follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Xero Limit
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Scion FR-S Forum | Subaru BRZ Forum | Toyota 86 GT 86 Forum | AS1 Forum - FT86CLUB > Technical Topics > Forced Induction

Forced Induction Turbo, Supercharger, Methanol, Nitrous


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-21-2018, 11:53 PM   #29
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
I know were interested in a real dyno sheet for the RS but in the meantime here is a buddies Dynapak Dyno sheet from Church Automotive in California for his stock compression motor with the RS and e85. He made 400 on it at about 7200rpm

https://ibb.co/GWf7pC1
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2018, 12:01 AM   #30
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
I also talked to Delicious Tuning and they said that the small standard Jackson intercooler was mostly designed around the C30 and lower boost setups and that the c38 RS setups are showing some very noticeable heatsoak which is holding back the full potential. The guys at ATPTurbo think that based on the 74lb/min flow of the C38-81 at high boost it should be upgraded to the garrett core of 24 x 10.5 x 3 (600hp rated) or the 24 x 6 x 3 (400hp core) for best cooling and best efficiency for keeping pressure drop low as possible. Once I finish tuning here soon Ill see how the results look and go from there on more upgrades to the kit.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2018, 01:40 PM   #31
JDMChris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Drives: 2016
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 222
Thanks: 50
Thanked 99 Times in 71 Posts
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Send a message via AIM to JDMChris
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86joe View Post
I know were interested in a real dyno sheet for the RS but in the meantime here is a buddies Dynapak Dyno sheet from Church Automotive in California for his stock compression motor with the RS and e85. He made 400 on it at about 7200rpm

https://ibb.co/GWf7pC1
That Dyno is also on a AT car, so considerable difference because of the drive train loss.

High Boost Pulley+E85 does about that same power on that same Dyno with a MT car.
JDMChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 11:55 PM   #32
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMChris View Post
That Dyno is also on a AT car, so considerable difference because of the drive train loss.

High Boost Pulley+E85 does about that same power on that same Dyno with a MT car.
Thats true I forgot about that.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 07:40 AM   #33
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
So the car is finished up. On a mustang dyno that I baselined stock at 153whp, I made 350whp on E85 at 15psi at 7450rpm with the RS Upgrade. This is in Texas in about 50 degree weather when tuned. Car made around 295whp on 93. Lots of timing pulled out obviously. Lots of people say this dyno reads low but with the 153whp baseline Id say its a pretty accurate reading. My motor is built but with stock CFM so no ported heads or cams. I dont think the RS will make 400 on anything but a Dynapak dyno. The car feels fantastic and the power is very impressive for a rotrex so the actual number is irrelevant to me at the end of the day. The extra torque coming on sooner is noticeable over the HBP. I understand all setups and environments are different but IDK where Jackson is seeing 17psi. Also Im not so sure a better intercooler would be worth it. Based on the temps we saw when tuning, theres a little to be desired in terms of cooling but I dont think the power gain would be worth the money spent. May be better to just use the C38-91 as it would just bolt right in and run more power that way. Either way, these were the results I saw with my 12.5:1 motor, E85, catless bolt ons, and the 90mm RS pulley.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 86joe For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-07-2019), JonAvalon (02-07-2019)
Old 02-09-2019, 09:02 PM   #34
GrabTheWheel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Drives: 16' BRZ
Location: California
Posts: 179
Thanks: 22
Thanked 78 Times in 47 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86joe View Post
So the car is finished up. On a mustang dyno that I baselined stock at 153whp, I made 350whp on E85 at 15psi at 7450rpm with the RS Upgrade. This is in Texas in about 50 degree weather when tuned. Car made around 295whp on 93. Lots of timing pulled out obviously. Lots of people say this dyno reads low but with the 153whp baseline Id say its a pretty accurate reading. My motor is built but with stock CFM so no ported heads or cams. I dont think the RS will make 400 on anything but a Dynapak dyno. The car feels fantastic and the power is very impressive for a rotrex so the actual number is irrelevant to me at the end of the day. The extra torque coming on sooner is noticeable over the HBP. I understand all setups and environments are different but IDK where Jackson is seeing 17psi. Also Im not so sure a better intercooler would be worth it. Based on the temps we saw when tuning, theres a little to be desired in terms of cooling but I dont think the power gain would be worth the money spent. May be better to just use the C38-91 as it would just bolt right in and run more power that way. Either way, these were the results I saw with my 12.5:1 motor, E85, catless bolt ons, and the 90mm RS pulley.
Are you above sea level at all? I was seeing just under 14psi with the HBP at redline on a C38-81. It's hard to believe you only gain 1 lb of boost with the RS pulley. Regardless of numbers your car sounds fun! Hopefully you have a convenient place to get E85, it's quite addictive...
GrabTheWheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 07:39 AM   #35
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabTheWheel View Post
Are you above sea level at all? I was seeing just under 14psi with the HBP at redline on a C38-81. It's hard to believe you only gain 1 lb of boost with the RS pulley. Regardless of numbers your car sounds fun! Hopefully you have a convenient place to get E85, it's quite addictive...
I am in Dallas, Texas which is 430 feet above sea level. All of the HBP users in this area including myself saw no more than 12psi max at 7450 redline. So a 3psi gain with RS. And yeah the butt dyno definitely feels great! The numbers are heartbreakers but it definitely feels how it should.
Do you remember your stock baseline numbers and then the numbers with the ~14psi HBP setup?
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to 86joe For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-11-2019)
Old 02-11-2019, 02:01 PM   #36
GrabTheWheel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Drives: 16' BRZ
Location: California
Posts: 179
Thanks: 22
Thanked 78 Times in 47 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86joe View Post
I am in Dallas, Texas which is 430 feet above sea level. All of the HBP users in this area including myself saw no more than 12psi max at 7450 redline. So a 3psi gain with RS. And yeah the butt dyno definitely feels great! The numbers are heartbreakers but it definitely feels how it should.
Do you remember your stock baseline numbers and then the numbers with the ~14psi HBP setup?
Unfortunately I don't have a stock baseline on the same dyno. 350 WHP on a mustang dyno is A LOT of power. I'm sure it feels amazing and the car doesn't feel like it's lacking, even in the torque department.

