View Single Post
Old 08-22-2013, 02:44 PM   #1528
Robftss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Drives: VW
Location: Canada
Posts: 270
Thanks: 190
Thanked 392 Times in 145 Posts
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfrank1972 View Post
I believe you are right about the sequential vs parallel:

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pu...ial-d_636.html

Wouldn't parallel make more sense as we're looking to keep boost low but maintain that boost at high rpm? i.e. double your CFM by using parallel units, and not worry about limiting boost by switching the motors?
Series as shown.

Parallel:
- Remove 'spider' intake manifold.
- Supercharge each 2 cyl (100hp) bank separately with its own ESC, 'Y' the inlets to a single MAF. I think this would look cool! and make room with the manifold removed.
- Run both units off a larger 24V, 35-40 AHR SLA, this will keep the PR's balanced.

Since the VW is 115hp stock, using two TQ18024V smaller units per side on the FA20 would yield ~ 3.5 psi to redline

Similarly, 370Z and early BMW 850i use two separate MAF/intake/manifold/cylinder runs, effectively 2 banks on a common crankshaft.
Robftss is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Robftss For This Useful Post:
bfrank1972 (08-22-2013)