cheapo s/c conversion

  • Thread starter Thread starter 233
  • Start date Start date

233

233

Soldato
Joined
21 Nov 2004
Posts
13,558
Location
Wishaw
toying with the idea of supercharging the budget E30 320 ;)


was looking at a few chargers on the bay ranging from ones off of bmw mini's (dirt cheap) through to jag v8 uns


i'm not expecting miracles but an extra 40 horses on top of the standard 130 would be nice :)


any of the s/c knowledgable care to share some thoughts
 
Can the stock internals on the block of the e30 take the increased pressure?

You'd also need a way of adjusting the fuelling, either a piggyback ecu or some kind of adjusted map on the stock ecu (if possible).

It'd be a lot simpler to just add a bottle of laughing gas, but of course the power wouldn't be as progessive, and its more of a one-off thing.
 
going to go diy managment either use the best part of an emerald m3d setup or megasquirt

ideally run 5-8 psi :)
 
Is supercharging a 320 going to give better vfm results than selling up and buying a 325? Or am I missing the point?
 
I seem to remember that the appropriate update for an E30 was to get a 2.7 block (the US had these on their low emissions model), then stick the head from a 2.5 on it. Probably a LOT more effective than a supercharger, and cheaper.
 
right...I did a fairly large writeup of this a while back but can't find it. :(

firstly, principles. this exercise does not aim to get omfgzorz mad bhp yo!!! nor does it aim to chase peak bhp figures.

what we are going to do is increase the efficiency of the engine, making it produce more torque over more of the rev range. this makes it more driveable and (because bhp is ultimately a function of torque and revs) makes it produce more power.

secondly, blower choice. for a 2.0 I'd go for an eaton m42 from a BMW mini or merc 230 kompressor. this will be fine for up to 10psi of pressure. it is a positive displacement supercharger which means that it outputs a set volume of air for each revolution...note: not boost. boost is a bad thing. nasty, nasty boost.

thirdly, cooling. you can go up to around 6-7psi without the need to cool the inlet charge by the use of either an intercooler or a chargecooler. above this you will need to either find a way of routing the blower outlet to an intercooler then back around to the plenum chamber or find the space to package a chargecooler on the inlet side of the engine (Jag v8 chargecoolers are cheap and plentiful...use one side and sell the other :)).

so we've got the basics out of the way; what we are wanting to achieve, what we will use to achieve it and cooling...

now you have an option. do you want to stay with 6psi, leave out the cooling side, stick with stock internals and get an engine which doesn't really suffer ay greater wear and tear than a stock engine?

...or do you want to go for 9-10psi, an intercooler or chargecooler, risk the chance of the stock internals letting go, upgrading the internals and spending more money for an engine which will ultimately be more powerful?

with either choice, you will need to look up the map for your blower on the eaton website and use it to work out what pulley ratio you need. but what engine rpm to use as a reference? well the easiest way to do this is to find a point in the rev range where you feel the engine pulls hardest.and use that...for a bit more accuracy, get a rolling road printout and find where your peak point is in the torque curve.

mounting and plumbing...you will need to find space for the blower to go where it won't foul steering components and so on. if I recall correctly, the intake is on the left hand side of your engine bay...so you should be okay mounting it under the plenum. once you have decided your location (remembering that you need a clear belt run to the crank pulley), you will need to mount the blower solidly to the engine. try and triangulate mounts for stiffness.

you will need adapter plates for the blower inlet and outlet. CR500DOM on the www.retro-rides.com forums makes these (expertly CNC'd. well worth it...and if you haven't signed up, do it. its a great resource and I'd love to see a build diary on there :)). these plates basically turn the odd-shaped inlet and outlet into standard-sized circular ports.

after that its 'simply' a case of mounting everything up, getting it plumbed up and running with your ECU.

on the intake side of things, you can either retain the stock TB and plenum, replace it with a bigger TB (328?) or replace the whole setup with an ITB rig...with a six, I'd go for two sets of TBs from a triumph triple and a custom plenum. you should be fine for flow with them until you start nudging 400bhp-ish.

all said and done, though. I would simply drop a 535i engine in. 211bhp from the word go and then fit a blower or turbo in the future for 300+bhp.

*n
 
penski said:
all said and done, though. I would simply drop a 535i engine in. 211bhp from the word go and then fit a blower or turbo in the future for 300+bhp.

*n


Thread closed. ;)
 
Wayn0r said:
you could lower the compression by using a thicker headgasket.

I should have mentioned this before...

there is no need to lower the compression. none whatsoever.

this isn't eighties-style turbocharging we're talking about here.

a 335i with jag v8 blower (a larger eaton unit than the mini one...) and triumph tbs would be a riot.

