Hello guys/gals have been trying to join this site sometime.
My vehicle in brief is a 3.9 Range Rover supercharged with a Commodore roots style blower, Fully sequential injection for both LPG and petrol, fully sequential ignition with one coil per plug, running a wolf version 500 ECU.
This wolf unit was the only one that appeared to offer full mapping for both LPG and petrol including separate ignition maps.
I am at present running approximately 6 lbs boost.
This is okay on LPG however with petrol, the intake air is to hot.
With a possible head gasket problem I am about to strip the top end and incorporate a air to air after cooler .
I will be manufacturing this unit from an existing holy style inlet manifold.
Am considering mounting supercharger upside down to enable longer fuel runners.
This believe gives a better bottom end torque, or is it really relevant with a supercharger.
The LPG is direct injected into the inlet ports thereby minimising the chance of unwanted explosions.
Can anybody shed any light on my proposals concerning inlet manifolds
3.9 Range Rover Supercharger manifold design
Moderator: phpBB2 - Administrators
Hi
welcome to the forum, to get straight in the runner length effecting the torque curve is primerily for normally aspirated engines where shock wave tuning and air column momemtum dominate, you have a blower on there which will overide any effect these two would have, also the fact there is a blower there will pretty well stop and resonent behaviou in the inlet trace. To be honest the best design would be to have as short a runner as you can manage, but don't worry too much if packaging reasons mean it has to be longer, just have a nice constant taper down to the port. When plumbing in the intercooler consider having the ability to bypass it when on LPG or atleast be able to block off part of the matrix I think you may have problems on LPG with bad idle charictoristics brought on at idle by having the charge too cold and iceing occouring.
Best regards
Mike
welcome to the forum, to get straight in the runner length effecting the torque curve is primerily for normally aspirated engines where shock wave tuning and air column momemtum dominate, you have a blower on there which will overide any effect these two would have, also the fact there is a blower there will pretty well stop and resonent behaviou in the inlet trace. To be honest the best design would be to have as short a runner as you can manage, but don't worry too much if packaging reasons mean it has to be longer, just have a nice constant taper down to the port. When plumbing in the intercooler consider having the ability to bypass it when on LPG or atleast be able to block off part of the matrix I think you may have problems on LPG with bad idle charictoristics brought on at idle by having the charge too cold and iceing occouring.
Best regards
Mike
poppet valves rule!
3.9 Range Rover Supercharger manifold design
Thanks Mike for your input.
I thought that was the case with the runners.
This type of supercharger has a vacuum operated bypass incorporated which allows both petrol and LPG to receive naturally aspirated air at idle and remained so until the pedal to the metal.
LPG has not been a problem so far except for a slight compensation when on gas to counteract the enriching curve that is required for cold petrol start.
As the runner length is no issue, I will be removing a portion of the top of inlet manifold, without upsetting the balance of the existing runner lengths. When I have a better view of what's in their, I am considering combining the existing water jacket which is on the underside of the manifold to increase the available plenum chamber beneath the supercharger.
This would allow much shorter runners of even lengths.
Also some porting as you suggested to taper runners.
The charger is presently mounted on top of a EFI manifold from a discovery2 this I believe is causing a problem as the plenum is rather small and without the trumpets the runners are varying in length.
The front pulley is approximately 20 mil below the bonnet and there is no room for the possibility of bonnet mounted radiator and little room for the air to air after cooler between the charger and manifold.
Using the old manifold, I will end up with much more room to accommodate everything
I have drawn up things with Cad but cannot finalise the possibilities until I remove the charger and know its footprint.
Then it will be back to the drawing board to see if it is all possible.
I will also be looking at the compression ratio and squished. As I think somebody has put on metal gaskets resulting in higher compression ratio.
The motor is a late model cross bolt Serpentine.
Thank you so much for your help.
At this stage until I remove everything I am a bit unsure as to what I have.
You may be able to help me decide if combining the water jacket would be a good idea leaving the manifold without water cooling.
