I know we've been texting back and forth about this....

Would anyone agree with me that the F1A-94 shouldn't be the first choice if going the Procharger route?

 

I'm still exploring that. I wish I could find a first hand dyno etc to see how it builds boost. The few things I have seen are encouraging though. Less laggy than I would have thought.

 

Paraphrasing a quote off YB "If the bottom end is too soft, spray the hell out of it until it isn't"

 

stick with the TVS and nitrous imo

 

I'm not sure you need to be looking for dyno graphs as there are way too many variables....unless you can find some where they are making pull to pull blower speed changes to help you see how the boost curve responds.

I just keep going back to the fact that this new generation of race blowers seem to all have one thing in common. They work ******* awesome at max or beyond recommended speed. I see 2 problems with this as it relates to the typical street type stock block ls stuff.

1. Once you get the blower happy, boost levels go off the charts as far as being manageable with pump gas and a2a intercoolers and **** like that, especially for the belt drive systems you may be talking about using.

2. I know the older generation of blowers aren't as efficient in regards to "power to drive", but they seem to be able to flow more air at slower blower speeds.

Either way, trying to make 1000+ hp with a belt drive would make even the most hardcore Procharger guys, even with the best of the really nice dedicated 8 rib stuff on the market, go insane. My decision to go with a cog drive on my stuff (and I was even doing the cog drive when I still had intentions of keeping it on the street) was solely based on the fact that my blower, even spinning it only 84% of max recommended speed takes a staggering 250+ horsepower just to drive it.

If you decide to go the Procharger route, I'd recommend seriously giving the drive system some serious thought as that is going to make or break a combination like what you are trying to achieve.

You guys have see all the bullshit issues I've had trying to make that kind of power. It takes a special kind of stupid to go after something like that.

I guess that what I'm getting at is this, if you wanna go the Procharger route for something like this, some of the older blowers like the F1C or the F1R or even an F2 could have some benefits as they seem to make better power at slower blower speeds, especially if you implemented some of the internal cnc volute mods that Morris offers.

 

All very good points.

There's no question if I go procharger it will be dedicated drive. Not sure how far people get with the 12 rib there, but the bummer is you're limited by the size of the lower ring to 7.65".

 

I remember when I did the 8 rib conversion on mine, I was calling anybody and everybody I could find to help with tech on the topic.

I remember one guy telling me that doing a 12 rib vs. 8 rib set up was stupid unless you could change the tensioner. His opinion was that if the tensioner you are using applies 100 lbs. of force (this is an arbitrary number for the sake of the argument) to the belt, in an 8 rib scenario you would in theory be applying around 12.5 lbs. of force to each rib. This same example but with a 12 rib set up would be applying 8.33 lbs. of force to each rib. Based on that, his opinion was that unless you could come up with a tensioner to get the 12.5 lbs./rib number back on all 12 ribs, then it was a waste.

I'm not really sure how right/wrong his opinion was, but it was something that stuck in my head. Wish I could remember who it was and if he was ever able to back anything up.

I can see his point, but the part I couldn't get past was "yeah, the lbs./rib goes down, but you still have more surface area for traction. I think a cool test would be something that provides quantifiable evidence as it relates to a minimum force/rib before you loose belt traction, but not sure it could be done without keeping the rib count constant.

Then I promise that the force/rib minimum would change depending on rib count, so how the **** do you then compare?????

In one example you could obtain data that said:

An 8 rib set up starts slipping at anything lower than 10 lbs./rib (showing that you would need a tensioner to provide 80 lbs. of force).

A 12 rib set up starts slipping at anything lower than 8 lbs.rib (showing that you would need a tensioner to provide 96 lbs. of force).

In another example it could be:

An 8 rib set up starts slipping at anything lower than 10 lbs./rib (showing that you would need a tensioner to provide 80 lbs. of force).

A 12 rib set up starts slipping at anything lower than 5 lbs.rib (showing that you would need a tensioner to provide 60 lbs. of force).

In conclusion, the two examples above using what could seem to both be realistic numbers, you have results of one test showing the need for a stronger tensioner for the 12 rib, and then another test showing the need for a weaker tensioner that is weaker for the 12 rib.

I am now cross-eyed.

I'm sure that needs some grammatical corrections to fully make sense.

 

Just another quick thought to the post above.....

Throw a pulley size change in the mix and surface area for the belt changes and all test data goes out the ******* window.......


Go turbo.

 

.....oh and if that wasn't enough fucked up **** to wrap your head around......

as soon as you "pulley down" you are now making more power. More power accelerates the motor faster, which accelerates the blower faster. Accelerating the blower faster then throws another wrench in this attempt to gain usefull data as acceleration alone will cause the belt to slip easier.

A steady state rpm test would be worthless so now what.........**** I'm done.

 

How come maggie, whipple and even twin screws don't seem to have these belt issues that prochargers have? And even if they did, they don't seem to have them anymore.