I don't want to upset the Rotrex guys (I use to be one) but the reality is the C38-81 will not make 400-500 WHP on a non hub dyno like many people on this forum claim it will. Maybe with a different cam and higher than stock compression?

The Rotrex feels great, makes cool sounds and mimics the stock power band in a very satisfying way. BUT if you are looking for BIG power it is not a good option even with the RS pulley on E85.

Rotrex touts itself as being the most "efficient" blower can someone please explain this to me? To me that would mean having the most power gains per PSI of boost. Obviously it will not keep up with a turbo and I don't think anyone expects it to. But I promise you that a TVS 1320 with 15 PSI on E85 will make a noticeable amount more power without any dip in power at the top end and plenty of torque down low.

The consensus on this forum that the Rotrex is best for track and the TVS is best for the street just doesn't make sense to me. To me the TVS is clearly the better choice for AutoX and I believe it will out perform the Rotrex on track as well. If you want a car that sounds cool, feels like you're boosted and keeps the stock powerband then go Rotrex. If you want torque and to feel like you have a strong V6 in the car with near silent operation go TVS. The Rotrex is the least likely to blow a stock motor but that's simply because it makes less power as you move away from the CARB setup compared to Edelbrock and Harrop.

Last edited by GrabTheWheel; 02-11-2019 at 02:27 PM.
GrabTheWheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 08:14 PM   #37
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabTheWheel View Post
Unfortunately I don't have a stock baseline on the same dyno. 350 WHP on a mustang dyno is A LOT of power. I'm sure it feels amazing and the car doesn't feel like it's lacking, even in the torque department.

I don't want to upset the Rotrex guys (I use to be one) but the reality is the C38-81 will not make 400-500 WHP on a non hub dyno like many people on this forum claim it will. Maybe with a different cam and higher than stock compression?

The Rotrex feels great, makes cool sounds and mimics the stock power band in a very satisfying way. BUT if you are looking for BIG power it is not a good option even with the RS pulley on E85.

Rotrex touts itself as being the most "efficient" blower can someone please explain this to me? To me that would mean having the most power gains per PSI of boost. Obviously it will not keep up with a turbo and I don't think anyone expects it to. But I promise you that a TVS 1320 with 15 PSI on E85 will make a noticeable amount more power without any dip in power at the top end and plenty of torque down low.