*n
 
it is by no means a complete guide and shouldn't be used as such but it will give you the basic pointers on what to do.

what we are actually trying to achieve is to raise the volumetric efficiency to 130% over as much of the rev range as possible.

remember when you look at a rolling road printout and the torque curve in particular?

you will see that most normal cars have a torque curve which rises to a peak then tails off. the actual number at the peak is not that important...what is key is the actual area of the graph underneath the curve. the flatter the curve and the more area underneath the curve, then the more driveable the engine will be. compare the curves of a 3.0 V6 and a 2.0 VTEC engine; the former will have a wider, flatter torque curve and the latter will be quite 'peaky' with not as much area under the curve.

the torque 'peak' will be at or very close to 130% volumetric efficiency.

because we are using this peak as the basis for our calculation to obtain pulley ratios to get the correct blower speed for 6-7psi, the finished product should result in the rest of the curve being raised to the level of (or close to) the former peak. the curve will then be raised as a whole across the rev range.

so although you will see a 25-30% increase in peak bhp, the torque spread, low-end torque and driveability of the engine increases massively.

*n
 
penski said:
compare the curves of a 3.0 V6 and a 2.0 VTEC engine; the former will have a wider, flatter torque curve and the latter will be quite 'peaky' with not as much area under the curve.

Not quite true, VTEC engines have a very flat torque curve, they're engineered that way. Granted, they don't produce as much torque as a larger capacity engine, but they do have a very flat curve.
DSC00141_001.JPG
 
neil-ste said:
Not quite true, VTEC engines have a very flat torque curve, they're engineered that way. Granted, they don't produce as much torque as a larger capacity engine, but they do have a very flat curve.
http://www.feedthehorse.com/photos/d/3365-2/DSC00141_001.JPG[IMG][/QUOTE]

yes, there are two main routes to big power: lots of torque or lots of revs. honda chose the latter.

but even looking at that curve, it has a defined peak. the comparison I was trying to make was with one which would basically look like a tabletop; lots of torque low down, rising slowly to the peak then rolling off at the limiter.

*n
 
penski said:
I should have mentioned this before...

there is no need to lower the compression. none whatsoever.

this isn't eighties-style turbocharging we're talking about here.

a 335i with jag v8 blower (a larger eaton unit than the mini one...) and triumph tbs would be a riot.

*n

that was just a suggestion if you wanted more psi without going on forged internals (didnt read the whole thread, just the bit about big psi + internals :p)
 
Wayn0r said:
that was just a suggestion if you wanted more psi without going on forged internals (didnt read the whole thread, just the bit about big psi + internals :p)

all lowering the ompression would do would be increase resistance to detonation...slightly.

if you go to 10psi with low compression, you will still need stronger internals...you'll just end up with an engine which has the internals to take 10psi of pressure but with low compression which would make it inefficient and which would defeat the entire point of the exercise. ;)

*n
 
neil-ste said:
Not quite true, VTEC engines have a very flat torque curve, they're engineered that way. Granted, they don't produce as much torque as a larger capacity engine, but they do have a very flat curve.
DSC00141_001.JPG

yeah true people always talk about how vtec engines are peaky...but the reality is that they have incredibly flat torque bands...it's just that they are still usually under 2.0 liters so their "flat torque" isn't very much...but at 8000 rpm even a small amnt of torque translates to very nice power.
 
penski said:
all lowering the ompression would do would be increase resistance to detonation...slightly.

if you go to 10psi with low compression, you will still need stronger internals...you'll just end up with an engine which has the internals to take 10psi of pressure but with low compression which would make it inefficient and which would defeat the entire point of the exercise. ;)

*n

But penski detonation is without doubt the most reliable way to balls your engine in seconds. So surly by reducing any chance of detonation you will add many miles to the engine. It would make it more ineficient as you said, but by blowing up the engine in 20 minutes would also defeat the point of the exercise :p
 
penski said:
it is a positive displacement supercharger which means that it outputs a set volume of air for each revolution...note: not boost. boost is a bad thing. nasty, nasty boost.

it's still forced induction, and still pressurising the inlet manifold.. that's still 'boost' however you want to word it.

penski said:
all lowering the ompression would do would be increase resistance to detonation...slightly.

if you go to 10psi with low compression, you will still need stronger internals...you'll just end up with an engine which has the internals to take 10psi of pressure but with low compression which would make it inefficient and which would defeat the entire point of the exercise. ;)

*n

well, no. Lowering the compression would.. lower the compression.

10psi with low compression would result in less power than 10psi running stock CR. So if the internals were good to run 10psi, then lower the compression will let you run more. Trading off CR vs pressure to acheive similar bhp/torque figures. After all that's what the internals are rated to, not manifold pressures.
 
Back
Top Bottom