Innovate (Sprintex) Supercharger Owners Topic

[whataboutbob]

As of yesterday evening. Put the blower on at 34.4K. Still running great.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by SprintexUSA

10% total HP output increase is where it stands, compared to a non-coated rotor pack. Back to back, it feels like you bolted something else on or got a tune for race fuel. Maybe think of it like driving at night after sunset.

There's 10% more fun to be had, basically. No matter how you put the power in there, you get more stress on the driveline by the time it reaches the ground. The driveline pays the price no matter how you put extra power in there. With these systems already making 300whp, I would think weight removal would be just as effective or more so. "I would not let it stall your plans" is what I'm trying to say.

The gains need to be put into perspective. Yes, we have dyno results. Yes, the gains are there. There is no silver bullet, though. This is not a freakishly unreasonable power gain with the +plus mod. We didn't turn straw into gold. It was a nice little bump in output, honestly undeserving of the drama surrounding it. The 335 is there if you want to prove something. The 210 was meant to be fun, and the plus mod would be "10% more fun". Looking at it pragmatically, you could make the same power on a 75mm pulley that you did on a 69mm pulley, and not stress anything out in the process.

Again, weight savings would be equally useful.

I'd love to see someone get anywhere near 300 whp with 91octane and this kit. But its not going to happen. If the 210+ can get to the 275 whp I'm reading this as then that's fairly significant, to me at least.

[SprintexUSA]

Agreed. 91 octane is definitely asking for it. The right fuel lets you get away with soooo much!

[OICU812]

Originally Posted by SprintexUSA

Agreed. 91 octane is definitely asking for it. The right fuel lets you get away with soooo much!

Fair enough, is the 210+ a 2015 release, any eta?

[R2]

Originally Posted by SprintexUSA

10% total HP output increase is where it stands, compared to a non-coated rotor pack. Back to back, it feels like you bolted something else on or got a tune for race fuel. Maybe think of it like driving at night after sunset.

There's 10% more fun to be had, basically. No matter how you put the power in there, you get more stress on the driveline by the time it reaches the ground. The driveline pays the price no matter how you put extra power in there. With these systems already making 300whp, I would think weight removal would be just as effective or more so. "I would not let it stall your plans" is what I'm trying to say.

The gains need to be put into perspective. Yes, we have dyno results. Yes, the gains are there. There is no silver bullet, though. This is not a freakishly unreasonable power gain with the +plus mod. We didn't turn straw into gold. It was a nice little bump in output, honestly undeserving of the drama surrounding it. The 335 is there if you want to prove something. The 210 was meant to be fun, and the plus mod would be "10% more fun". Looking at it pragmatically, you could make the same power on a 75mm pulley that you did on a 69mm pulley, and not stress anything out in the process.

Again, weight savings would be equally useful.

A little clarification on where the 10% comes from would be great. You mention coated rotors, which to me means you'd have better sealing and less blow-by between the rotors/housing/etc. So, presumably this increases volumetric efficiency vs. the standard 210 unit.

I have two questions regarding this:
1)Does this increase that volumetric efficiency at all supercharger speeds, or more so at higher rpm?
2)Does the adiabatic efficiency improve at all rotor speeds and pressure ratios as well (especially lower pressure ratios)?

If I am interested in a low power installation, either the 210 with the 75mm pulley or the 210+ and the same pulley, would I see any difference between the two? Could I get away without an intercooler easier with the 210+ as compared to the 210?

[Calum]

Originally Posted by R2

A little clarification on where the 10% comes from would be great. You mention coated rotors, which to me means you'd have better sealing and less blow-by between the rotors/housing/etc. So, presumably this increases volumetric efficiency vs. the standard 210 unit.

I have two questions regarding this:
1)Does this increase that volumetric efficiency at all supercharger speeds, or more so at higher rpm?
2)Does the adiabatic efficiency improve at all rotor speeds and pressure ratios as well (especially lower pressure ratios)?

If I am interested in a low power installation, either the 210 with the 75mm pulley or the 210+ and the same pulley, would I see any difference between the two? Could I get away without an intercooler easier with the 210+ as compared to the 210?

I'm guessing that for the same air flow there will less heat from the compressor but i d love to see the answers to your question.