The consensus on this forum that the Rotrex is best for track and the TVS is best for the street just doesn't make sense to me. To me the TVS is clearly the better choice for AutoX and I believe it will out perform the Rotrex on track as well. If you want a car that sounds cool, feels like you're boosted and keeps the stock powerband then go Rotrex. If you want torque and to feel like you have a strong V6 in the car with near silent operation go TVS. The Rotrex is the least likely to blow a stock motor but that's simply because it makes less power as you move away from the CARB setup compared to Edelbrock and Harrop.
I completely agree. Unlikely any chassis dyno is gonna show +400 with a C38-81 RS setup. I definitely chose the C38 kit because I originally ran it on stock motor 93 fuel and it was my daily at the time so i wanted the low torque for extra precaution. Even though its perfectly possible to hurt the valvetrain with a rotrex but atleast I wasnt going to bend a rod by any means (not with a good tune anyway). I will look into a turbo kit maybe in a year or two to push the built motor a little harder. But in the meantime the RS setup feels fantastic and should be very reliable with the motor build/power levels. In the back of my mind though Im curious how a C38-91 or even the C38R would feel with a small pulley. Just isnt worth spending the +2300$ that those superchargers cost when a 4500$ JDL 3076r kit can make 500hp.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 08:21 PM   #38
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Also, if I remember correctly (Id have to go back and look at dyno sheet) the RS made 10.5psi at 5000rpm.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2019, 12:03 AM   #39
GrabTheWheel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Drives: 16' BRZ
Location: California
Posts: 179
Thanks: 22
Thanked 78 Times in 47 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86joe View Post
I completely agree. Unlikely any chassis dyno is gonna show +400 with a C38-81 RS setup. I definitely chose the C38 kit because I originally ran it on stock motor 93 fuel and it was my daily at the time so i wanted the low torque for extra precaution. Even though its perfectly possible to hurt the valvetrain with a rotrex but atleast I wasnt going to bend a rod by any means (not with a good tune anyway). I will look into a turbo kit maybe in a year or two to push the built motor a little harder. But in the meantime the RS setup feels fantastic and should be very reliable with the motor build/power levels. In the back of my mind though Im curious how a C38-91 or even the C38R would feel with a small pulley. Just isnt worth spending the +2300$ that those superchargers cost when a 4500$ JDL 3076r kit can make 500hp.
Well, it's nice to see someone who can be objective instead of just a fanboy of the kit they bought! I actually bought a Jackson kit first after having driven the Edelbrock kit. I thought the Jackson felt faster because of the way the power builds up top and it suited me since I liked to keep the revs up above 4K anyway. Plus at the time I felt like if I was gonna spend the money on boost I wanted to hear and feel it, so the Rotrex just fit the bill as I wasn't going to Sprintex and the TVS units are super quiet.

It's pretty hysterical to me that Rotrex advertise their blowers as "silent operation". They are super loud off throttle maybe not more so than any other centrifugal supercharger but I haven't noticed much of a difference. I hadn't heard about the C38R, looks pretty cool. On the plus side if you decide to sell and upgrade, the Jackson kits are easy to sell, they are also half the weight of the TVS kits. Not only a benefit on your car but also makes it easier when you go to ship it.

I have kind of a love/hate relationship with centri's. I think if you could have a Rotrex large enough to make 1 bar of boost at 3500rpm and 30 psi at redline it would be perfect!

I have an old comptech kit on my S2K and I enjoy it. My wife hates the sound. She likes the sound of V8's...
GrabTheWheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2019, 08:15 AM   #40
86joe
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion FRS
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabTheWheel View Post
Well, it's nice to see someone who can be objective instead of just a fanboy of the kit they bought! I actually bought a Jackson kit first after having driven the Edelbrock kit. I thought the Jackson felt faster because of the way the power builds up top and it suited me since I liked to keep the revs up above 4K anyway. Plus at the time I felt like if I was gonna spend the money on boost I wanted to hear and feel it, so the Rotrex just fit the bill as I wasn't going to Sprintex and the TVS units are super quiet.

It's pretty hysterical to me that Rotrex advertise their blowers as "silent operation". They are super loud off throttle maybe not more so than any other centrifugal supercharger but I haven't noticed much of a difference. I hadn't heard about the C38R, looks pretty cool. On the plus side if you decide to sell and upgrade, the Jackson kits are easy to sell, they are also half the weight of the TVS kits. Not only a benefit on your car but also makes it easier when you go to ship it.

I have kind of a love/hate relationship with centri's. I think if you could have a Rotrex large enough to make 1 bar of boost at 3500rpm and 30 psi at redline it would be perfect!

I have an old comptech kit on my S2K and I enjoy it. My wife hates the sound. She likes the sound of V8's...
Speaking of Rotrex sound haha...aside from that noise they make at idle...the RS makes it LOUD AS HELL 6000rpm and higher. When i wind out 2nd and 3rd to red, the induction noise is absurdly loud. Much much louder than the standard and HBP.
86joe is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to 86joe For This Useful Post:
GrabTheWheel (02-13-2019)
 
Reply

Tags
c38, high boost, jrsc, pulley, supercharger

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone of JRSC or Edelbrock? tian105 Mid-Atlantic 11 10-02-2017 11:56 AM
JRSC &a Delicious Tuning VABeachBRZ Forced Induction 6 08-10-2017 04:44 PM
Speed Academy EP5 - JRSC dyno (updated: EP6 - JRSC Track Test) DarkSunrise Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum 17 03-30-2017 11:39 PM
JRSC oil use xsnapshot Forced Induction 3 03-27-2016 10:22 PM
NEOPLOT Crank pulley Alternator pulley& Waterpump pulley ANREX Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 10 10-25-2012 07:45 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.