I will be insulating the manifold from the heads and supercharger with some sort of thermal gaskets.
I'm not fully tuned yet as detonation has been an issue consequently had to knock back the timing.
Efficiency is my main goal with this build, will also need to dial up the cam to find out what that is.
I thought that was the case with the runners.
This type of supercharger has a vacuum operated bypass incorporated which allows both petrol and LPG to receive naturally aspirated air at idle and remained so until the pedal to the metal.
LPG has not been a problem so far except for a slight compensation when on gas to counteract the enriching curve that is required for cold petrol start.
As the runner length is no issue, I will be removing a portion of the top of inlet manifold, without upsetting the balance of the existing runner lengths. When I have a better view of what's in their, I am considering combining the existing water jacket which is on the underside of the manifold to increase the available plenum chamber beneath the supercharger.
This would allow much shorter runners of even lengths.
Also some porting as you suggested to taper runners.
The charger is presently mounted on top of a EFI manifold from a discovery2 this I believe is causing a problem as the plenum is rather small and without the trumpets the runners are varying in length.
The front pulley is approximately 20 mil below the bonnet and there is no room for the possibility of bonnet mounted radiator and little room for the air to air after cooler between the charger and manifold.
Using the old manifold, I will end up with much more room to accommodate everything
I have drawn up things with Cad but cannot finalise the possibilities until I remove the charger and know its footprint.
Then it will be back to the drawing board to see if it is all possible.
I will also be looking at the compression ratio and squished. As I think somebody has put on metal gaskets resulting in higher compression ratio.
The motor is a late model cross bolt Serpentine.
Thank you so much for your help.
At this stage until I remove everything I am a bit unsure as to what I have.
You may be able to help me decide if combining the water jacket would be a good idea leaving the manifold without water cooling.
I will be insulating the manifold from the heads and supercharger with some sort of thermal gaskets.
I'm not fully tuned yet as detonation has been an issue consequently had to knock back the timing.
Efficiency is my main goal with this build, will also need to dial up the cam to find out what that is.
Hi, sounds like an interesting project.
Just a couple of my thoughts out loud!
What size is your supercharger? and what pulley ratio is it running at? Is this any where near the max speed of the supercharger? Could your supercharger be getting near it's limit and getting inefficient?
I was led to believe that at 6psi you should be ok without charge coolers? Do you want to increase the boost?
Have you thought about air to water coolers? would help with the possible freezing issue mentioned and may be easier to package?
Tom.
Just a couple of my thoughts out loud!
What size is your supercharger? and what pulley ratio is it running at? Is this any where near the max speed of the supercharger? Could your supercharger be getting near it's limit and getting inefficient?
I was led to believe that at 6psi you should be ok without charge coolers? Do you want to increase the boost?
Have you thought about air to water coolers? would help with the possible freezing issue mentioned and may be easier to package?
Tom.
Dax Rush 4.6 supercharged V8 MSII
3.9 Range Rover Supercharger manifold design
Thanks Tom for your comments.
It is approaching midnight here in Oz, and just caught your message.
I will probably post some pictures soon especially when I dismantle.
After reading your note, I do have to consider is my main problem with detination mainly due to high compression ratio or even squish.
These units have been installed in Oz on Rover V8 with success at minimal boost of approximately 4lb .
This charger is 1 L per revolution, the pulley ratio is just under 2 to 1.
The charger has never been on this particular block before and I am unsure of the compression ratio etc. As yet.
I have considered the water air sandwich plate, have not completely rule it out yet. It is less efficient than air to air from what I have read.
However the advantage in less pipework etc is attractive.
Only after around 300 BHP and efficiency.
I was running approximately 8 LB boast, intake air temperature was too high.
Consequently drop the boost.
Nothing is conclusive at this stage until I investigate further.
I do wish to install a after cooler as this vehicle toes a 20 caravan and our temperatures up north are a huge demand to any vehicle.