[SprintexUSA]

Originally Posted by R2

A little clarification on where the 10% comes from would be great. You mention coated rotors, which to me means you'd have better sealing and less blow-by between the rotors/housing/etc. So, presumably this increases volumetric efficiency vs. the standard 210 unit.

I have two questions regarding this:
1)Does this increase that volumetric efficiency at all supercharger speeds, or more so at higher rpm?
2)Does the adiabatic efficiency improve at all rotor speeds and pressure ratios as well (especially lower pressure ratios)?

If I am interested in a low power installation, either the 210 with the 75mm pulley or the 210+ and the same pulley, would I see any difference between the two? Could I get away without an intercooler easier with the 210+ as compared to the 210?

The clearances are very tight already. The rotor coating fills in the last of these gaps as best it can. .003-.005 tolerance does not leave much wriggle room. The coating goes after that last shred of efficiency.

The volumetric and adiabatic efficiencies both increase at all RPMs. You would see the power increase on a non-intercooled application using the same pulley. You would be less pressed to use an intercooler or smaller pulley, but the gains would still be there. This leads me full circle back to the 10% I was talking about. The coating just goes after that last bit of efficiency left on the table inside the current unit.

[R2]

Originally Posted by SprintexUSA

The clearances are very tight already. The rotor coating fills in the last of these gaps as best it can. .003-.005 tolerance does not leave much wriggle room. The coating goes after that last shred of efficiency.

The volumetric and adiabatic efficiencies both increase at all RPMs. You would see the power increase on a non-intercooled application using the same pulley. You would be less pressed to use an intercooler or smaller pulley, but the gains would still be there. This leads me full circle back to the 10% I was talking about. The coating just goes after that last bit of efficiency left on the table inside the current unit.

Sounds good, thanks for the response. I'm a fan of maximizing things to the full extent possible. Now, I have one final question:


With this new coating, are there any clearance or reliability issues when used in very cold environments? I'm thinking of condensation that freezes inside the rotor housing and turns into a layer of frost. This frost would likely be thin but would certainly be greater than the clearances. Would this be an issue for this new coating, or even the standard 210 without the coating?

[SprintexUSA]

Morning frost or overnight freezing has never been an issue with rotor clearances. A bead of water or sheet of paper is actually thicker than the clearances inside the unit.

Frost from heavy nitrous use might cause an icing issue, but that's a big "IF". I wouldn't run a wet nitrous system on this since the intercooler is in the way.

Low oil levels in winter are something to watch out for. As long as the gears can reach the oil bath, you're in good shape.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by SprintexUSA

The clearances are very tight already. The rotor coating fills in the last of these gaps as best it can. .003-.005 tolerance does not leave much wriggle room. The coating goes after that last shred of efficiency.

The volumetric and adiabatic efficiencies both increase at all RPMs. You would see the power increase on a non-intercooled application using the same pulley. You would be less pressed to use an intercooler or smaller pulley, but the gains would still be there. This leads me full circle back to the 10% I was talking about. The coating just goes after that last bit of efficiency left on the table inside the current unit.

Thanks for the explanation. Its good to know what we're actually discussing.

[CarzCarzCarz]

What MAP sensor are you guys running, or how are you reading your boost pressure? I have a ScanGauge II reading from the ODBII port right now, but I think it tops out at like 5 psi. I remember hearing of problems with other MAP sensors, but haven't had chance to read this whole thread.

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by CarzCarzCarz

What MAP sensor are you guys running, or how are you reading your boost pressure? I have a ScanGauge II reading from the ODBII port right now, but I think it tops out at like 5 psi. I remember hearing of problems with other MAP sensors, but haven't had chance to read this whole thread.

I just run the OEM sensor. There's no need for a larger sensor unless you want to use an OBD based gauge, but you don't really need to know boost on a SC as you can't over boost, or if you want to run SD.

[Khorne]

Originally Posted by CarzCarzCarz

What MAP sensor are you guys running, or how are you reading your boost pressure? I have a ScanGauge II reading from the ODBII port right now, but I think it tops out at like 5 psi. I remember hearing of problems with other MAP sensors, but haven't had chance to read this whole thread.

Drilled and tapped the map plate, like Kode said it's not needed with an s/c kit, but it is cool to see :P

[sam69]

Where did you get that gauge pod from mate