Innovate (Sprintex) Supercharger Owners Topic

[evo4g63]

Conclusion.... run the innovate kit non IC, 70mm pulley,oil cooler, radiator and call it a day

[stockysnail]

Originally Posted by evo4g63

Conclusion.... run the innovate kit non IC, 70mm pulley,oil cooler, radiator and call it a day

If we had post blower air temperatures and they are safe then I would be ok with that but since there isn't post blower temps, who knows? I'd rather not have my engine die on me after a few years of use from too much extreme temps or whatever else may happen.

[NickFRS]

Originally Posted by moto-mike

So for comparison purposes, here's the intercooled vs nonintercooled run. Best intercooled took hours on the dyno, best non-intercooled was our OTS tune with e65 (phloozy) above. Both on ethanol running pretty much the same advance, cam timing, and di timings. Both Raceseng 70mm pulleys.

My conclusion, for the time being, is that the intercooler hinders flow too much for the smaller pulleys. The problem is a maximum HP output issue. The charge air becomes incredibly unstable with that laminova core.

We tried the following over 50+ dyno pulls and two gas tanks on the road covering a hundred flashes.

FULL cam sweep in both directions
DI/PI ratios 100-0-100 in both directions
DI timings covering a full sweep that is physically possible, to the point of misfiring on both extremes.
AFR from 11:1 to 13.5:1. Best power above was on the leaner end.
Stock and aftermarket injectors.
Ignition timing is not a factor.
What we though were bad coils are not, no misfires on the latest tunes.

So there you have it. We'll keep working on this to see what else might be playing a role.

Now, does anyone have dynojet numbers of an intercooled setup that does differently?

As much as us tuners compete, I have been surprised by the consensus with our dyno findings. Oddly enough we hypothesized this would be an issue months back....

So what you saying is run a 72.5 pulley with the intercooler

[Ryan86]

Originally Posted by NickFRS

So what you saying is run a 72.5 pulley with the intercooler

Strangely I'm not seeing the same results.

I ran 75mm, 72.5 mm and 70mm all on the same dyno 2 pulls each, with 15 minute intervals between each pulley change. Using @DeliciousTuning interchangeable pulley tune.

I posted my graphs a few pages back,
70mm got 13.4 hp more than the 75mm with increased torque.

[NickFRS]

Originally Posted by Ryan86

Strangely I'm not seeing the same results.

I ran 75mm, 72.5 mm and 70mm all on the same dyno 2 pulls each, with 15 minute intervals between each pulley change. Using @DeliciousTuning interchangeable pulley tune.

I posted my graphs a few pages back,
70mm got 13.4 hp more than the 75mm with increased torque.

with a intercooler?

[xxscaxx]

Originally Posted by calispec

@delicious hit over 300 with this kit intercooled. IIRC. I think we need to hear from him before we start assuming it isn't possible or that there are problems getting there. i know he used e85 but this is the first I have heard of these problems. Does anyone know the area of the openings on the cooler vs the ports on the runner? I know there is restriction over the laminova.

I want the intercooler. Anyone want to sell me one??

I agree i'd like to hear his side of things, but what pisses me off is that all these tuners/shops/innovate/sprintex/whoever are so damn tight lipped about things, don't want to spew out this information out to anyone, and if it just so happens this is an issue that can't be worked out, us, the users of the kit suffer. More money WE have to spend, more headaches, etc. If I knew the intercooler kit had this issue, I would have simply waited to purchase it. Now I've wasted TWO days on the dyno (time & money), wasted money changing my spark plugs, wasted money buying tools that I probably won't need, etc. Hell even if it is worked out, I spent all this time and money already on it for no reason.

If the intercooler doesn't pan out, I will gladly sell you mine.

also the dyno charts moto-mike posted were both tuned on e85, so the e85 usage is irrelevant.

@NickFRS - Ryan86 is on the intercooler.

[Kodename47]

My question to those who are worrying is, would you rather 10/15bhp more or lower charge temps? Maybe not so relevant on ethanol but on pump you'll be able to keep the power more reliably with the I/C.

I intend to go to the 210+ asap for this reason alone.... lower charge temps will mean better reliable and repeatable power.

[xxscaxx]

That was the whole point of me going with the intercooler. But you should be making more power with it as well, not LOSING power.