If you add a wife to the situation with searing heat and air con not managing it all makes for a tense time. Although it doesn't bother me. I hope covered your response will take another look in the morning.
Thanks again to all.
Peter
It is approaching midnight here in Oz, and just caught your message.
I will probably post some pictures soon especially when I dismantle.
After reading your note, I do have to consider is my main problem with detination mainly due to high compression ratio or even squish.
These units have been installed in Oz on Rover V8 with success at minimal boost of approximately 4lb .
This charger is 1 L per revolution, the pulley ratio is just under 2 to 1.
The charger has never been on this particular block before and I am unsure of the compression ratio etc. As yet.
I have considered the water air sandwich plate, have not completely rule it out yet. It is less efficient than air to air from what I have read.
However the advantage in less pipework etc is attractive.
Only after around 300 BHP and efficiency.
I was running approximately 8 LB boast, intake air temperature was too high.
Consequently drop the boost.
Nothing is conclusive at this stage until I investigate further.
I do wish to install a after cooler as this vehicle toes a 20 caravan and our temperatures up north are a huge demand to any vehicle.
If you add a wife to the situation with searing heat and air con not managing it all makes for a tense time. Although it doesn't bother me. I hope covered your response will take another look in the morning.
Thanks again to all.
Peter
3.9 Range Rover Supercharger manifold design
As I mentioned the charger only comes in at reasonable throttle because of the natural aspiration through a bypass.
A bigger charger would definitely benefit all round however I have what I have and believe it will be sufficient as I'm not after huge gains.
The LPG enters as a vapour just alongside the petrol injectors
LPG does like cold air to increase economy, and I have no issues with icing up and I also run a heat post just after the gas unit.
I had to learn the wolf version 500 programming as it is not a popular unit in Western Australia. Finding someone familiar and with a four-wheel-drive was quite difficult.
I have welded up the central viscous unit, removed front drive shaft, all to allow two wheel dino compatibility.
Vehicle does not get use much as yet and has been a project of some two years. (Not there yet.)
Peter
A bigger charger would definitely benefit all round however I have what I have and believe it will be sufficient as I'm not after huge gains.
The LPG enters as a vapour just alongside the petrol injectors
LPG does like cold air to increase economy, and I have no issues with icing up and I also run a heat post just after the gas unit.
I had to learn the wolf version 500 programming as it is not a popular unit in Western Australia. Finding someone familiar and with a four-wheel-drive was quite difficult.
I have welded up the central viscous unit, removed front drive shaft, all to allow two wheel dino compatibility.
Vehicle does not get use much as yet and has been a project of some two years. (Not there yet.)
Peter
Have you ever thought about going the water/methanol injection route ???
Thats what I used to get my temps down. Its damn cheap these days and easy to plumb in.
Have this kit myself Be cool .
Be shure to use real methanol instead of ethanol if you go this route. Methanol takes away more heat when it vapours & burns.
Thats what I used to get my temps down. Its damn cheap these days and easy to plumb in.
Have this kit myself Be cool .
Be shure to use real methanol instead of ethanol if you go this route. Methanol takes away more heat when it vapours & burns.
'73 Ford Capri. 3.5 RV8, Magnacharger 110 Supercharger, Merlin F85 Heads, Water/Methanol Injected
'73 Ford F250, 6.7ltr V8
Building a GT40 mk2
'73 Ford F250, 6.7ltr V8
Building a GT40 mk2
Thanks mate
Might consider it but it all depends on what i find when i remove the top end.
Just increasing the plenum beneath the charger may be a good thing.
Mainly concerened to get comp ratio and inlet manifold wright first.
If it is not to dificult would rather alter manifold for air to air aftercooler which i beleave is the more efficent choice.
Might consider it but it all depends on what i find when i remove the top end.
Just increasing the plenum beneath the charger may be a good thing.
Mainly concerened to get comp ratio and inlet manifold wright first.
If it is not to dificult would rather alter manifold for air to air aftercooler which i beleave is the more efficent choice.
