CSG's Jackson Racing "Factory Tuned" Supercharger experience, updated 12/19/2013

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Not everyone is looking for the same things.

The Rotrex is quieter, runs more efficiently (lower IAT), and has linear boost growth (the Vortech is slightly exponential).

The Vortech has more overhead for big power if you want to upgrade later with injectors, fuel pump, possibly clutch, and a smaller pulley.

Mike, what are your thoughts on Rotrex vs. Twin-Screw (Innovate)? It looks like the intercooled Innovate kit produces a good ~20 lb-ft more torque in the midrange and matches the Rotrex up top.

The thing that keeps me coming back to Jackson is your comment about them extensively track-testing the car, but it seems like Innovate kits have been used on the track as well with some success.

[CSG Mike]

Datalog from lap 5 on RS3 and Jackson Racing Supercharger (this is to make sure everything is nice and toasty).

The system runs COOL. We still need an engine oil cooler, however. This was in about 75F (24C) ambient. Datalogs are in F.

Lines are:

- Coolant temp (never gets over 200F)
- Intake Air Temp (as measured by the car)
- GPS speed (proof we're not putzing around the track)
- Throttle body position
- Brake pedal position

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Mike, what are your thoughts on Rotrex vs. Twin-Screw (Innovate)? It looks like the intercooled Innovate kit produces a good ~20 lb-ft more torque in the midrange and matches the Rotrex up top.

The thing that keeps me coming back to Jackson is your comment about them extensively track-testing the car, but it seems like Innovate kits have been used on the track as well with some success.

Other than Robispec and Innovate's own car, can you point me to any other Innovate S/C'd cars that are extensively tracked?

That being said, can you point me to ANY FI car that is heavily tracked? The fact of the matter is that 99% of the kits out there are only being used for the street, and likewise, the kits are being designed for street use.

Coming back to your question, are there any dynos of what the Innovate makes when the kit is heat soaked? How about 5+ back to back runs on the dyno?

Frankly, I don't care what the kit makes at peak on a dyno, in a single run. I want to know what the output is going to be when I've been flogging the car for 5 minutes straight on track.

Every kit we've been testing on the dyno has had multiple back to back runs, and they ALL heat soak to some degree. We'll post results when we finish our analysis and have solid results. Our previous Innovate volunteer unvolunteered, so we do need to find another Innovate car to test on the dyno.


For the time being, refer to this post: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=17 and my above datalog.

[kurbkilla]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Only the EcuTek CARB tune is certified by CARB.

So if i wanted to do a tune/exhaust/drivetrain/brakes and then do FI. My first tune would be ECUtech so I dont buy two flashing devices. Correct?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by kurbkilla

So if i wanted to do a tune/exhaust/drivetrain/brakes and then do FI. My first tune would be ECUtech so I dont buy two flashing devices. Correct?

Correct. If you already own EcuTek, then you can purchase JUST the CARB tune if you wanted to. Otherwise, all you'd need to do after getting FI is just a retune (tow to the dyno!)

[DarkSunrise]

Apart from Robispec and Innovate, I think Abbey Motorsport was testing a twin-screw innovate/sprintex setup on their track car. I know a handful of innovate owners have also trackedtheir cars, including Swift996.

I agree with you on heat-soaked output being more important, but is there a reason to think the Jackson sc will be less prone to heatsoak than the ic innovate sc? That's an honest q, I really don't have enough data on these kits to know which would be better able to resist heat issues on the track.

[Ralph Spoilsport]

@CSG Mike

That's IAT measured just ahead of the throttle body, yes?

What were you seeing for oil temp?

Nice numbers, thanks a bunch.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Apart from Robispec and Innovate, I think Abbey Motorsport was testing a twin-screw innovate/sprintex setup on their track car. I know a handful of innovate owners have also trackedtheir cars, including Swift996.

I agree with you on heat-soaked output being more important, but is there a reason to think the Jackson sc will be less prone to heatsoak than the ic innovate sc? That's an honest q, I really don't have enough data on these kits to know which would be better able to resist heat issues on the track.

For our use, we believe the Jackson Racing application to be superior; we're only concerned with power output from ~5k RPM to redline.

