Supercharging the GT86

[Billy2224]

Hey guys, just wondering how easy will it be to supercharge the 86.
Years down the track after the warranty has expired I came into the consideration of supercharging it. Having a Cooper S in the family which just left last year (sadly ) the low end power and extra kick with a supercharger is loads of fun.

How will the engine be able to handle it, how much boost and power gain do you guys reckon I would be able to get without even coming close to any engine damage?

Cheers, looking forward to the responses

[kyolml]

it will take a while before anyone sells one. While you are at it, you are welcome to make a rotrex based bracket if you can, which I will be interested.

[Lonewolf]

You'll most likely need to deal with the high compression (12.5) and have a well-sorted engine management solution, and the majority of the rest of the major issues will just be in the routing, fueling, and cooling of the engine and satellite components.

[Illusive]

I'm not a fan of a centrifugal style supercharger, I'd much rather prefer a smaller fast spooling turbo over them. You can get a more linear torque curve earlier and make more power than a centrifugal.

If forced to go with a supercharger, then twin screw type is the way to go. You get the low end grunt & throttle response that a supercharger should give, where as a centrifugal requires higher rpm's before the difference in power is evident.

[Drift-Office]

Ref : http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3878

[Billy2224]

Originally Posted by Illusive

I'm not a fan of a centrifugal style supercharger, I'd much rather prefer a smaller fast spooling turbo over them. You can get a more linear torque curve earlier and make more power than a centrifugal.

If forced to go with a supercharger, then twin screw type is the way to go. You get the low end grunt & throttle response that a supercharger should give, where as a centrifugal requires higher rpm's before the difference in power is evident.

yea i might be looking into a twin screw, just looking to see how much of a hassle it would be to do it with this type of engine, cheers mate

[yuli8466]

I think just simply waiting for HKS's solution. They can handle it. and a good solution both in power gain and reliability. I hope the throttle's response remains quickly.

[yuli8466]

Originally Posted by Illusive

I'd much rather prefer a smaller fast spooling turbo over them

the intake is not easy to deal with, while adding a turbo. Look at the existed twin turbo demo car, the intake pipe is very long and bended

[uspspro]

Originally Posted by Illusive

I'm not a fan of a centrifugal style supercharger, I'd much rather prefer a smaller fast spooling turbo over them. You can get a more linear torque curve earlier and make more power than a centrifugal.

If forced to go with a supercharger, then twin screw type is the way to go. You get the low end grunt & throttle response that a supercharger should give, where as a centrifugal requires higher rpm's before the difference in power is evident.

What you are saying is only half true.

First, turbos rarely have a "linear" torque curve. it's more of "torque hill". Usually they make a TON of mid-range torque (much more than a comparable centrifugal SC). Generally, there is a ramping up, then a plateau or hump around peak boost. If you have a small turbo then the ramp can be very short, but the top-end will suffer for it and torque will fall off.

Second, the torque curve with a centrifugal can be "linear" but the line will be increasing towards redline (see my old 1zzfe dyno below). That's without using a restrictor. The use of a big SC with a small pulley, with an inlet restrictor can have a very flat torque curve.

With a good Rotrex setup, the added power is more than evident way before getting into the upper rpms. See below, it has like 50 more ft-lb at 3000 rpm and obviously way more up top

here is a stock 1zzfe dyno:



Here is my Rotrex dyno

[ichitaka05]

How easy is it? It's easy, if you have enough $$$$

Serious note, after your warranty is over, prob good idea to search again. By then there will be more options

[Illusive]

Originally Posted by uspspro

What you are saying is only half true.

How about we agree to dis-agree on that point?

Originally Posted by uspspro

Here is my Rotrex dyno

This is my reason why we agree to dis-agree:


This is a stock 1zz-fe with a GT-2871R based turbo system we designed. It is making more torque, sooner than the rotrex is and when the customer brings his car back for a motor build, it will make much more top end power than the rotrex set up will. This is with peak boost at around 10 psi. This turbo likes to live at 20-24 psi.

[Illusive]

Originally Posted by yuli8466

the intake is not easy to deal with, while adding a turbo. Look at the existed twin turbo demo car, the intake pipe is very long and bended

That's only if you go with an air/air intercooler set up. We prefer air/water set ups for the short piping path and maximum response.

[uspspro]

Originally Posted by Illusive

This is a stock 1zz-fe with a GT-2871R based turbo system we designed. It is making more torque, sooner than the rotrex is and when the customer brings his car back for a motor build, it will make much more top end power than the rotrex set up will. This is with peak boost at around 10 psi. This turbo likes to live at 20-24 psi.

Yeah, there is no doubt that the turbo will make more power and torque.

Just saying that the centrifugals get a bad rap, when in reality, they can be setup pretty well.

The transient response with the Rotrex was amazing, no different than NA, but with lots more power. Something that doesn't show up on a dyno pull.

There are also many side benefits of something like the Rotrex
1) There is no glowing hot orb of metal situated in an engine bay that was never designed around it.
2) separate oiling system
3) packaging
4) can keep existing NA mods (exhaust, DP, headers, etc)

[Illusive]

Originally Posted by uspspro

The transient response with the Rotrex was amazing, no different than NA, but with lots more power. Something that doesn't show up on a dyno pull.

Yes, The dyno doesn't always tell the tale on the street. The gt2871r transient was also equally amazing, the car makes 1.5-2.0 psi of boost at 1500 rpm in 3rd gear. You get near instantaneous throttle response with the system. I really am looking forward to our gt-25r based 1zz-fe turbo system's results because of how good the response was with the 2871r.

Originally Posted by uspspro

There are also many side benefits of something like the Rotrex
1) There is no glowing hot orb of metal situated in an engine bay that was never designed around it.

This is kind of a moot point, the turbo systems genreally sit in the same location as the factory exhaust does which is designed to handle the heat. When a turbo system is designed properly it includes all necessary heat shielding, and doesn't turn into a glowing orb of heat

Originally Posted by uspspro

2) separate oiling system

Definately an advantage to a supercharger system.

Originally Posted by uspspro

3) packaging

This can be a plus or a minus depending on where the s/c is mounted and hood clearances.

Originally Posted by uspspro

4) can keep existing NA mods (exhaust, DP, headers, etc)

You could keep n/a header(s) and n/a designed exhausts, but they would not be optimized for the f/i set up, so you would want to change them out anyways.

My main point was not to argue a s/c benefits, but that I prefer a screw type s/c over a rotrex style when given the option.