Looking back on your post's with some scotch made me think.........
What do you know about your tiny blower..........
How fast can it turn before it gets inefficient. Eatons for example get inefficient above 14.600 rpm blower speed.
I have a Magnacharger 110 ( 1.8 liter) that will still cope with 19.000 rpm ( I am not running it that fast)( I did ask the manufactorer that still makes me old blower).
If a small blower has to run fast it heats up fast heating up the intake charge too. Bigger blowers run slower so they heat up slower.
Running a small blower fast means also oiling issues. Blower oil heats up to much or gets to thin. Internal seal issues can occure as seals can handle some amount of rpm friction otherwise Teflon seals need to be placed.
As I understand you'r running a 1 liter or 61ci blower on a 3.9 V8.
In my eyes a bit small so I am not shure if there's any benifit to run more boost as original equiped.
As you'r planning to design your own manifold why not find yourself a nice bigger Eaton M90 or bigger (pefered) unit.
In my opinion an after cooler conversion will not solve your issues, it will only place it somewhere else cause your blower is very small.
For your records............have a 3.5 myself running a Magnacharger 110ci.
Engine is 9:1cr and run aprox 10psi boost without any issues.
I added water methanol injection as a safety device, 300cc@150psi pressure, comes in at 6psi boost.
What do you know about your tiny blower..........
How fast can it turn before it gets inefficient. Eatons for example get inefficient above 14.600 rpm blower speed.
I have a Magnacharger 110 ( 1.8 liter) that will still cope with 19.000 rpm ( I am not running it that fast)( I did ask the manufactorer that still makes me old blower).
If a small blower has to run fast it heats up fast heating up the intake charge too. Bigger blowers run slower so they heat up slower.
Running a small blower fast means also oiling issues. Blower oil heats up to much or gets to thin. Internal seal issues can occure as seals can handle some amount of rpm friction otherwise Teflon seals need to be placed.
As I understand you'r running a 1 liter or 61ci blower on a 3.9 V8.
In my eyes a bit small so I am not shure if there's any benifit to run more boost as original equiped.
As you'r planning to design your own manifold why not find yourself a nice bigger Eaton M90 or bigger (pefered) unit.
In my opinion an after cooler conversion will not solve your issues, it will only place it somewhere else cause your blower is very small.
For your records............have a 3.5 myself running a Magnacharger 110ci.
Engine is 9:1cr and run aprox 10psi boost without any issues.
I added water methanol injection as a safety device, 300cc@150psi pressure, comes in at 6psi boost.
'73 Ford Capri. 3.5 RV8, Magnacharger 110 Supercharger, Merlin F85 Heads, Water/Methanol Injected
'73 Ford F250, 6.7ltr V8
Building a GT40 mk2
'73 Ford F250, 6.7ltr V8
Building a GT40 mk2
A 1 litre blower on a 2:1 drive ratio into a 3.9 litre engine is too small to give any meaningfull boost , any increase in manifold pressure over about .5psi will be entirly due to the heating of the inlet charge and restrictions in the inlet manifold little wonder it pinks. You need somthing like 1.6 litre blower driven at 1.8:1 to give you around 7 psi boost which with a 9:1 to 9.25:1 cr and a decent squish band should run well on petrol, you could do with at least 10 or 10.5:1 for the LPG but you seem to want to run both, can you get E85, because with that you could run higher CR to suit the LPG.
Best regards
Mike
Best regards
Mike
poppet valves rule!
Thanks Mike.
What is an E85 is it an Eton.
These superchargers are fitted to GMH, 3.6 LT V6 motors, when adapted to the Rover, boost is recommended at around 3 to 4 psi.
At that boost they seem to be okay with moderate power increases and better economy.
I may have two drop to those levels of boost, as I'm not after huge performance gains. Just efficiency.
I am yet to decide which way to go.
What is an E85 is it an Eton.