From Kenne Bell (Positive displacement supercharger manufacturer):

http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Commo...efficiency.pdf

SUPERCHARGER RATINGS & OUTPUT
Superchargers are rated by liters (L) or cubic inches (cfm). For example; An Eaton 90 (90 cu.") is actually 1.5L. One should exercise
extreme caution in using supercharger "ratings" as the only criteria in selecting a supercharger. These ratings can be deceiving.
Just look at the differences in HP and efficiencies between the Eaton 90 (1.5L) and Kenne Bell 1500 (1.5L). See comparison tests in
our catalog and website (dyno test comparison and
(Eaton 112 vs. Kenne Bell 2.2).
Now that you understand the 3 basics of supercharging, let's assume that two superchargers have identical 1. volumetric efficiency
2. power consumption/parasitic HP loss and 3. discharge temp at 6000 engine rpm. Further assume these superchargers take
turns blowing air into an engine at 6000 rpm. Since an engine has no eyes or fingers, it cannot possibly distinguish between the 2
superchargers. The engine only sees air flow/cfm and boost. Subsequently, the superchargers will both produce the same HP.
Why? Again, the 1. power consumption 2. cfm/boost and 3. temp are identical. There is no "4th dimension" or unknown source of
power that will make one supercharger produce more power than another. Let's summarize: If 2 unrestricted inlet superchargers,
regardless of type or manufacturer, have the same VE, power consumption and discharge temp, then both will produce exactly the
same peak HP. If more power is required, then raise the boost level. Boost is what makes the power. That's what superchargers do.
They make boost. However, it is very important to understand that they don't all make the same boost at 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000
- so they cannot possibly produce the same HP at 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000. For example: Centrifugal superchargers are also
very efficient, but only at higher engine speeds where they produce the most cfm and boost. At lower engine speeds, the centrifugal
produces proportionately less air and, therefore, less boost (engine back pressure) and power.
The Twin Screw produces approx. the same boost at any engine rpm. Every revolution of the Twin Screw delivers the same cfm or
liters per revolution i.e. 2L per revolution at 2000-6000. That's why these superchargers are referred to as "positive displacement."
Unlike a positive displacement supercharger, the centrifugal might produce 1/2 L @ 1000 engine rpm, 2/3L @ 2000, 1L @ 3000, 1-
1/3L @ 4000, 1-2/3L @ 5000 and finally 2L @ 6000. That's because the centrifugal relies on engine speed to generate exponentially
higher cfm/L - and boost. Boost is approx. 1 psi per 1000 rpm on a 6 psi centrifugal kit whereas the boost may be 6 psi at 2000-6000
on a positive displacement type.
The centrifugal boost curve is not exactly linear as indicated above, but it's close enough for discussion. For example: Here's an
actual test. 11 psi at 6000, 7 psi @ 5000, 4.5 @ 4000, 2.5 @ 3000. What's important to remember is that the Twin Screws pump out
approx. the same displacement or cfm per revolution at any engine speed. Twin Screw efficiency (actual displacement or cfm
discharged) will depend on the overall design of the supercharger itself. Besides VE, temperature efficiency and power
consumption, you should obviously also consider a superchargers construction and it's reputation for performance, reliability and
longevity. Equally important is the manufacturers reputation for tech support and service.
For those interested in additional information and technical discussions, there are numerous SAE (Society of Automotive
Engineers) papers written on supercharging

[DarkSunrise]

Ah that makes sense. From that article, I take it that the rotrex is both efficient/cool and makes most of its power up top so it sounds ideal for what you guys needed. If it proves reliable under your track testing, I will definitely consider it. Thanks!

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Ah that makes sense. From that article, I take it that the rotrex is both efficient/cool and makes most of its power up top so it sounds ideal for what you guys needed. If it proves reliable under your track testing, I will definitely consider it. Thanks!

Basically, we sacrifice a little bit down low for maximum efficiency up top.

The Rotrex rivals turbochargers in terms of compressor efficiency.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Ralph Spoilsport

@CSG Mike

That's IAT measured just ahead of the throttle body, yes?

What were you seeing for oil temp?

Nice numbers, thanks a bunch.

Correct. Not bad considering the ambient temp and that this was on lap 5!

Oil temps were high. We need an oil cooler. Output was lowered due to the ECU pulling timing.

[Sellout]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The Rotrex rivals turbochargers in terms of compressor efficiency.

Yeah. It's kinda like a twin-screw in that way. Or a roots TVS. Or even a Vortech.

Come to think of it, damn near all superchargers that aren't from the 60s or 70s are pretty efficient

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Sellout

Yeah. It's kinda like a twin-screw in that way. Or a roots TVS. Or even a Vortech.

Come to think of it, damn near all superchargers that aren't from the 60s or 70s are pretty efficient

Intake temps say it all...

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The Rotrex rivals turbochargers in terms of compressor efficiency.

Right. Hence my interest . The only thing not to like with the rotrex kits is that the blower itself seems pretty expensive.