Plus, I couldn't even get a clean pull without the car breaking up, so hell even 10whp less right now would be great if I could actually get a full dyno pull done.

I also plan on going to the 210+. But I wouldn't expect that out for at least a few months.

[mad_sb]

What Map Sensor are you using?

I know of at least one person (and he knows of a shop that saw the same issue IIRC, over seas) that saw all sorts of issues in the 5k-7k range on his intercooled sprintex setup, swapped back to a stock map sensor and all the problems went away for some bizarre reason, and yes, the map sensor they were using was properly scaled.

He also tried everyting tuning wise, cam sweeps, fueling, timing etc etc nothing made it any better until he went back to the stock map sensor. I don't understand it, but I trust what he was telling me. Seems crazy but there could be a reference to the map sensor that is not exposed in some of the tuning platforms is all i can figure.

Originally Posted by moto-mike

So for comparison purposes, here's the intercooled vs nonintercooled run. Best intercooled took hours on the dyno, best non-intercooled was our OTS tune with e65 (phloozy) above. Both on ethanol running pretty much the same advance, cam timing, and di timings. Both Raceseng 70mm pulleys.

My conclusion, for the time being, is that the intercooler hinders flow too much for the smaller pulleys. The problem is a maximum HP output issue. The charge air becomes incredibly unstable with that laminova core.

We tried the following over 50+ dyno pulls and two gas tanks on the road covering a hundred flashes.

FULL cam sweep in both directions
DI/PI ratios 100-0-100 in both directions
DI timings covering a full sweep that is physically possible, to the point of misfiring on both extremes.
AFR from 11:1 to 13.5:1. Best power above was on the leaner end.
Stock and aftermarket injectors.
Ignition timing is not a factor.
What we though were bad coils are not, no misfires on the latest tunes.

So there you have it. We'll keep working on this to see what else might be playing a role.

Now, does anyone have dynojet numbers of an intercooled setup that does differently?

As much as us tuners compete, I have been surprised by the consensus with our dyno findings. Oddly enough we hypothesized this would be an issue months back....

[xxscaxx]

Originally Posted by mad_sb

What Map Sensor are you using?

I know of at least one person (and he knows of a shop that saw the same issue IIRC, over seas) that saw all sorts of issues in the 5k-7k range on his intercooled sprintex setup, swapped back to a stock map sensor and all the problems went away for some bizarre reason, and yes, the map sensor they were using was properly scaled.

He also tried everyting tuning wise, cam sweeps, fueling, timing etc etc nothing made it any better until he went back to the stock map sensor.

I know your asking Mike, but I am using a Omni 4 bar map sensor.

I know Mike is a fan of the 3 bar.

This would be bizarre. But I have found that the Omni o-ring is too large for the MAP sensor plate. Even lubing it up, its extremely hard to get it in there without ripping the o-ring.

[Xero-Limit]

Without the IC we are able to use 3 bar and 4 bar sensors with 0 issues. The signal becomes very erratic with the intercooler, so this may explain the sine wave on the torque curve, but not so much the overall reduced output. Chicken or the egg kind of deal with that one.

[Ryan86]

Originally Posted by NickFRS

with a intercooler?

Yes with IC kit.

Here is the chart comparing 75 mm vs 72.5m on 91 OCT.
Very little difference

[Ryan86]

72.5mm vs 70mm on 91oct

Can see the smaller pulley gave more power.

Also note this was a expirimental tune I was testing for Bill, so ignore the numbers and the spiky top end.

[calispec]

Originally Posted by xxscaxx

I know your asking Mike, but I am using a Omni 4 bar map sensor.

I know Mike is a fan of the 3 bar.

This would be bizarre. But I have found that the Omni o-ring is too large for the MAP sensor plate. Even lubing it up, its extremely hard to get it in there without ripping the o-ring.

IIRC Sprintex shipped a new MAP sensor with the stage two kit. It also had AIT built in. They had so many problems with it that they stopped shipping the map sensor and told all their customers to switch back to the OEM map sensor. I was going to switch my map sensor as well but after hearing all that I stayed away. I talked briefly to Bill and he said I was better off staying OEM.

Sorry to hear about all your problems. It's super easy to make the switch so why not give it a try to rule it out.