These superchargers are fitted to GMH, 3.6 LT V6 motors, when adapted to the Rover, boost is recommended at around 3 to 4 psi.
At that boost they seem to be okay with moderate power increases and better economy.
I may have two drop to those levels of boost, as I'm not after huge performance gains. Just efficiency.
I am yet to decide which way to go.
Thank you for all your replies, I will bring them up to date tomorrow as it is quite late here and time for bed.
Hope to remove heads within the next few days,
and I will send pics and have more to discuss if you are all willing.
I must say that your wealth of information is highly appreciated.
Thank you again.
Hope to remove heads within the next few days,
and I will send pics and have more to discuss if you are all willing.
I must say that your wealth of information is highly appreciated.
Thank you again.
SUPERCHARGER PARTICULARS
In the middle of Eaton's supercharger family, the M62 displaces 1.035 liters and is suitable for the majority of engines between 2.2 and 3.5 liters. As such, the M62 is the ideal choice for passenger cars, SUVs and light trucks around the world.
• Displacement: 1.035 Liters
• Max. Outlet Pressure: 2.0 Bar
• Max Speed Cont (inst.): 14,000 (16,000)
Flow at Max. Speed @ 1.8 Bar: 810 cubic meters / hour
What I have found so far is:
Tin head gaskets had failed water in number seven leaving the piston very clean.
Head gasket failed between number four and six.
Interesting holes in front of Block to connect water jacket.
All original facings.
Don't wish to change valve sizes due to cost, but would like to throat out the exhaust seats.
Exaust valves are stainless but no easing and probibly too thich behind head.
The squish would be aprox. 1.4 MM from deck to piston plus a compressed composite gasket =2.6 MM total or. 102 th Souuld i deck the block?
Having trouble calculating compression ratio. it as suposed to be 8.13:1 will post volumes shortly.
Once the heads are bolted back on I will be looking at the camshaft specs and manifold construction.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
When you are too old to learn you're too old.
Here is a link to my photo album
http://s1223.photobucket.com/albums/dd510/rangy2/
In the middle of Eaton's supercharger family, the M62 displaces 1.035 liters and is suitable for the majority of engines between 2.2 and 3.5 liters. As such, the M62 is the ideal choice for passenger cars, SUVs and light trucks around the world.
• Displacement: 1.035 Liters
• Max. Outlet Pressure: 2.0 Bar
• Max Speed Cont (inst.): 14,000 (16,000)
Flow at Max. Speed @ 1.8 Bar: 810 cubic meters / hour
What I have found so far is:
Tin head gaskets had failed water in number seven leaving the piston very clean.
Head gasket failed between number four and six.
Interesting holes in front of Block to connect water jacket.
All original facings.
Don't wish to change valve sizes due to cost, but would like to throat out the exhaust seats.
Exaust valves are stainless but no easing and probibly too thich behind head.
The squish would be aprox. 1.4 MM from deck to piston plus a compressed composite gasket =2.6 MM total or. 102 th Souuld i deck the block?
Having trouble calculating compression ratio. it as suposed to be 8.13:1 will post volumes shortly.
Once the heads are bolted back on I will be looking at the camshaft specs and manifold construction.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
When you are too old to learn you're too old.
Here is a link to my photo album
http://s1223.photobucket.com/albums/dd510/rangy2/
Looking at those numbers, on a 3.9 with a redline of 6.5k on the engine and 1.035l from the blower per rev, with a VE of .75 you may see manifold boost of about 7 psi, if you ft stage 1 heads and a decent cam you will see a VE about .8 to .85. that means a boost around 6 psi, at peak torque you may only see boost of about 2 psi, given the power used to drive the supercharger and it's efficiency of about 80% you are doing little more than heating up the inlet charge. I certainly think you will see very little more power out of it for the boosted engine you may get 214 bhp with take off 20 bhp to drive the blower then you are pretty much staying where you are. I think that blower is just too small.
Best regards
Mike
Best regards
Mike
poppet valves rule!
