less boost and a smaller compressor. Thats not what you are using it for.

 

I beg to differ...this is the setup Maggie wants: 370 & MP122. their claims were that it had enuf displacement to powere a 402, and that it only woke up at higher boost levels in the 11-12lb range. We're not talkin about much more than 6.2l here

 

I didn't read back through the thread to check but, has the bypass valve been checked to make sure it's closing all the way?

If it wasn't maybe it is shooting hot air back into the intake tract causing some of the high IAT issue.

 

the 122 ships with a 2.8" pulley for the trucks(pretty sure). I have a hard time believing the equivalent of 2 blower pulley sizes down from that renders it crippled by heat. There's got to be more to this than that.......

I read alot of people in here speculating what the 122 is designed for, almost to the point of fact. Maybe that's all we can go off of, but something ain't right and maybe in ain't the 122

 

He was referring to the intercooler system. It was designed for a much lower amount of cfm flow and lower boost levels. If I recall, when that intercooler and lower manifold were designed, it was for a system of around 6psi and for 4.8L and 5.3L's.